Rites and Psychoactive Drugs

Share thoughts and ideas regarding what can be done to meet contemporary humanity's need for rites of initiation and passage.

Moderators: Clemsy, Martin_Weyers, Cindy B.

noman
Associate
Posts: 670
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:26 am

Post by noman »

We use prescription drugs because the benefit outweighs the detriment. Some folks have side effects, some become addicted, and some die. That doesn’t make us Nazis, Evinnra.

If you don’t believe a psychoactive drug can be of spiritual benefit than it’s a moot point. But if it can be, and if the benefits outweigh the risks, then, it seems to me, these drugs should be used in such a way to maximize their benefit – which in my mind would include a healthy dose of ritual and social affirmation.

Personally, I’m like Campbell in this one respect. I like talking about these drugs, how they’re used and what their effect, their possible benefit, or what they can tell us about human consciousness. But I don’t care much for the idea of experimenting myself. Because, for me – ‘a mind – is a terrible thing to waste’. :( (It’s an American advertising slogan)

Cheers

- NoMan

Aireal
Associate
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 5:58 pm
Location: Mayfield, Ky.

Post by Aireal »

I saw a show today on the use of drugs in ancient times, and heard some points that are relevant here I think.


Many modern drugs are far more potent than in their natural form. Coke and crack verses chewing coca leaves. This allows for overuse and misuse.

Recreational use of drugs is done more to escape reality rather than coming to a deeper understanding of reality as is the case with their spiritual use.

The recreational use of drugs today leads to one abandoning social responsibility, even turning to crime. Spiritual use of drugs tends to put more responsibility on the members of the groups that use them.

We do not currently have a social structure that can make proper use of drugs in spiritual matters, except for small groups.

"The road to hell is paved with the best of intentions."

This old saying has been proved true too many times. When it comes to powerful drugs, it would be best to err on the side of caution.

Little Feather

Evinnra
Associate
Posts: 2102
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:12 pm
Location: Melbourne

Post by Evinnra »

NoMan,

If we affirmed the norm that using drugs is socially acceptable then we would be doing something that is detrimental to peoples' freedom, health and spiritual capacity. We would be doing EXACTLY what the Nazis did.

I will have to be obnoxcious here and stand by my previous statement that only SOME people benefit from using drugs. Most people do not. It was mentioned in one of the above posts that some people do have allergic reactions but most people don't, so it should be allright to get rid of the social stigma attached to this practice. Even if this statement was acceptable - which is clearly not the case - who in their right mind would take the personal responsibility to commit such crime as advocating drug use to the wider community as a socially acceptable practice? Drug use DOES NOT HELP SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT, IT HAMPERS ALREADY EXISTING CAPACITIES!!! Perhaps the reason why the removal of social stigma from drug use in people's perception is so important to some is that they would not dare to take the responsibility for such action them selves. If drug use became socially acceptable, the outcomes could all be blamed on the 'dumb masses' and those who have the means to provide for them self even when 'stoned' could get away without blame.

We've nearly lost our culture by the same strategy. Hollywood is the 'shining example' to demonstrate my case.

Evinnra

littlewing
Associate
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 9:08 pm
Location: coastal NC

Post by littlewing »

Wow, Bodhi! Wish I could meet you at the rainbow this summer; I'm homesick and my kid is getting married (in a kilt; good 2nd gen hippie...); so though my husband will be there, I won't this year. 'Zen's Hot Sauce and Coffee' kitchen will be on the edges out of a van, and worth looking up for the culinary experience (not to mention the drumming). Anyway, all I can really say after that post is Namaste!

Re: Ram Das' guru who couldn't feel 900mcgs of acid, though not in such huge doses, I find difficulty in feeling a measly 100mcgs in a forest setting. A forest by a stream (desert; swamp; no matter) is my church. There I'm in eternal meditation whether on a sweltering hike or sitting in meditation. (You could accuse me of being the experimental meditation type. I believe in quality over quantity and don't spend any time in forced meditation; I do it when moved. I love yoga, and how Tai Chi has changed my life, but human is as human does and I miss the mark of practice, for years sometimes.) I prefer mushrooms over acid; but all is hard to acquire where I am in life so I'll take what I can get. Yet, in the wild, often I'm not sure, and may argue, whether the 'stuff' was good. A second trip on the same 'stuff' may prove it was quite strong; but in the wild, where I am already spiritually altered, it can be hard to tell.

