Moses was high on hallucinogenic drug when he received Ten Commandments,' claims top academic.

MellowViper

so this is what fedrica is looking for, pro drug diatribes on a buddhist forum

I'm anti-drugs, as a generality, when it comes to physically addictive substances, but I don't see psychedelics in the same way. They're really something that shouldn't be taken lightly, but they're natural and don't play on the reward centers of the brain like opiates and amphetamines do. Putting all psychoactive chemicals under the same umbrella term "drugs" is misleading and doesn't address the very different properties a lot of them have.

so you have no problem with the idea that the buddha was a hypocrite who preached one thing;drug free, and did another, even though you have no evidence, me thinks the problem is more to do with modern hypocrites who claim to be buddhist yet refuse to follow the buddhas teaching like the precepts.

I don't think it would have made buddha a hypocrite, because I don't think he was explicitly against all plants and substances that have any effect on the mind and body whatsoever, just ones that have regressive effects in limiting ones abillity to be mindful. As I noted, psychedelics generally amplify awareness of your own subconscious, where alcohol and opium makes you ignore it further. Mara is a part of the subconscious, and if a shamanistic plant can amplify it and make it more noticable than it normally is, I see that as a benefit in my quest in squelching the fires of my own internal suffering.

Cough syrup is technically a drug and can be recreationally abused, but if taken as a medicine, it can help cure your ailments. The same goes for psychedelics. They can be abused recreationally, which, with them, often leads to bad trips and nervous breakdowns. However, if used in a ceremonial setting, as a spiritual medicine, as the Native Americans do, it can have a lot of positive, healing effects on the psyche.

by clinical definition a person high on acid or shrooms is clinically insane and can get locked in a mental institution if found by police, any one trying to tell you this is not getting high is high themselves in denial of their addiction, by the way you cant serve in the US police forces if you have ever done acid. and according to urban legend anything over ten hits makes you legally insane for life.....

I haven't used shrooms since about 7 months ago. I don't think that really quallifies me as having addictive or compulsive behavior, and its really something I wouldn't want to use on a regular basis. If people do use it out of peer pressure or as some sort of party drug, then yah, they will suffer serious repercussions. Its not a toy and something to get your rocks off on. If you treat it as such, you will get bitten by it. I use it sparaingly, much like Native Americans and their use of peyote. They aren't partying on the stuff. They take it reverently with much respect for their set and setting. Look at the stats of Natives who partake in the ritual. They aren't any less impaired in day to day faculties than any other part of the population. In fact, at least with Ayahuascha church practitioners, they actually have an improved ability to concentrate over the rest of general population in daily function.

If these herbs diminished ones capacity to be mindful and didn't have an enhancing effect on concentration and awareness of one's surroundings, I doubt people living in the rain forests of South America or former wildernss of North AMerica would have used them as long as they have. People who have to be alert to predatorial carnivores and poisonous snakes aren't going to use something that, in the long run, lowers their ability to be mindful to their environment.

If you can't find this info in google, I'll be happy to post some links. I just have to find them again.

formermonkJohn

this started out on my part as have some respect for moses, now it has to be have some respect for the great founder of our religion, the buddha, if anyone was following the precepts it was the buddha, if you dont believe the buddha had some superhuman abilities and wisdom, you might as well give up now, obviously if you see yourself on par with the buddha, your ideas are always going to win out over his. i see a lot of this on this forum, if you have the idea that the buddha was just an average man with some good ideas, youre never going to really pay close enough attention to what he said, and youre going to be in denial of most of what he said, a lot of posters on this forum sound like this, in my opinion.

compassionate_warrior

much like Native Americans and their use of peyote. They aren't partying on the stuff. They take it reverently with much respect for their set and setting. Look at the stats of Natives who partake in the ritual. They aren't any less impaired in day to day faculties than any other part of the population. In fact, at least with Ayahuascha church practitioners, they actually have an improved ability to concentrate over the rest of general population in daily function.

If these herbs diminished ones capacity to be mindful and didn't have an enhancing effect, I doubt people living in the rain forests of South America or former wildernss of North AMerica would have used them as long as they have. People who have to be alert to predatorial carnivores and poisonous snakes aren't going to use something that, in the long run, lowers their ability to be mindful to their environment.

Very interesting point in paragraph 2, MV. It would have been maladaptive for Indigenous and traditional peoples to use anything that permanently impaired their alertness; it would've lead to an evolutionary dead end. And you're right, some of these hallucinogens were used as a sacrament, they (including our and the Buddha's ancestors) "didn't party on the stuff". It was used to enhance spirituality, or communication with the Divine. It's abuse of these substances (over-use, heedless use) that causes problems.

MellowViper

Very interesting point in paragraph 2, MV. It would have been maladaptive for Indigenous and traditional peoples to use anything that permanently impaired their alertness; it would've lead to an evolutionary dead end. And you're right, some of these hallucinogens were used as a sacrament, they (including our and the Buddha's ancestors) "didn't party on the stuff". It was used to enhance spirituality, or communication with the Divine. It's abuse of these substances (over-use, heedless use) that causes problems.

