Hello all!

In a number of posts here on the Nexus, I have seen people conflating Buddhism, psychedelics, and meditation. This is hardly a new idea, just look at Tim Leary and his handling of the Tibetan Book of the Dead. As a Buddhist, the thought that these should be synthesized does not sit well with me. I would like to open up a friendly discussion and hear your thoughts.

As a disclaimer I would like to emphasize that I am not claiming absolute authority on this issue. I have my view and opinions, that all. I have also been doing psychedelics for about as long as I have been practicing Buddhism, about fifteen years. I have gone through sober years, as well as times of indulgence. I was a member of a Buddhist Monastery at one point, so I have had plenty of exposure to both meditation practice and psychedelics.

First of all, what does it mean to be Buddhist? I will offer a simple answer, one that includes all times and tradition of the Dharma. A Buddhist is one who has unshakable faith in the state of Buddhahood, and who has dedicated their life to the path that leads there.

We can say that Buddhahood is synonymous with enlightenment. You see the term enlightenment used in all sorts of ways in new age circles. Enlightenment is not an insight, a mystical experience, or an experience of transformation. Enlightenment means reaching Buddhahood. Buddhahood is not an experience, it is a state that transcends all duality and limitations. There is nothing higher.

I think it would be fair to say that nobody has yet to become an enlightened Buddha from taking psychedelics. I doubt many people take them with the one-pointed intention of obtaining Buddhahood. Of course, I can't know that for sure. Enlightenment is not so much obtained, but uncovered. It is not dependent on external causes (such as taking a drug), it is discovered with one's own primordial wisdom and awareness.

I believe that psychedelics are incredible tools. Of course, they can either be medicine or poison, unlike the Buddhadharma, which is always medicine. In my view (which may differ from some or many of you), Buddhism and meditaion are a spiritual path, while psychedelics are a worldy path. When I say worldly I do not mean materialistic. I believe that personal transformation, healing, even communicating with "entities" or "spirit beings" are worldly because these are things that do not transcend samsara, or our conditioned world of illusion. In Buddhism, we are not looking to become a better person per say, we are aiming to free ourselves from the shackles that bind us to samsara: the deluded perceptions that spring from ignorance and create the duality of self and other. Healing and transformation are relative and therefore secondary. There are also many unseen entities that inhabit other planes of existence that we can communicate with, but this is still samsara. I know very little about Amazonian shamanism, but my perception is that it is not a spiritual path based on ayahuasca. Rather, it is a profound wisdom tradition that employs many tools, ayahuasca being one, that is used for worldly pursuits, such as divination and healing. When I say worldly, I do not mean that it is not profound, just that it does not lead to Buddhahood.

We all know that psychedelics can radically change how we view the world. Our conceptual models can be crushed and the ego sent running. These experiences can give us profound insights, and perhaps can be a catalyst for enlightenment in the future do to karma. In my experience, psychedelics can show us how the world of illusion is propped up by our endless concepts. Through them, we can peek into the empty nature of self and the world we experience.

The advanced yogi can use any experience to see through the illusion of duality. Perhaps someone with high very high capacity and experience can use psychedelics to obtain realization, but I think that they pose some problems for most people.

For starters, it is very easy to become attached to our psychedelic experiences. This is not a bad thing, unless we are trying to obtain realization. Notice how much significance we give to our trips. We overlay meaning and concpets to our experiences... art and culture even spring forth from them. In order to be true meditation, we have to be completely unattached to whatever we experience. No hope, no fear, no good, no bad... It is so easy to become enthralled by our trips. Also, different people will give different values to the trips and the drugs themselves. Charles Manson and CO took LSD...

Also, compared to meditation, it is very difficult to integrate our insights in a solid and permanent way. Many people seem to think that meditation should look "mystical," with all sorts of lights and bliss and other jazz. In reality, an effective meditation practice takes massive commitment and hard daily work. The fruit of this effort is firstly to tame the mind. This is like cutting a tree at the root. If we have a fully trained mind we have a tool that we can use in any and every situation. Thoughts and emotions will not keep their hold on us and true wisdom will develop. This is solid and noticeable. You will be changed from the inside out. I really doubt that psychedelics can really accomplish this. Many people have a hard time integrating their experiences to their life, and eventually the lessons and insights fade. Rick Strassman noted this in his patients when he followed up on them, influencing his decision to stop the DMT studies.

This is turning out to be a really long post! I don't know if anyone will read it, but it was fun for me to write. I have some more points to make, but please chime in!