Re: Grateful Dead concerts: these are spiritual experiences for me and perfectly legit surroundings (safe even) for ingestion of substances that may enhance my dancing meditation. I leave these dances with far beyond a substance high. Many concerts I am not lucky enough to score any substances anyway. Still, I leave with a high (OK, I like the ones with a little chemical help better...) that is a loving practice I carry into Kowanisqatsi. It is for the better for the crazy world (a very middle class experience) I live in. I give the love I've received and shared in the brotherhood and sisterhood of the Show. What's wrong with that as a controlled spiritual setting for psychedelic experience?

Anyone can have an allergic reaction to anything, legal or no; food, insect, drug. An allergic reaction, if anaphylactic, can kill, no matter the antigen. This is serious. Yet it does not dismiss the value of insects, drugs or specific foods. It just means that person dast not ingest that substance without an epipen close by!

Re: whether most people experience good or bad things from drugs, I don't think my experience is any different than 'most people'. I don't think acceptance of illegal drugs in society will be the death knell of us all. Would that respect for the power of altering chemicals be half as strong as the willing abuse... for purposes of escape. It isn't the psychedelics themselves that are bad; but how they are used or abused in any given society that can be bad. Our 'modern' culture has thrown all mindaltering drug use in the 'abuse' category. Such a tactic actually encourages drug abuse, imo; and makes it a small minority of 'cultural creatives' that can rise above such a stigma.

lw

noman
Associate
Posts: 670
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:26 am

Post by noman »

Eva,

I’m not advocating the use of illegal drugs or advocating their legalization. All I am saying is this: If psycho-active drugs can be of spiritual benefit, they should be used properly, within the framework of a mythology – not just experimentally, without any methodical control. What I think happened in the Sixties, is that they were used in exorbitant amounts, without any control or method as a result or substitute for our loss of mythology

As I recall, Jesus changed water into a pycho-active drug. But substituting vast quantities of wine for the loss of Christian mythology is probably not the best course of action. But its value lies in it being used properly within the context of the myth/rites of Christianity

- NoMan

littlewing
Associate
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 9:08 pm
Location: coastal NC

Post by littlewing »

noman:
What I think happened in the Sixties, is that they were used in exorbitant amounts, without any control or method as a result or substitute for our loss of mythology
I do agree with this. I see some value in recognizing how much humans hunger for a life myth as evidenced by failed or even partially failed attempts. (I happen to think the 60's movement panned out as a partially failed attempt, imo.) On another thread, I tried to share my take that our current gangster rapper debacle with teens all over the country trying to emulate, is also a result of longing for a life myth. Not saying that's why gangs formed in the inner cities!! That's a whole different story of poverty, underworld economy, and political intrigue. But that the gangster phenom grabbed kids' hearts like drugs, sex, rock n roll did in the '60's I see as an effort to seek initiation into adulthood; to seek a warrior's role. It's a bad choice of warrior born of longing.

*sigh* I'm off topic here. Though there are parallels of drug abuse inherent in both cultures, I've seen no evidence that gangster culture uses drugs to gain anything beyond escape. So perhaps this thought doesn't belong in this thread.

This debate (drugs good...drugs bad) reminds me of a Milarepa poem about discrimination. I paraphrase, using his structure and repeated last line:

Intoxication to release spirit from responsibility to life, and
Ingestion to release ego and open to all of life
Even tho the two appear alike, beware of misjudgment

lw

noman
Associate
Posts: 670
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:26 am

Post by noman »

As far as topic goes – you seem right on target to me Littlewing. I’ve been waiting for an opportunity to answer your last post. I’ve been taking a lot of over the counter drugs this last week as I battle a cold. No spiritual uplift thus far.

