Spirituality and hallucinogens

ChocolateSauce

I'd like to ask the opinion of the spiritually-minded what their opinion is of mixing hallucinogens with spirituality.

For thousands of years, many cultures the world over have used drugs such as Salvia, Mescaline (Peyote cactus), mushrooms and others as a gateway to the spirit world, and some people have even hypothosised that religion began because of such use.

I myself have had such experiences (and will again tomorrow night in Amsterdam)....what is your perspective?

Do you think there is any merit to these ideas?
Do you think the experiences have any meaning, or do you (like I) think they are probably nothing more than chemistry in action?
Have they any place is modern religion/spirituality?
Have you had them yourself, or known someone who has?

Oryx

Dancing and spinning are also ways to enter an altered state. Psychologists have also been quoted as saying that LSD is a useful tool in understanding the psyche.
I have got to a level where, when it works right, I can go into a very odd drug like state, without drugs. Its actually quite cool, and free and legal too.

Its a chicken an egg situation. Is a feeling of spiritual connectedness caused by the chemical state of your brain, and is it purely a physical thing, or if you change the chemical state of your brain does it raise you to another spiritual level? Depending on your outlook and beliefs, youll think its one thing, or the other.:)

Once I got off my head on cannabis.* Chucked a whitey as they say. For a few minutes of it, I had the solution to every problem in the world. Ha. Pity I got sick a minute later, and forgot it all.

*in my dim and distant past. To long ago and in another country. Ya cant arrest me.

Asiaprod

Tried it when I first started Buddhism and meditation. At the time I thought it was great, had the answers to everything, and by morning they were just a dim memory. Soon came to realize that I was not really achieving anything lasting. Now I would never even think of attempting anything spiritual in my path while under the influence, I would not be able to trust the results. Again, this is under my path, can't speak for others.

Nevyn

I would say that they are one of the 8 paths to power/insight/enlightenment but that there are ways to reach such states via ingestion/inhalation/imbibing substances which are not illegal.

Personally I don't see the point in artifical chemicals for altering the body's brainchemistry for spiritual as needed what so ever.

I would always be careful about what reasons for undertaking such a journey, why I was considering it, what could be gained, what are the dangers, what was learned from last time, had I gained and learned all that I could and but the
conclusions I had come to into being real by making real changes. Other wise it's just tripping of your head to feel something.

stevenmu

I have thought this through a few times. Like Asiaprod I have tried a few things and solved the complexities of the life and the universe many times over, only for it to have faded away the next day.

The problem is, as has been said, you can never really trust anything you "discover". While it can be a way to open your mind to different thought processes, you can never be sure if any of them are reaching out beyond the interactions between the substance in question and your mind. I think they can put you more in touch with your own subconscious, and help you recognise thoughts that would normally just slip through, but there's other ways of doing that too.

JC 2K3

They're the closest thing to "spiritual" that I've ever experienced, although, somewhat paradoxially, they're one of the main things that confirmed to me that "spirituality" and the supernatural don't exist in any conventional sense.

They've been extremely enlightening to me in teaching me how my mind works, and how much more there is to reality than a sober state of mind, how deep our perception really goes etc.

I'm quite firmly of the opinion that they had a very large influence in the development of religion, and that primitive artwork, which is generally associated with early religions, was heavily influenced by their effects (for example, the intricate, spirally patterns in Celtic artwork).

In relation to their use in whatever the modern conventional pursuit of spirituality is though, I don't know because I have little interest in it.

philologos

JC2K3, I'd say about a year or two ago, when we were discussing spirituality in the A&A forum you said you didn't know what exactly the term meant. So I must ask you for curiosity's sake, when you said that these substances were the closest things to "spiritual" you have experienced, what do you mean by "spiritual"?

JC 2K3

I suppose I still don't understand what the term means exactly, though I don't think there's a solid definition of it anyway (I think I was told by Thaed on here a while back that I would never understand unless I had some kind of spiritual experience, which is fair enough, although since you can't make someone else feel the emotions you feel at any given time, I often wonder if it's different interpretations of profound feelings/emotions). I really just used it in the above post because that's the title of this thread.

By 'closest thing to "spiritual" I've experienced', I really meant that I think I've learned a lot about how my mind works. Primarily that the human mind is so easily manipulated (which taught me a bit about why so many people believe in supernatural things) and that deep reflection and thought, and exploration of feelings and emotions are good for the human mind.

philologos

I was just curious as using substances would never be neccessary for people to have spiritual experiences in my interpretation of what it would be. Infact I would argue that substances (for this I'm also including alcohol) would hinder this. Then again the Rastafaris and the Buddhists would disagree with me.

JC 2K3

But if you're (presumably) never done any recreational drug bar alcohol, how can you know?

hiorta

Got to agree, Jakkass.
Taking stimulants to try to experience that which is beyond them, seems to put the desired goal even further away.