There have been some use of psychoactive substances in the history of Buddhism. Datura, especially was used in India and Tibet. This plant was associated with the protector Mahakala and was used during tantric rituals. It was also given to students, under the close supervision of a teacher, in order for the student to experience the malleability of the mind. Through these experience the students could see how the mind is not as fixed and solid as it appears.

I believe certain yogis would get proper wasted on booze as a specific meditation practice. This was used to prepare them for dying, which the person is in a very confused and altered state. Dying is very important in Tibetan Buddhism, and you must be able to remain stable during this loony and frightening experience.

This goes back to what I said before. For the advanced practicitoner, anything can become the path, anything can be a source of wisdom. That doesn't mean that the datura itself possessed properties that led to realization. The plant itself was mearly a tool.

It is interesting that Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche, who was regarded as highly realized, but also highly controversial (he smoked, drank A LOT, slept with many women, ect) took LSD on occasion. He described it as "Super Samsara." Meaning super illusion, literally.

My posts probably come off as pretty dogmatic. I just think that it is important not to mix up traditions and make up our own. Like I said, I have done a ton of drugs. In the end, none of the psychedelics that I have taken helped my meditation or my Buddhist practice even by a hair's tip. I have had many amazing experiences, and hold much love for DMT, mushrooms, and all the rest. I have also been harshly criticized from my fellow Buddhists for my drug use, so don't think that I am bashing them.

Psychedelics can provide so many rich experiences. They have especially helped me to transform myself and deal with past issues in a new light. They have kept my wonder alive, and have never failed to amaze. But in the end, I feel like they offer nothing more than experiences. There is no end to what we can experience in samsara. If our goal is to truly change, to transcend our illusionary human designations and really find out what our full potential is, we need something a little bit stronger than psychedelics.

Of course, not everybody is Buddhist. Drugs mean different things to different people. I have not always thought this way, but today I stand by my view that psychedelics are a tremendous source of experience, but that they are not a true spiritual path.

This raises a lot of questions. I believe Terence McKenna once said that religion has failed us. He put psychedelics in a position to be the sole evolutionary force and perhaps only possible savior for our planet.

I probably haven't answered my own question all that well. Perhaps it can boil down to what does it mean to be a true spiritual path? Where does it lead? I gave a very crude rendition based on my particular tradition. I appreciate all traditions, though. My worldly vehicle could be your spiritual vehicle.

In the end, spirituality is sadly lacking from our culture. Psychedelics urge people to look deeper, to make their lives more poignant and meaningful. I wonder how far these chemicals and plants can take one as their spiritual path?

Spirituality is so profound, yet so simple. It seems to me that everybody here is dedicated to their own path in their own unique way. I think new age paths, where traditions are mixed together like ingredients in a stew does great disservice to both the tradition and the practitioner.

As a Buddhist, I wince when I see the Dharma presented in ways that have no basis in the true teaching. I'm a bit of a hypocrite, though. As a "serious" (pretty sad, but I do my best) practitioner of the Dharma I should dedicate my life to practice and the teaching, yet I have never stopped using drugs.

Some of the most important Dharma lessons that I have learned was from being a heroin addict. Of course, there is nothing spiritual about dope. I think what makes us spiritual is how much we allow ourselves to be taught by our circumstances and what's around us. If anything, psychedelics always tell me, "keep your eyes open."

May we all wake up. May we wake up all.

Love to hear what you guys have to say about all of this dribble.

Very interesting post!

Maybe I'm just being arbitrary, but I have some clear differences in belief.

For example, you claim no absolute authority but you imply that Buddhahood is absolute enlightenment.

Do you mean to say that Buddhahood describes absolute enlightenment? Because to say that it is, would be implying absolute authority.

If psychedelics are worldly, they are the least worldly things on Earth. I agree that meditation is an uncovering, and it takes mastery and discipline to be able to hold onto that thoughtless state so that you're able to leave your physical body. Psychedelics do it for you. There is a very significant reason in my opinion that they evolved with us and all around us - they are our link to the spiritual realms.

Also, in my opinion, Buddhism is worldly. I feel like some Buddhists would even agree with this statement. I feel like any religion in a good capacity is adding to your own internal spiritual authority. I feel like any religion operating as that spiritual authority is false. I'm sure there's plenty of reference to looking within, in the Buddhist teachings. Followers shouldn't forget this even though it's easy.