The Sufi poet Rumi often uses the metaphor of wine and intoxication to describe a spiritual state.
The grapes of my body can only become wine
After the winemaker tramples me.
I surrender my spirit like grapes to his trampling
So my inmost heart can blaze and dance with joy.

- Rumi

* * * * * * *

God has given us a dark wine so potent that,
drinking it, we leave the two worlds.
God has put into the form of hashish a power
to deliver the taster from self-consciousness.

- Rumi

* * * * * * *

The wine of this fleeting world
caused your head to ache.
Finally you joined the tavern of Eternity.
Like an arrow, you sped from the bow
and went straight for the bull's eye of bliss.

- Rumi
Campbell says in POM is that the purpose of a myth/rite is to pitch you out – outside of your ordinary everyday experience of the world to something else. It is an escape. But a controlled and carefully planned escape. And psychoactive drugs can certainly assist the journey.

But the question is this: Is the use of any psychoactive drug, in any way, detrimental to the desired condition of which Rumi speaks? Are psychoactive drugs the contents of the Devil’s briefcase – guaranteed to lead us astray, away from the Sharia, (the path to the watering hole), or could they be used in such a way to assist the temporary release that Campbell claims is necessary to our spiritual life.

I was born in 58, and I never really embraced the counter-culture of the 60s, largely as a result of an older brother who was so hippyish it made me sick. So long as these drugs are associated with counter-culture contempt of the establishment they will always retain their negative reputation. That’s why I offered the idea, the possibility, that sometime in the future, we will have mastered the use of these drugs for their benefit if such benefit exists. And they won’t be abused as a substitute for a lost mythology or to ‘buy the stairway to heaven’ so to speak.

I realize that you and I will be long pushing up daisies before such a mythology comes to pass. I just wondered if people more experienced with these drugs could shed some light on the possibility. The possibility of a functional mythology that incorporates these drugs, and not what i consider to be the dysfunctional mythology or a reactionary mythology of hippy-ism.

It seems to me Bodhi leans in the direction of the positive:
I recall one of the criticisms traditionalists in mystical disciplines often leveled during the psychedelic era was that there was no sense of ritual structure to the psychedelics, and no elders to initiate novices … but then when such ritual structure spontaneously emerged (which we see beginning to appear as far back as the fifties with the emphasis on “set” and “setting,” eventually revealing the complex structure Grof identifies in the individual experience) and when experienced guides stepped forward, they were derided as “druggies” rather than serious practitioners...

-Bodhi
But I think Aireal has a great take on the issue:
We do not currently have a social structure that can make proper use of drugs in spiritual matters, except for small groups.

When it comes to powerful drugs, it would be best to err on the side of caution.

- Aireal
And Bliss5150 feels they are not really necessary:
The problem is people who do drugs seem to overly admire other people who do drugs.

Most drug-visions shamans or "non-hallucinogen" philosophers arrive at the same place: the suburbs of Spiritus Mundi - the mediocre.

- Bliss5150
What does Littlewing think?

- NoMan

littlewing
Associate
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 9:08 pm
Location: coastal NC

Post by littlewing »

I'm sorry, noman! I don't have a picture in my head of how a positive drug use structure would look to inspire us to a new myth.

Earlier societies of humankind were more successful keeping psychoactives positive than our modern ones. One of the ways they acheived that was to reserve the drug for ceremonial use. Perhaps a modern version of that could be intentional use, like that of the modern quest seeker. Another was to have a gatekeeper of sorts: the shaman. As Bodhi pointed out, those moderns who have stood up as gatekeepers... say, Timothy Leary, who probably ingested more LSD than anyone on the planet to this date! and who kept his bright mind trained on leading edge creativity to his end... lost most all credibility because our society uses drug use as a cut-off for credibility.

Perhaps part of the problem judging 'drugs good... drugs bad' lies in the fact that like all good philosophical sticky wickets, there's a paradox. Rumi, one of the greatest spiritual romantics in our history books, was an alcoholic if I understood it right. Perhaps any one person, at least in complex societies, is more likely to take away some of the good and some of the bad together. Every individual has the opportunity, when bringing a mind altering substance into their lives, to use it to get out of ego and gain a larger perspective on their lives. With that, runs risk of bad trips; accidents; and addiction to name a few. But even alcohol, the drug I would most likely deride, brought Rumi some enlightenment!

