So I was googling a quote yesterday for another thread amd came across this term "Phanerothyme". I didn't know what it meant, so as I always do with these sorts of things, I googled some more, and came across this essay:
Phanerothyme: A Western Approach to the Religious Use of Psychochemicals
On the whole I thought it was a well articulated essay, informative, and yet at the same time very divisive and judgemental. It clearly carries that Protestant mindset that Spirituality and fun have no cross over, and that there is only one way to reach these states with these substances. It got me thinking.
While it puts forward a solid protocol which the author finds rewarding, he does not seem to grasp that this is only one of many ways to use these substances, and seems to hold him self aloof from the crowd, which, to my mind is quite an unenlightened stance to be taking.
I used to take psychedelics as a recreational tool, so maybe this is why his preaching irritated me. I know people who still take them in this manner, and I do not judge unless I think they are actually being dangerous. I find it hard to use Psychs in a purely 'recreational' manner any more, because I have been illumunated by the possibilities of these substances - this was after a very baffling and confusing experience on LSD several years back where I glimpsed my first 'peak behind the veil' - purely by accident.
That day changed a lot for me, and maybe I would not be on this path if it was not for that frosty afternoon. So, it was unstructured, so i was shaken for some time after the experience, so I felt scared and alone for the rest of the trip - SO WHAT?! It was ultimately a very good thing that re-kindled my otherwise failing relationship with God. Sometimes the substances and mind states they unlock, can give us the push we need to follow our own spiritual path, and seek our own routes to the same goal.
While I agree we should look towards the traditional for a framework of how these things should work, I believe that our way must also be adapted to not only the more traditional religious paradigms, but also to those who are not actively seeking a 'God' or 'Higher self' - for some greater awareness and a change of perspective is all that is needed to function that bit better on a day to day basis.
Who are we, or the author, to judge any singular person??? Who is he to suggest that this is the only way to respectfully use these compounds?
"Judge not lest ye be judged / For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." Matthew 7.2
Phanerothyme... I think I'll stick to Psychedelic thanks... I would be very interested to see what he has to think about DMT, seeing as he considers visual hallucinations to be 'undesirable':
" The test is not how magnificent the visions, but rather how clear is the understanding obtained, and the test of clarity is its applicability to the decisions of daily life."
What if the visions are magnificent AND the insight and applicability are there? What if one thoroughly enjoyed the experience? Is there no recreation to be had in this "sober" practise?
This turned into a bit of a rant, and for that I'm sorry, as you can see this article both fascinated me and ruffled my feathers :lol: Any thoughts on this matter will be gratefully recieved.
Phanerothyme: A Western Approach to the Religious Use of Psychochemicals
On the whole I thought it was a well articulated essay, informative, and yet at the same time very divisive and judgemental. It clearly carries that Protestant mindset that Spirituality and fun have no cross over, and that there is only one way to reach these states with these substances. It got me thinking.
While it puts forward a solid protocol which the author finds rewarding, he does not seem to grasp that this is only one of many ways to use these substances, and seems to hold him self aloof from the crowd, which, to my mind is quite an unenlightened stance to be taking.
I used to take psychedelics as a recreational tool, so maybe this is why his preaching irritated me. I know people who still take them in this manner, and I do not judge unless I think they are actually being dangerous. I find it hard to use Psychs in a purely 'recreational' manner any more, because I have been illumunated by the possibilities of these substances - this was after a very baffling and confusing experience on LSD several years back where I glimpsed my first 'peak behind the veil' - purely by accident.
That day changed a lot for me, and maybe I would not be on this path if it was not for that frosty afternoon. So, it was unstructured, so i was shaken for some time after the experience, so I felt scared and alone for the rest of the trip - SO WHAT?! It was ultimately a very good thing that re-kindled my otherwise failing relationship with God. Sometimes the substances and mind states they unlock, can give us the push we need to follow our own spiritual path, and seek our own routes to the same goal.
While I agree we should look towards the traditional for a framework of how these things should work, I believe that our way must also be adapted to not only the more traditional religious paradigms, but also to those who are not actively seeking a 'God' or 'Higher self' - for some greater awareness and a change of perspective is all that is needed to function that bit better on a day to day basis.
Who are we, or the author, to judge any singular person??? Who is he to suggest that this is the only way to respectfully use these compounds?
"Judge not lest ye be judged / For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." Matthew 7.2
Phanerothyme... I think I'll stick to Psychedelic thanks... I would be very interested to see what he has to think about DMT, seeing as he considers visual hallucinations to be 'undesirable':
" The test is not how magnificent the visions, but rather how clear is the understanding obtained, and the test of clarity is its applicability to the decisions of daily life."
What if the visions are magnificent AND the insight and applicability are there? What if one thoroughly enjoyed the experience? Is there no recreation to be had in this "sober" practise?
This turned into a bit of a rant, and for that I'm sorry, as you can see this article both fascinated me and ruffled my feathers :lol: Any thoughts on this matter will be gratefully recieved.