Psychedelic Wisdom Sources You Trust?

[OneIsEros]

I was not attacking your meditation practice by noting that practices passed down through generations are more likely to be more refined than practices starting from scratch.

I also don’t think I was sensationalizing indigenous cultures that use psychedelics by pointing out that their practices are, uniquely among world cultures, developed specifically in relation to psychedelics (versus, for example, my own meditation practice, which is just my own personal “start from scratch” approach).

And I’ve noticed that you pull out progressive polemics in ways that are passive aggressive. “Privilege”, “indigenous sensationalism”, “elitist”, and so on.

 

[Voidmatrix]

And I’ve noticed that you pull out progressive polemics in ways that are passive aggressive. “Privilege”, “indigenous sensationalism”, “elitist”, and so on.

Wouldn't say I'm passive aggressive, but perhaps some of my observations happen to align with some "progressive polemics," but I don't care. If making observations about a passive aggressive statement and addressing that (which you didn't acknowledge) makes me passive aggressive, okay, and?

One love

 

[OneIsEros]

In response to yours, bud.

 

[Palmer Eldritch]

There are uncontacted tribes in the Amazon that have not yet discovered the wheel. We have similar deficits regarding psychedelic use. If it is elitist to say that humans learn new things generationally (like: the wheel, or, more advanced uses of psychedelics), then yeah, sure. And?

By this logic, would you argue that we have similar deficits regarding personal computers or the internet? We lack a longstanding cultural tradition of using these (and other) tools, so it seems like we're at a disadvantage. (Well, we probably have no wisdom around their use, but this is completely in counterpoint to your wheel example above.)

I would personally argue a longstanding tradition does not necessitate wisdom. In the case of spirituality, there are many longstanding traditions. And yet if the goal of these traditions is enlightenment (which I imagine many of them claim), they all fail horribly. You could count on one hand the number of enlightened persons who followed these traditions to arrive where they are. (Actually you couldn't; the number is 0.)

Where spiritual traditions shine is in an arena entirely separated from enlightenment. Compassion, kindness, selflessness, feeling good about oneself, community, etc. And here is where the tradition really provides the benefit.

To summarize: Wisdom is not predicated upon a tradition; traditions can be beneficial or they may hinder. In the case of psychedelics, I think there's value in both tradition and in the "from scratch" approach. But I guess it depends on what you hope to get out of psychedelics personally. My approach is more the "from scratch" approach, but I also put more weight in enlightenment than I do the "other" flavor of spirituality.

 

[OneIsEros]

There are uncontacted tribes in the Amazon that have not yet discovered the wheel. We have similar deficits regarding psychedelic use. If it is elitist to say that humans learn new things generationally (like: the wheel, or, more advanced uses of psychedelics), then yeah, sure. And?

By this logic, would you argue that we have similar deficits regarding personal computers or the internet? We lack a longstanding cultural tradition of using these (and other) tools, so it seems like we're at a disadvantage. (Well, we probably have no wisdom around their use, but this is completely in counterpoint to your wheel example above.)

I would personally argue a longstanding tradition does not necessitate wisdom. In the case of spirituality, there are many longstanding traditions. And yet if the goal of these traditions is enlightenment (which I imagine many of them claim), they all fail horribly. You could count on one hand the number of enlightened persons who followed these traditions to arrive where they are. (Actually you couldn't; the number is 0.)

Where spiritual traditions shine is in an arena entirely separated from enlightenment. Compassion, kindness, selflessness, feeling good about oneself, community, etc. And here is where the tradition really provides the benefit.

To summarize: Wisdom is not predicated upon a tradition; traditions can be beneficial or they may hinder. In the case of psychedelics, I think there's value in both tradition and in the "from scratch" approach. But I guess it depends on what you hope to get out of psychedelics personally. My approach is more the "from scratch" approach, but I also put more weight in enlightenment than I do the "other" flavor of spirituality.

I mean, yes, actually! We are actually watching cultural protocol around the internet grow as we speak. At this point in time, we’re learning a lot in both positive and negative terms. Much like out culture’s discovery of psychedelics actually. “They’ll save the world!” “They’ll make you crazy!” “… it’s a mixed bag!”

But, to speak more closely to the metaphor: yes, I believe a culture that uses and develops computer technology for many centuries will have better computers, most likely. Consider technology 15 years ago compared to today.

 

[Palmer Eldritch]

.......and you entirely missed the point. Never mind.

 

[OneIsEros]

.......and you entirely missed the point. Never mind.

Perhaps. To your other points though: I do not know of any enlightened figure who arose out of a vacuum.