Not unlike athletes using drugs in the hope of achieving that which they must achieve through personal endeavour.

philologos

JC 2K3 wrote: »

But if you're (presumably) never done any recreational drug bar alcohol, how can you know?

Fair point, JC 2K3, I do however know that spiritual experiences, or those which I claim to be spiritual experiences are attainable without substances. Infact the Biblical text even refers to spiritual experiences as being something that is attainable as an alternative to taking substances. Although not all people adopt this I think it's a good passage:

Ephesians 5:18 "Do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery; but be filled with the Spirit"

You might say that only pertains to alcohol, but if you look up the definition of debauchery:

"Indulgence in sensual pleasures; scandalous activities involving sex, alcohol, or drugs without inhibition."

For me, passions of the flesh, including drunkeness, drugs, amongst other things are contrary to that which is spiritual.

JC 2K3

hiorta wrote: »

Got to agree, Jakkass.
Taking stimulants to try to experience that which is beyond them, seems to put the desired goal even further away.

Not unlike athletes using drugs in the hope of achieving that which they must achieve through personal endeavour.

Why must it be achieved through personal endeavour though? Drugs are banned in sport because it's a competition, it's completely different.

Also, I don't have a "desired goal" as such. What would this be for you and why would the use of psychedelics (should be noted that the drugs being referred to in this topic are not hallucinogens, strictly speaking, but psychedelics, there are quite a few crucial differences between the two) put it further away?

JC 2K3

Jakkass wrote: »

Fair point, JC 2K3, I do however know that spiritual experiences, or those which I claim to be spiritual experiences are attainable without substances. Infact the Biblical text even refers to spiritual experiences as being something that is attainable as an alternative to taking substances. Although not all people adopt this I think it's a good passage:

Ephesians 5:18 "Do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery; but be filled with the Spirit"

You might say that only pertains to alcohol, but if you look up the definition of debauchery:

"Indulgence in sensual pleasures; scandalous activities involving sex, alcohol, or drugs without inhibition."

For me, passions of the flesh, including drunkeness, drugs, amongst other things are contrary to that which is spiritual.

And this is essentially why I can't begin to understand what "spiritual" really means, and doubt if it does really mean anything definite. Everyone has a different definition of the term, it seems to just relate to any vaguely profound feeling or experience.

I believe that similar experiences to taking psychedelics can be attained through other means; sex, meditation/deep prayer/reflection, fasting, dreaming, sleep deprivation, dancing etc., but don't see why any of the above is any more valid (or safe, in some cases), than the use of drugs.

philologos

Let me describe it for you. A rather intense feeling of inspiration, awe, or connection to a higher power, or a higher source of meaning in life. I'd see it more as a higher power, a connection to God through the Holy Spirit, but that's the best I can describe it. I only really started noticing it when I accepted Christianity as my faith, and when I started reading the Holy Scriptures, praying, going to church more often, and so on. The interesting thing is I can relate to quite a few other people (albeit Christians I know) about this spiritual connection.

JC 2K3

And would you accept if I told you that I can relate to what you have just described? A feeling that we are not alone, of connectedness with everything etc.

Also, have you heard of the Marsh Chapel Experiment? I think it might be interesting to you as you're a Christian. It was a psychological experiment done on Good Friday 1962, in which half a group of Divinity students were given a placebo, and half psilocybin (the drug in magic mushrooms) before the Good Friday service. Almost of those who received psilocybin claimed to have experienced profound religious experiences, and for many it strengthened their beliefs in God. See this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MFMB7dPk-k for an account of it by a participant.

philologos

JC 2K3, yes it's interesting, but I think that people can have profound religious experiences without substances. Personally, I wouldn't due to considering drugs to fall under the definition of debauchery, and as such being forbidden in the Christian faith.

If you could relate to what I am talking about, then yes I would consider it to be probable that it was somewhat "spiritual", but that this is a deception induced by the drug rather than a religious experience. I'm not entirely sure but this is my reasoning on it.

I'll watch and read up on it.

JC 2K3

See I'm a materialist, so there's not much further this discussion can go.

I believe that if you can't prove the difference between a deception and the real thing, then they are both, in fact, the same.

Consider the reasons why you don't believe in Transubstantiation and you might be able to see where I'm coming from somewhat.n

philologos

Hm, I might actually since my reasons for not considering transubstantiation would be based on context, substance, and science.

However I would argue in a case of cause and effect here:

The effect no doubt is the same, we've agreed on that much, however what is the means of achieving said affect, arguably they are very different, you would agree?

There is a difference between:
1) Partaking in a religious act, such as prayer, reading the Bible, attending church, (being the cause) and then receiving this feeling.

and

2) Taking substances, and feeling this feeling.

How do we know that this isn't just induced by the drug, rather than actually being a spiritual motion?

