I would like to add though, that i disagree with you about seeking pleasure. I don't think there's anything wrong with pleasure.

It is definately true that pleasure does not automatically lead to great wisdom or insights. But, given that you posses some discipline, a basic level of self control and the willingness to accept the also innevitable pains in life, it does not automatically lead to deterioration.

Pleasure is actually very imortant. As is pain ofcourse.
We couldn't do without any of the two.

Message received. Thank-you for your contribution, xss27.

I have found harmalas to have a quieting effect on the mind and a reasonably good addition to long meditation sessions. Most of my meditation happens in 15 minure blocks, while sober and eyes closed. I have a hard time meditating with eyes open and I wonder how much a difference it really makes. To those of you who keep your eyes open: what's the difference?

I have found it very difficult to meditate with LSD or cannabis. I have had limited success using LSD during meditation and have found cannabis to be completely counterproductive. I have enjoyed kava before meditation as well.

Theravada keeps eyes closed. The Pali suttas which Theravada follows (the oldest records of Buddhist teachings) say nothing about eyes open or closed, but, the Pali suttas do emphasize meditation as a means of transcending sensory experience, including the mind, which is counted as a sixth sense. The culmination of meditation, nirvana, is referred to as the cessation of perception and feeling.

What that means is debated.

Zen is emphatically eyes open. The founder, Bodhidharma, ripped his eyelids off, which sprouted into the first tea plant. They are trying to maintain total awareness without engaging in mental acts of distinguishing. Total openness, not keeping anything out. This relates to their Madhyamaka heritage which states that everything is interconnected. Not a “oneness”, but not a “twoness” either. Just not separate. Just awareness leading to an ineffable realization of how nothing is separate.

Zen has a more subtle approach in my estimation, or at least a more subtle literature.

I go by Pali suttas. They are simpler, and closer to the Buddha’s original teachings, and are more conducive to visionary meditation with psychedelics. The founder of the Thai forest tradition had many visions prior to becoming a Non-Returner. The trick with visions is to not hold onto them - just continue the meditation, they will rise and pass. Do not follow them - follow the meditation.

For years I sat with Zen people, and I kept my eyes open. It is less drowsy. Now I only open my eyes when I am drowsy. Eyes closed allows for more centered focus on breathing. Focus on breathing is only a preliminary stage in Zen. Their emphasis is more on stillness, just open awareness - which means not blocking anything out, rather than giving your attention to a singular thing like breathing.

In Zen tradition (this story is NOT in the Pali suttas), the Buddha was enlightened when he saw Venus in the sky. This means two things: one, his eyes were open, two, he was looking around - not centrally locked on a singular object. Very different from the Pali sources.

The Tibetan practice of Dzogchen is the most similar thing to Zen in the Tibetan world. I’m pretty sure they keep eyes open too.

I suppose it comes down to the manner of your attention. Openness or singular - in each case, keenly aware. They are both subject to distraction in different ways. Eyes open, the environment can be distracting, eyes closed your internal thoughts (especially if you are drowsy).

I find it interesting so many people like the harmalas. Harmalas alone just make me drowsy and a little distracted. I only value them for making DMT orally active personally.

About acid: I’ve mentioned it, but I agree with you, I find it makes sitting meditation more difficult. However, it definitely enhances yoga. I signed up for several hours of classes at a large hot yoga studio, spent my peak doing it for the day - best yoga classes ever. Walked out and the whole trip was changed qualitatively. It was like being in a Pixar cartoon. I only tried cannabis at yoga once - it was not for me.

OneIsEros:

Thank you for the history lesson. That was kind of you to type it all out. I really appreciate it.

This was a concept which took me years to adopt. With meditative visions, when I first began finding them, I was enthralled and gitty. Following them was difficult and often pulled me right out of me meditative state.

Yup. Now it makes sense to me; it seems so obvious. Thanks.

I don't find harmalas distracting in the least. Exactly the opposite actually< I usually smoke un-concentrated B. Caapi leaf if I am going to include it in my sitting.

Yoga with LSD is marvelous, I agree. But I am very enthusiastic about that particular drug. Its funny how a drug can change so dramatically once you develop a relationship with it. I used to be a very constant pot smoker and was absolutely infatuated with the plant and its effects. But once I quit and lost my tolerance to her weirder and more psychedelic effects our relationship has never been then same. I think Cannabis with a moderate to high tolerance is a fantastic drug; among the very best. But cannabis without a tolerance is probably the most powerful raw plant in existence. Way too much for meditation.

Absolutely. Totally understandable and a perfectly natural reaction too. There's a romanticism of nature too.. nature is absolutely brutal. Our manicured lawns and aligned trees hide the imperceptible slaughter going on every moment of the day between plant life, yet we look out the window across picturesque 'landscape painting' scenery, totally curated, and think that is an accurate representation of nature.



India is a great example. Every cultural system has its flaws and shouldn't romanticised, even indigenous ones. I bet if you could accurately communicate with those people they would have exactly the same hopes, issues, disillusionment and fantasies as anyone else. That happens to anyone stuck in this piece of flesh.

Romance is an illness. It is projecting your power outwards in the hope of solving your own problems. It isn't polite to dump that burden of responsibility on to others, and above all a disservice to yourself for not believing you have the power inside yourself to find what you really are looking for.

My pleasure