To practice what I preach, I have started to learn about many religions and many traditions and many practices - this is such a better view in my opinion. We have what we call moments of enlightenment which are really just small epiphanies, but there's always a bigger picture, isn't there?

o.O

EDIT- It's so strange to me that you say none of your psychedelics have had any impact on your meditation.

I did psychedelics for 10 years before ever really discovering the truth behind meditation. I immediately associated it with my psychedelic experiences and this was an incredible revelation for me. For me, the two are intrinsically connected, and very much the same.

I still believe that the pineal gland can or could release DMT and give people or our ancestors incredible and profound knowledge. The pineal gland, labeled by Descartes as the Seat of the Soul, also a very big part of Buddhism. Even Buddhism thinks the links are strong.

Let me clarify.

I was claiming no absolute authority for my self. I was making it clear that I am not an expert authority of the subject so my words are not the end all.

My distinction between worldly and spiritual referred to paths, not things. Buddhism is a path. It has a beginning, our state of ignorance, a middle, which is our meditation practice, and an end, Buddhahood. In my view this path is spiritual because it takes us from a state of conditioned existence, characterized by suffering, death, ignorance, ect. to a state beyond these conditioning and limiting factors: the transcendent and all-pervading state of enlightenment.

In a broad sense I was raising the question if psychedelics could be used as a spiritual path, or as a part of a spiritual path. In a specific sense I was debating the trend that the psychedelic state describes enlightenment, leads there, or is in any other way a part of the identity of Buddhism.

I am not sure what you mean by absolute authority. Enlightenment, and indeed all of reality, cannot be described. It is beyond being a thing and being nothing. It is emptiness, not nothingness, while at the same time it is aware and all-pervading. It is considered the highest state because it embodies true reality itself. It is the absolute. Nothing can reach beyond it because it encapsulates all while remaining beyond being something and nothing.

I also don't equate meditation with a thoughtless state. To master meditation is to be able to be unaffected by whatever arises, be it thought, emotion, or a bomb. Meditation culminates in complete unattachment, it is a state of true freedom, not an experience, but the ability to be able to be unconditioned by any experience. To me, this is far more profound than visiting spirit realms or out of body experiences. Among other reasons, psychedelics are worldly, regardless of how other-worldly they may be, because they do not have the power to cut through all experiences, being just another experience in itself.

Not sure what you mean by Buddhism being worldly. I defined spiritually and worldliness in pretty specific terms, and perhaps I should have tried to be universal. Buddhism is certainly not an eternalistic religion, there is no god, sould, ect. Maybe that is what you meant. I think all religions claim authority. In my opinion Buddhism has a valid right to do so because their view of reality is based on direct experience, not on faith. It is hard to claim the absolute authority of a god that nobody can see. Every tenant in Buddhism can be experienced for oneself with practice.

Psychedelics have had absolutely no impact on my meditation practice. What I have discovered through meditation originated in my most profound teachers and their lineage of teaching, which is like a conduit of pure spiritual energy. I get many positive benefits from psychedelics, but the cognizant awareness that experiences psychedelics is the same that experiences everything else. They are great for deconstructing your models and the ego, but I don't think that they are sufficient to permanently collapse the bridge of duality. This is where serious practice comes in. Any experience can be a source of realization, as long as there is absolutely no grasping and you are completely integrated into the experience in a non-dual way so that the experiencer and the experience are one.

Perhaps the psychedelic experience lends a unique opportunity to get into this non-dual state. But without some serious achievements in terms of practice it aint gonna happen, and the experience remains just that. A dualistic illusory experience... regardless of how profound the experience is, unless one is completely in a non-attached, non-dual state, the experience is fundamentally no different from any other in this world of illusion. Thus my designation of worldly.

How is the pineal gland a part of Buddhism? You may be right, but I have never encountered this. Some people like to equate the pineal gland with the "third eye." For the most part, this third eye is another concept derived from the new age mishmash. The eye on the forehead depicted in certain deities in Buddhism is a symbol for their ability to look unhindered through time. Some people equate it with chakras, yogic power, and even the pineal gland. This is a perfect example of the new age soup that I was speaking of. It is the same process that found a marriage between Eighh Century Tibetan texts and LSD and called it Buddhism. It's only my opinion, but I find this horribly lame.

If there really is presence of this link with the pineal gland and DMT in the cannon of Buddhism I would love to see it and would happily eat my words and parade about town naked in shame. Not trying to diss your view, I think its great that you are drawing from different wisdom sources.... Most people just watch TV.