I just wanna be clear that I don't think Ayahuascha, Peyote, and psychedelics in general are a panacea or source to instant enlightenment. The shaman, like the Buddha and the Christ, were people within a society that had an unusual knack for philosophical insights and tackling the bigger questions. I think the psychedelic is only a tool that can help individuals like that on their path to enlightenment, but I don't think its the necessary cause of it. Its sort of like Francis Crick realizing the structure of DNA while on LSD. A person without a history in bioengineering and physics wouldn't have come up with that solution while on the same substance. It acted as a kind of catalyst for him though, and the same thing goes for intelligent people who use any psychedelic. I'm not saying Jesus, Buddha, or Moses used psyhcedelics, but I'm not completely closed to the idea that on their paths they may have used them.

I don't think psychedelics are for everyone but can have very positive benefits for alot of people, as evidenced by the way they've cured alcholism and personal problems in the lives of Daima and Native American Church adherents. BTW, the founder of AA stopped drinking after a controlled, clinical LSD experience he had in the 50's.

Theswingisyellow

It took an LSD trip when I was 17 to make me realize what a destructive path I was going down with drugs. I didn't have a bad trip, I wasn't in trouble, I just woke the next morning and my whole perspective on life and my drug use radically shifted. It took LSD to get me off drugs. Not that I recommend drug use, but for me in that time and place it was a life changing event. Don't use and haven't used since.
All the best,
Todd

compassionate_warrior

Crick was on LSD when he conceived the double helix??

ShiftPlusOne

if you dont believe the buddha had some superhuman abilities and wisdom, you might as well give up now, obviously if you see yourself on par with the buddha, your ideas are always going to win out over his. i see a lot of this on this forum, if you have the idea that the buddha was just an average man with some good ideas, youre never going to really pay close enough attention to what he said, and youre going to be in denial of most of what he said, a lot of posters on this forum sound like this, in my opinion.

Didn't the Buddha teach to look for your own answers and not to believe things just because he said them? If we believe Buddha has supernatural powers and there's no room for doubt, then Buddhism becomes a faith religion like all others.

formermonkJohn

i think the buddha said to test his answers to see if they were true, not believe or reject anything in his teachings based on your own mind and whims.

ShiftPlusOne

I can agree with that, but saying "you might as well give up now" if I don't believe in superhuman abilities seems a bit too much. I don't see much of a focus on any superhuman abilities in Buddhism at all. I don't see why that would be a requirement.

MellowViper

Crick was on LSD when he conceived the double helix??

Yes. He realized the actual shape while he was on an LSD trip. His wife, being an artist, drew what he described to her.



So, in my view, if he, while on an LSD trip, made such an imoportant discovery that changed, forever, the way humanity understands itself, I really don't see why Moses couldn't have realized the 10 commandments or why Buddha couldn't have conceptualized the four noble truths on a mushroom trip.

formermonkJohn

what i meant is you might as well give up if you think the buddha has nothing more to offer than anyone else, the buddha was an exceptional person, from exceptional circumstance with exceptionally bright answers to basic questions, thats why i would reccomend reading a good "life of the Buddha" story before trying to tackle scriptures, i would say martin luther king had supernatural abilities to get his point across too.

formermonkJohn

viper, a lot of people have killed themselves on lsd too or run around naked, like it or not you're not even subtely advocating illegal drug use and that borders on just plain evil in my book, certainly maya by definition.....

formermonkJohn

ps i did a search on francis crick lsd, youre story is not from crick, his biographer says only he experimented with pot and lsd, and answers.com says there is no evidence for the story, so maybe you need to consider where youre getting your stories from.

ShiftPlusOne

Thanks for clearing that up. I suppose it was just a miscommunication regarding 'supernatural abilities'.

MellowViper

ps i did a search on francis crick lsd, youre story is not from crick, his biographer says only he experimented with pot and lsd, and answers.com says there is no evidence for the story, so maybe you need to consider where youre getting your stories from.

Perhaps it is up for debate. I think there's a chance it could be true. That's just what I read from, what I thought to be, credible sources. However, Douglas Engelbart, the inventor of GUI and a lot within home computing, gave a lot of credit to his LSD usage. The inventor of PCR, DNA amplification, also gave credit to LSD and said he probably wouldn't have come up with the Nobel prize winning technique if it weren't for him dropping acid. So, smart people getting insights from the usage of LSD isn't just some sort of isolated claim. Its can be seen more than once, and I wouldn't be surprized if his biographer was right. The best way you can rule out whether his biographer was a lying, conniving LSD propagandist who wanted to corrupt society or a genuine researcher who reported information as he obtained it is to look up his personal life. Was he some sort of agent of Timothy Leary and the counter culture, or was he just a normal biographer. Those would be some interesting facts to look into.

viper, a lot of people have killed themselves on lsd too or run around naked, like it or not you're not even subtely advocating illegal drug use and that borders on just plain evil in my book, certainly maya by definition.....