Aristotle goes to great lengths to articulate the history that led to him. The Buddha was dependent on an already thriving tradition of sramanas. Laozi was part of the period of the Hundred Schools of Thought, and was engaging creatively with tensions and problems laid out in front of him. And these people’s traditions made plenty of folk generally regarded as enlightened, and those folk tend to honour their ancestors for providing context for them to work in. So, I am unsure of where you are getting this idea. Dogen and everyone else in Zen tradition cites the ancestors constantly. The Thai Forest Tradition is incredibly reverential to the Buddha, and to Ajahn Mun, for having started that grassroots movement which led to so many monks (allegedly) realizing arhatship.

 

[fink]

I feel far detached from a pious or monastic vision of what enlightenment means. Surely the idea is to reach an ultimate understanding whilst playing the game as the character you have been allocated?

So easy to find enlightenment with no responsibility, sitting in a secluded paradise, far removed from the chaotic human story. A real achievement is getting there while buried under the mountains of crap that regular human life entails.

 

[OneIsEros]

I feel far detached from a pious or monastic vision of what enlightenment means. Surely the idea is to reach an ultimate understanding whilst playing the game as the character you have been allocated?

So easy to find enlightenment with no responsibility, sitting in a secluded paradise, far removed from the chaotic human story. A real achievement is getting there while buried under the mountains of crap that regular human life entails.

There are occasional figures like that. But they too arise within the context of their traditions. (Layman P’ang, Vimalakirti). The Soto school of Zen emphasizes the mundanity you speak of. Meister Eckhart taught that the life of works transcended the academic contemplative life. There are many paths. But - each and every one of these arose in the context of their traditions.

 

[fink]

Unless you can teach a method that works for a human buried deep in the souless city then I don't see the wisdom as future proof. What do these ancient traditions have to say about a world constructed and controlled by AI and machines. Did any of these teachers have any notion that humanity could become a multi-planet species?

What I mean to say is that our sources of wisdom are very soon to become inaccessible to all but the most fortunate and isolated of humans. Actually, I am partly suggesting that has been the truth for a long while already in any case.

 

[Palmer Eldritch]

Perhaps. To your other points though: I do not know of any enlightened figure who arose out of a vacuum.

Do you personally know any enlightened person? Let's not talk about historical figures. Even if the Buddha was a real enlightened person, he's not here to tell us about the path he took, so it's rather a stretch to say he followed any tradition. Did you personally ask him? Is he here on this forum to confirm?

Otherwise I'm calling bullshit on all the historical figures you mentioned. We can't confirm that they even were enlightened let alone how they got there.

 

[OneIsEros]

Unless you can teach a method that works for a human buried deep in the souless city then I don't see the wisdom as future proof. What do these ancient traditions have to say about a world constructed and controlled by AI and machines. Did any of these teachers have any notion that humanity could become a multi-planet species?

What I mean to say is that our sources of wisdom are very soon to become inaccessible to all but the most fortunate and isolated of humans. Actually, I am partly suggesting that has been the truth for a long while already in any case.

I don’t know what you think these various traditions teach, but none of the ones I am aware of would find these circumstances problematic. And to some Nexians (not to you) who think that access to that sort of thing is a matter of “privilege”:

No. No it isn’t. It is a matter of labour in the context of community. It is hard, and it is a group effort, but it’s grass roots where and when it happens, and it’s not a bunch of rich folk. Hell, the more impoverished places in the world usually have the stronger traditions, and the ones that I’ve witnessed are ALL community built, by people who are, often, broke. Me included. I live check to check. So do many in these communities, which are usually based entirely on donations - and if not entirely, then mostly.

It takes WORK people! It’s not going to be fed to you on a platter. And it’s going to take teachers. In the Buddhist community we had teachers who travelled to Asia and returned to teach us, and the communities back home put in work making a hospitable world for those teachings to flourish in. We need people to learn from people who already know, and we need those people to teach us. AND we need to do work at developing skillful use on our own - while recognizing that that is probably going to be limited, in comparison.

Anyhow, I thank you for your contributions. It has confirmed what I suspected: in terms of the kind of active, skilled use of psychedelics that is documented among cultures that use psychedelics traditionally, there doesn’t seem like there’s much out there. My main interest, and an interest I hope will grow, is in - not so much moving away from the psychotherapeutic and Eastern Wisdom paradigms we have studied psychedelics through thus far - it’s not a terrible model, therapy’s good and I AM a Buddhist! - but calling in something we probably should have started with, before we went around trying to figure out if Soma and the Eleusinian Mysteries were psychedelic based. That is: cultures that we KNOW know things about psychedelics.

