I love that you're wrangling with this and I'm so glad you found a path to the living wisdom. I would say Vajrayana and much of Buddhism is helping pop the bubble of reification. The mind has a strong tendency toward certainty, solidity. But there is no ground to stand on. Awareness is completely transparent, it can't be seen yet somehow it's the most luminous thing. Entering through the gate of emptiness effectively disarms the habitual Doer.
But what I think I hear you're exclaiming is that at its core, there seems to be an infinite compassionate intelligence that wants to awaken, wants to guide us into higher consciousness. Who knows but that seems to be part of my experience too. Cool stuff huh?
"I teach suffering and the end of suffering."
I am yes. The Buddhist teachings are very clear systematic and complete. And yet God has just come in and superceeded all in a matchless way.
I am not interested in philosophical conjecture, I am talking about reference points for direct experience of these things.
The Eternal Glory of God is what is unmistakable and undeniable on Rue tea and DMT, consistent with Mystic traditions in Christianity, Advaita and others, and the direct intervention alluded to earlier guiding the path.
The Buddha didn't acknowledge this or encourage paying homage to or seeking this as support. Once again psychedelics have a power to reveal but go beyond different traditions and show their limitations, even the most venerated and authoritative, and in historic religious terms the Buddha pretty much tops that list I would say and the teachings make sense.
Yet it seems God Consciousness says "sure, but now let me show you this. "
What in the name of God is that, and how is it even possible?? Yet it is, as you and I and many others know.
I can say I have had dialogue with experienced Buddhist meditators with many years of practice who even lead retreats who have fundamentally said the experiences have meant they can no longer identify as 'Buddhist', but they generally keep this to themselves because the Buddhist path is otherwise great and very complete in itself - barring this omission of the Infinite Intelligence we can commune with that gives direct guidence and endows some of the higher meditation states effortlessly.
This is only an issue when you know about it though, which is why I generally don't introduce my Buddhist friends who are well on their path to psychedelics, to avoid this unsettling knowledge of a back door to the Ultimate guided by the Most High.
Any view will lead you astray. They are all mind stories in the end.
Yet how does the application of this square with our current life experience and the psychedelic enterprise?
According to Buddhist, and indeed perennialism which seeks unitive understanding between commonalities across tradition,
there is right view, and there are wrong views.
So it isn't true to say "all views lead astray". Many do, but some don't which is the point.
Yes, views need to ultimately be transcended after we have walked the path they point to. Since we have not yet walked the path to completion ( I make no claim to Enlightenment), views are necessary at this level.
You're presenting one more fairy tale here, imo.
The only truth within my reach that I can fall back on is Being. That's real and here all the time. This state is unmistakable, and is the base of every sentient being.
Your fairytale is likewise that "just be, and all will take care of itself" and is imo, one that works for you now.
Perhaps all you want to point to is the here and now. This doesn't answer or resolve these issues for me but it is a major and fundamental part of the process. If you are satisfied with this and have a "I'll leave it there, and then hope for the best when life comes to an end" then thats fine and that is your view and your approach. It's not a universal panacea however that applies to others, and isnt necessarily what the Buddhists are teaching either, at the beginning or later, aside from maybe Zen.
The teaching ought to be according to the taught! It's not like there is no God, but Buddha tells you what you need to hear at your level of maturity. Read "Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi" if you want to see how it functions. Sri Ramana advised a multitude of different practices, and his take on the truth shifted from person to person.
"Later development" is just that. People were ready to hear a deeper truth. Shakyamuni laid a foundation for that to happen, though.
We can't show the truth to another, only point to it
Regards the Dharmakaya or "The Godless God of Buddhism", I know that the narrative of some later traditions is that it developed later...but again I have a hard time reconciling the Buddha's silence on direct intervention and guidance from On High as experienced with psychedelics, which he also isnt recorded as talking about much if at all.
I also struggle with what, to me could be a form of conceit, to say that those who were born at the time of the Buddha himself including his direct disciples were somehow at a 'less level of maturity' than later generations and not ready for the more advanced teachings. Surely they were more advanced, so needed less.
So the absence of mention of God by the Buddha, something that not only is felt but even directs experience for me psychically and physically during trips is not a small issue but if you have reconciled it in a way satisfactory to you then good for you. To me yes, I can reconcile it in that they are perhaps different paths on different sides of the mountain. Which is why I said that as I see it, Buddhism is not the best framework for understanding what occurs in this central aspect, although overall there are a lot of very relevant teachings there.