If you have time, I would like to hear about the connection you made in your experience with meditation and psychedelics.

I was hoping for some diffent views, so thanks...

...But you describe it next! ..








I like this about Buddhism. That's what I meant when I said that some Buddhists will even agree with me. I even like what the 14th Dalai Lama said when he said "if science disproves some part of Buddhism then Buddhism will have to change". The 'monk religions' as I call them are definitely among the truest paths of all institutions named as religions.




Thoughtlessness may not equate to the entire definition of mediation, but surely, non-thought is a significant part of the discipline.



I said this because it is a set of ideas organized by humans.



I definitely think a psych. exp. can have you experiencing non duality. And like you, I think also that if one is going to get any level of spirituality out of it, then there has to be a training, some kind of practice framework to allow for the successful navigation. That's where meditation comes in! That's why this was such a revelation for me. I meditate 3x daily now - and some of the things and truths I've been able to achieve while meditating certainly rival the ones I've achieved on psychedelics. And I believe that mediation is a more important link to our spirituality than psychedelics are, but I feel like a psychedelic journey and a meditative trance are very very similar in several contexts.

OK, cool.

So as far as psychedelics and meditation goes, we seem to hold opposite views, this is good. I described what perceived as the differences, maybe you can describe what .you feel is similar about meditation and psychedelics. Then we'll really be cooking!

Meditation is a very broad term. Even within Buddhism alone, there are so many practices that fall under the title, from silent zazen to intricate tantric visualizations. And on top of that everybody has their own concepts of what meditation is, so we have some challenges in this dialogue.

What I meant about meditation and thoughts... I am not saying that you should pursue thoughts in meditation, but you should have no attachment to them, so they do not affect you. The open spaciousness that you can experience in meditation doesn't come from a completely thought free state, it comes from a state where there is no grasping, so thoughts, sounds, whatever have no control over you. I think that this is what is meant by no thought.

As far as Buddhism being worldly because it is a set of ideas organized by humans. This is like the example of the finger pointing at the moon. The ideas and concepts of Buddhism is like the finger, but the moon, that which is being pointed to is enlightenment, which is beyond ideas and concpets. On a certain level we really can't escape ideas and concepts if we want to communicate.

I think maybe why people equate psychs with meditation is because they view meditation as an experience, possibly even having expectations of that experience, such as being mystical or whatever. I don't see it as an experience, I see it as a method for developing clarity, insight, ect. Whatever you experience in meditation is actually of little significance compared to what you achieve through the practice.

Psychs and meditation are both valuable altered states of consciousness for me.

Meditation has boosted my capacity for transcendental experiences with psychedelics, and psychedelics have provided me with the ability to allow the mystery and silence in meditation to take over- resulting in some very profound experiences I simply did not have when I was a psychedelic virgin.

The means for achieving a state of higher consciousness or being is irrelevant IMO, as long as you are going in the right direction.

Buddha is often depicted with the pine-cone shaped head.



The concept of the third eye originated long before the 'new age movement'. Many cultures believed that the pineal gland was the entrance and exit point of the soul. The gland first appears in the foetus 49 days after conception, which is the time stated in the Tibetan Book of the Dead that the soul ends its sojourn and reincarnates into the next body. This period also approximates the 40 days that it takes for the soul to enter the foetus as believed by early Christians, such as St. Augustine. Lao Tzu called the pineal gland the ‘gateway to heaven and earth’, and Descartes ‘the seat of the soul’.

The links are there all the way back to the beginning of documented history.

Let me ask you a question:

If Buddhism teaches you to learn from within, and the function of people finding a marriage between Tibetan texts and LSD was some kind of self-learning, then who's to say they can't call it Buddhism?

You can't, nor should you be able to, define what Buddhism is to anyone but yourself. That's the whole message it's trying to convey, right?

The Unknowing, excellent post, motivation is such a crucial thing, i didnt even see this level untill i did phycs, but it does seem to unlock that ability to the "sixth sense". Some people can do it without the aid. But some dont need the phycs, it was definatly dumping gas on a fire of understanding and the fire grew. But now I can control my trips much easyier, i wasnt before able to cause i was like everyone at one point a virgin to the relm. Now I understand it better, Im more comforatable in it, and meditation definatly is way easier to trigger. and has helped with centering myself.

Love the topic! Lets keep talkin!

Peace an Love!

Yea, agree.

OK, somebody needs to teach this poor caveman how to quote. I'm hopeless, sigh...

Glad to see this thread getting some responses.