 

[fink]

I love your passion and optimism on this topic. It is gratefully received. I truly hope the old sources of wisdom can keep up with the exponentially accelerating rocket ship we now find ourselves riding.

 

[OneIsEros]

Perhaps. To your other points though: I do not know of any enlightened figure who arose out of a vacuum.

Do you personally know any enlightened person? Let's not talk about historical figures. Even if the Buddha was a real enlightened person, he's not here to tell us about the path he took, so it's rather a stretch to say he followed any tradition. Did you personally ask him? Is he here on this forum to confirm?

Otherwise I'm calling bullshit on all the historical figures you mentioned. We can't confirm that they even were enlightened let alone how they got there.

I’ve studied with Thai Forest teachers who met and studied with Ajahns Chah and Maha Boowa, who are both regarded by the Thai Forest tradition as Arahants. And yes, it is true you cannot confirm if someone is enlightened from the outside —but you also can’t confirm that “enlightenment” exists at all, no matter how you define it (and the definitions are multiple - it could mean “liberally educated in the secular age of reason”, or it could mean “put an end to the klesas and stopped the process of psychic rebirth”). In the Buddha’s own teaching on that matter, he stated that there is no proof for it, except in a personal sense, which involves intensive lifelong practice. Sort of like how you can prove lucid dreaming exists, to yourself, by putting in the work and just doing it.

Regarding whether there was a tradition he inherited: the Buddha definitely is recorded as having trained under two separate teachers, and he modified their systems. They taught him to get to the realm of perception of nothingness, and then, the realm of neither-perception-nor-non-perception. After learning this from them, he developed their system of meditation further and attained the cessation of perception and feeling, the meditative entryway into Nibbana (Nirvana in Sanskrit).

I don’t know what you mean by enlightenment, but it doesn’t sound like you have inquired into these traditions in either their historical or contemporary forms. Hope this was helpful. You are correct, the Buddha may not have even existed. Ajahn Chah and Maha Boowa did though, and they were deeply reverential for their tradition, and the teachers they had in it. Who knows if they were enlightened. They generally are regarded as having been within that tradition, but, it can only be proven to yourself if it exists at all.

 

[Voidmatrix]

I don’t know what you think these various traditions teach, but none of the ones I am aware of would find these circumstances problematic. And to some Nexians (not to you) who think that access to that sort of thing is a matter of “privilege”:

Funny, I definitely said things like opportunity as well, but it's good to see your claim about me being passive aggressive is more a projection of your own behaviors.

You have a habit of coming here with an agenda to impart your knowledge on us. Makes for a poor atmosphere for interaction.

One love

 

[OneIsEros]

I don’t know what you think these various traditions teach, but none of the ones I am aware of would find these circumstances problematic. And to some Nexians (not to you) who think that access to that sort of thing is a matter of “privilege”:

Funny, I definitely said things like opportunity as well, but it's good to see your claim about me being passive aggressive is more a projection of your own behaviors.

You have a habit of coming here with an agenda to impart your knowledge on us. Makes for a poor atmosphere for interaction.

One love

I didn’t start this Void, you did. It wasn’t cool.

 

[fink]

Come now. You are both better creatures than to let this go any further in public.

 

[OneIsEros]

Good reminder. Thank-you.

Void. Increasingly I think we just might not see eye to eye on a lot of things. I did not ever mean to attack your personal practice, or anyone’s. My main gripe is what is available to us as a community - not how individuals in the community are conducting themselves, in the context of what is given to us. I’m hungry for fare that is not there, but I think is out there to be had. That’s all. We are as a community shaped knowingly or unknowingly by what we have access to.

 

[Voidmatrix]

Come now. You are both better creatures than to let this go any further in public.

Good reminder. Thank-you.

Void. Increasingly I think we just might not see eye to eye on a lot of things. I did not ever mean to attack your personal practice, or anyone’s. My main gripe is what is available to us as a community - not how individuals in the community are conducting themselves, in the context of what is given to us. I’m hungry for fare that is not there, but I think is out there to be had. That’s all. We are as a community shaped knowingly or unknowingly by what we have access to.

That's something we can agree on, but it's a reason I appreciate you. I want to grow, and we grow the most interacting with ways of thinking that are contrary to our own. Plus, you're articulate and highly intelligent. I just find that certain statements you make are a bit antagonistic. To be fair, I'm sensitive to subtlety so will be better about shrugging things off.

And another thing we can agree on is about access, which I feel is entailed in the idea of opportunity, so I will clarify better in the future.

One love

 

[Palmer Eldritch]

I don’t know what you mean by enlightenment.

Just trying to prepare for the big reveal:

I am enlightened.