Well, they probably weren't ready for it or shouldn't have taken it at all. A lot of people have died from climbing Mount Everest. Just because they haven't mentally or physically prepped their selves and haven't treated it with respect doesn't mean mountain climbing or using psychedwelics is a bad thing. I think they're both neutral to be honest. Legality and morality aren't always one in the same either, and I never advocated to anyone to break the law. I'm just telling you, that from my experience, there's a positive potential in psychedelics and a very long history behind their usage in various cultures.

Because of the positive results, because of the way they've improved peoples' lives in clinical and controlled settings, I think the laws should be re-evaluated. I think they should be available to liscensed doctors to administer in the propper context and not be left up to kids who just want to party on them. When I took psychedelics in the past, I didn't hurt anyone, nor did I hurt myself, so i really don't think I did an evil thing, nor do I believe I'm doing anything evil by citing my experience with it. I never said that everyone should take it, and I stated in more than one way that its usage should be restricted to very reverent and controlled settings, as is the case with Peyote and Ayahuascha churches, as well as the clinical environment that LSD was legally administered under in the 50's.

Legality doesn't always have much to do with morality though. War and slavery.

formermonkJohn

when are you going to get it/ WE DONT WANT TO TAKE YOUR DRUGS, the drugs certainly arent contributing to your wisdom through your postings

MellowViper

when are you going to get it/ WE DONT WANT TO TAKE YOUR DRUGS, the drugs certainly arent contributing to your wisdom through your postings

When are you gonna get it that I'm not even telling you to take my drugs? Who's this "we" anyway? You're the only one who's been adamant about condemning me as an evil, crazed drug addict. Did you even read anything I just wrote? I said I'm not telling anyone to take them. I'm simply stating that I've had positive effects with them and that other people have too and that the positive results shouldn't be completely ruled out by the negative ones, a lot of which was probably due to people not respecting their set and setting and the psychedelic. I might as well not try to even respond to you or hold a conversation with you because you don't really have much respect for people with opinions that don't agree with you. I find you quite insulting acutally. I'm not deluded into thinking I have some sort of divine, infinite wisdom as you sarcastically inferred. Like I said, I don't believe they're a source of instant enlightenment. I just think they have value under the right context. I think my very limited use of psychedelics have helped contribute a certain level of positivity to the body of my life experiences, but I'm under no delusion about being some sort of sage as you seem to assume.

My point wasn't to promote drugs at all. My point was to show that religious use of Shamanistic plants has a long history among tribal people and that, because of the positive benefits that one can get from them in the controlled setting of a spiritual ceremony, the idea of Moses using mushrooms as a sacrament isn't completely far fetched or necessarily a negative thing if true. That's not to say that everyone should use them or that everyone should go party off of them all night every night.

mugzy

when are you going to get it/ WE DONT WANT TO TAKE YOUR DRUGS, the drugs certainly arent contributing to your wisdom through your postings

I don't know where you're getting this from. I cannot find a reference where @MellowViper was pushing you or anyone else to take drugs. It seems to me that he is just sharing his opinion and thoughts on the matter with regards to the original topic, and is open to the possibility that the ten commandments could have been influenced by psychedelic substances. Unless I missed something, that's how his posts appear to me.

robot

Mellowviper I very much enjoyed your posts about these substances. And I agree with all of it especially the point that they are not for everyone. Magic mushrooms were legal when i discovered what they could do for me and I was flabbergasted when they outlawed them. It was mainly to keep people from trespassing on private property at first. Its pretty hard to convince someone that they can have benefits if that person has not had the experience. Waste of time really.

formermonkJohn

then take your shroom heads to the timothy leary forum, we need clear minds on a buddhist forum

mugzy

then take your shroom heads to the timothy leary forum, we need clear minds on a buddhist forum

I don't think you are in any position to force anyone to leave the forum simply for sharing an opinion you don't agree with. It's very rude to call anyone a "shroom head" for sharing their experience with these substances, which indeed is the original topic of this post. It's in the general banter section. There's no reason to get so upset over a discussion like this. Please be respectful to our fellow forum members, even if you don't agree with their ideas.

formermonkJohn

i dont think anyone is being respectful of young teenagers cruising this forum if there spouting pro drug "propaganda" without any admissions of the negatives these drugs are well known for, buddhism is a patently anti drug/alcohol religion compared even to christianity, say some 16 yr old reads this discussion and takes your side, then the next day at school there offered some lsd, then possibility they take it have a bad trip and end up in the hospital. in no small way youre then responsable in some way, as you have influenced them in a way to be more likely to do drugs, i read somewhere that this is against forum rules, i for one think this whole thread is inappropriate, buddhism is not about doing whatever you want, it does include controlling your desires and excesses to have a better life for you and others. as the former monk at my temple told me the most important teaching in the 5 precepts for young people is the anti drug/alcohol message, you can never gain enlightenment without a clear head, and you cant do that without staying off the drugs, what youre doing is kinda like going on a born again forum and saying jesus was having sex with mary, high on pot, you wouldn't get far, you shouldnt get far on this forum either with this drug talk either in my opinion, but im just one buddhist and thats my opinion

federica

I'm closing this thread.
It's gone seriously off topic and has descended into bickering.
Careful what you say, people.
Particularly about the "merits" of taking recreational drugs, for whatever result or foundation.

Thanks.