It's more complex than the charge against transubstantiation. However I am open to what you are arguing, and it's by no means clear cut. I'm actually looking forward to what psychologists and scientists will reveal in the future concerning why I and others feel the way we do when we interact with God.

JC 2K3

Jakkass wrote: »

There is a difference between:
1) Partaking in a religious act, such as prayer, reading the Bible, attending church, (being the cause) and then receiving this feeling.

and

2) Taking substances, and feeling this feeling.

How do we know that this isn't just induced by the drug, rather than actually being a spiritual motion?

You've gotta see where I'm coming from. I don't believe in anything supernatural. I don't know/understand what a "spiritual motion" is. All I know is that it seems similar feelings can be induced by different means. Be it deep prayer and/or utter devotion and belief in a higher power, or taking drugs. I would say that this shows that since the same feelings can be achieved through material changes in brain chemistry by the use of drugs as belief in and devotion to Gods, that there is no God, or at least that religious experiences are not as profound as they're made out to be and therefore are not evidence of the supernatural. You would contest that the mechanism of receiving such an experience (i.e. supernatural over natural) must differ and that's the key difference. And members of certain other religions (particularly early ones) would believe that certain drugs are sacred and induce supernatural experiences.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Jakkass wrote: »

There is a difference between:
1) Partaking in a religious act, such as prayer, reading the Bible, attending church, (being the cause) and then receiving this feeling.

and

2) Taking substances, and feeling this feeling.

How do we know that this isn't just induced by the drug, rather than actually being a spiritual motion?

Well both acts cause similar/identical chemical processes in the brain which causes one to feel as one does, so it could be argued that they are both means to the same end.

Asiaprod

Jakkass wrote: »

Then again the Rastafaris and the Buddhists would disagree with me.

Not sure where you got this idea from, but just for the record, drugs are not used in Buddhist practices. In fact, they are prohibited as they only cloud the mind and anything that is produced is usually an illusion that is forgotten the next day. It is true that many people as a result of taking drugs, in particular LSD during the Flower Power era, did turn to seek answers in Buddhism. Its also true that many Buddhist do use drugs recreationally. I have yet to meet a Buddhist that uses them in any other way.

philologos

Asiaprod, I grasped as much from your post on it. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted you. I'm not entirely knowledgeable on the Buddhist way of life.

Sean_K, I wouldn't know if they feel the same at all, I'm just going by what JC2K3 is telling me. I would see a difference between the two. I suppose to ever really know, I would have to take substances to see if my spiritual experiences are the same as induced by the substances that JC2K3 speaks of, and I'm never going to do that so unfortunately I'll never know.

Asiaprod

Jakkass wrote: »

Asiaprod, I grasped as much from your post on it. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted you. I'm not entirely knowledgeable on the Buddhist way of life.

No problem at all, we can all learn interesting things on Boards.ie.

PurpleBee

The psychedelic key turns a lock and unhinges doors. But if we must push on through are we going to get anywhere? I don't know and I don't know who I'm asking. Are drugs a useful spiritual path?

18AD

Yeah, I think they are, very much so! They certainly have a lot to offer.

It's such a giant topic. Is there a specific thing you're interested in?

Best.
AD

PurpleBee

yeah well all of it really, from what I've read it is a dangerous path to tread alone with many opportunities to stray. But the way our society is structured I find it very difficult to find support for my venture in a psychedelic vehicle...? I don't even know how openly i can talk about drugs on here, its sad really.

Nevyn

/looks at thread title and looks at content wtf?

Anyway, this has come up before and it is one of the ways to open the ways but I do think there are better ways.

Shulgin

Psychedelic drugs are often a starting point in a persons spiritual path, often just by chance. Many cultures use psychedelic plants in their spiritual rituals, it could even be these plants/substances that spawned human spirituality in the first place?

These drugs are not to be taken lightly and you should do a lot of research before considering going down that road. Also its important to have someone knowledgable there to help you if needs be.

18AD

PurpleBee wrote: »

yeah well all of it really, from what I've read it is a dangerous path to tread alone with many opportunities to stray. But the way our society is structured I find it very difficult to find support for my venture in a psychedelic vehicle...? I don't even know how openly i can talk about drugs on here, its sad really.

http://www.erowid.org/

I doubt you'll find much support for this venture! It is quite sad that it is an extremely difficult topic to talk about. I find that even with experienced users talking about the experience is so flippant.

I've found the most important part of it is what you bring back to consensus reality from your experience. Trying to integrate it into your every day state of mind. To rely too much on the drug itself is a shame, as you're what creates most of the experience.

Best.
AD

Nevyn

Actually I have found that those who have had such experiences in a spiritual context loathe to talk about it due to them being so personal and knowing that unless a person has a frame of context from doing something like it themselves a proper converstaion about it is pointless and full of misunderstandings.