What you are seeing in that beautiful statue of Buddha, this "eye" situated between the eyebrows is not an "eye", third or otherwise. It is called an urna, and it is one of the marks of the Buddha according to some of the earlier Buddhist texts. It is not associated with any mystic powers, or chakras, or anything like that. It would be a huge stretch to say that it corresponded to the pineal gland.

I am aware of the relationship of the development of the pineal gland and of the entrance of the consciousness into its next incarnation. I read about this is Strassman's book. It is a fascinating proposition, coming from Strassman himself. I realize that the concept of a "third eye" did nor originate in the modern new age movement. What the new age has done, though, is mixed and matched traditions without much discretion.

This is dangerous because the teachings in texts such as the Bardo Thodol, The Book of the Dead, are rather cryptic, and you really need an authentic teacher to convey correct meaning and understanding. For example, you stated that the soul enters the new body, but the idea of a soul contradicts core teachings in Buddhism. A soul is an eternal essence of a person. In Buddhism there is nobody or thing that posses an essence, and nothing is eternal and unchanging. The very idea of a soul is rejected.

Buddhism if full of contradictions and ambiguities. It is true that liberation is possible because of our own inherent enlightened nature, nobody can enlighten us but us.

On the other hand, while we are in this state of ignorance, if we are Buddhists, we need to rely on the authentic teachings of Lord Buddha and those that have achieved the fruit. Otherwise, anything and everything could be called Dharma. The Buddhist teaching offers so many different methods designed for different individuals, but the teachings are very clear as to what constitutes a true path to enlightenment, and what constitutes a false path.

I am obviously pretty biased in my beliefs. My parents were Buddhists and I have been absorbed in the teaching for most of my life. People can do as they wish, especially if it benefits them. That being said, I see a certain danger in trying to reinvent the Dharma into whatever form pleases you. It just isn't Buddhism.

Leary was a very bright man, but he had absolutely no authority to teach a text such as The Book of the Dead. That is why lineage and transmission are so important. So there is this constant friction between absolute truth, which is inexpressible and the final goal, and relative truth, where the teaching exists in time and place, with its own rules and functions.

I do think that psychedelics can be very useful for reorienting people from the clutches of materialistic culture and can inspire people to look deeper. Many people entered the Dharma paths after having psychedelic experiences.

I have never understood why people equate meditation with altered states of consciousness. To me, it is like removing all of the alterations, so it is quite the opposite. I think many times when people lump together meditation and tripping, they are looking for an experience from meditation, and become fixated on creating something mystical. Like I said before, I don't think meditation is about experiences.

Maybe I should try the quote button. Speaking of ignorance...

Birds are chirping... I can barely keep my third eye open... Thanks for the discussion, guys. I'll holla at y'all tomo.

Funny, because meditation IS an experience. It's about tapping into the inner experience which is eternal. I often cry when I meditate because I can FEEL the love and gratitude I have for my existence. Is that not an experience?

Of course, one can have all sorts of experiences while meditating, but that is not the point IMO. The point is to remain unattached to whatever arises, and look into the nature of the experience. I am not thinking too clearly (I rarely do), I didn't mean to imply that there was no experience when meditating, for that would be impossible. But we don't put any attachment or value into the experience, which is different from most people's attitude towards psychedelic experience.

Anything can happen, nothing can happen, its all the same from the point of view of the meditator. It trains us not to be conditioned, and this is freedom. When we really look into the nature of the experience, we can come to the non-dual state. Eventually, we can be in this state on or off the meditation cushion. As profound as pyschedlic states are, I don't think that you can achieve this... well maybe you could, but you would have to be pretty bad-ass to pull it off.

If the inner experience was eternal, it would never change, always being the same. These are things that you have to investigate on your own, on the cushion, and experience (that word again!) for yourself.

It sounds like you go pretty deep in your practice, especially if tears come forth. You should learn tong-len. Its a very emotional form of meditating, a practice that you can do anywhere, in the supermarket, while driving. I'm too mushbrained to talk about it now, if you want I can explain it later. Look it up. It works with love and compassion and wisdom at the same time. Very profound.

I get what you're saying about meditation. It's kind of a raw experience, just being without attaching anything to the experience itself. But this is exactly the approach I've been taking with psychedelics that make it that much more transformative...By simply being, you are no longer restricted by what you can experience. Thoughts & beliefs attract certain realities, whereas if you learn to just be, the inifinite will make itself known to you.

Both are crucial tools
Peace <3