The structure I learned drug use in was at least useful and fairly beneficial. It was a hippie culture; and what was beneficial about it was that it was done in warm loving surroundings with everyone caring about and for everyone else. The drug was expected to enhance good things; and if it didn't, we would guide the experience back to a good thing for that person. We tried to take care of each other; and share the experience. It certainly wasn't controlled; and structure was pretty loose! But the most important part of any structure was intact: Everyone present for the experience was treated with love; violence, including verbal putdowns, was gently policed out of the group by the group. There was a setting; and even a few guidelines.

I'm sorry you witnessed ugliness from your brother's experience, noman.
There were a lot of problems with the hippie experience: lovingkindness is a great guideline; but not enough to guarantee a non-abusive outcome. Much is left to the strength and purpose and baggage of each individual taking part. It was/is what a person makes of it.

I don't at this point in my life have any suggestions for structure of 'positive' drug use to bring about the new myth. Yet, I feel psychoactives are part of what will lead us there. I feel this based on the fact that they have inspired cultures our entire human history. And I feel this because, as Campbell and many others have pointed out, mind altering substances are capable of getting a body out of itself; releasing ego. Among all the arguments about that not being the only/best/healthiest way to do it... it's still the quickest, easiest way to learn.

lw
Without love in it, the dream will never come true...

Clemsy
Working Associate
Posts: 10645
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2002 6:00 am
Location: The forest... somewhere north of Albany
Contact:

Post by Clemsy »

Early morning with a cup of caffeine inspires a thought si I'll share...

Far too long ago in an undergrad psych class I recall the prof going on about the human impulse to experience altered states, of which much of our daily lives is an experience of an altered state: sleep, sex, variations in consciousness throughout the day (biorythms?), exercise, etc. Children spin to get dizzy. Of the artificial sources we have alcohol, tobacco, caffeine (hmm...), various pharmaceuticals we take for various reasons.

We all have this impulse to some degree and at the far end we have addictive personalities for whom this is a serious problem.

So on the one hand there's this natural impulse and on the other, and more to the topic of this thread, the use of psychoactive substances for spiitual purposes. Sometimes, I think, the recreational use can lead to an unexpected spiritual experience, which may be taken as such or not but may, regardless, be a blissful or terrifying experience.

Although I think that the use of hallucinogens may jar one to open the gates of a wider perception to the nature of things, I see this as a temporary use. The larger question of recreational use is a question, not only of moderation, but of morality in a society which says "Thou shalt not mess with thy consciosness beyond the allowed means."

Of course, there is no direct address of the natural impulse and ways to satisfy it within societal norms, or adjust those societal norms to make allowances for it.

Just my caffeine (see 'allowed means') talking. :lol:
Give me stories before I go mad! ~Andreas

Aireal
Associate
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 5:58 pm
Location: Mayfield, Ky.

Post by Aireal »

I read a study once, sorry I don't have a reference for it, that might be of help here.

The study was on spiritual experiences during drug use, and their effect on ones life.

The study found that those people who had a spiritual experience while using drugs received some positive effects from the experience that lasted long after the drugs wore off. Less stress was one such effect cited. Greater tolerance for others viewpoints was another. People felt more connected to each other and the universe. Those who were not very spiritual before this point often became more spiritually oriented afterwards.

However, the benefits seem to happen only/mostly after the first spiritual experience with drugs. More use leads to diminished effects, or none at all if repeated too often.

Thus religious or spiritual use that limits the number of times one uses drugs over a period seems to maximise their positive effects, and diminish the negative ones.

This backs up the point made by Clemsy that they are good for jarring open the gates of perception, but this is a temporary measure for the initiate. This also matches my own experience. My first visions were aided by drugs, fasting, etc, but I learned to enter altered states without them. Indeed, my most potent visions came latter in life, without such aid.

Little Feather

noman
Associate
Posts: 670
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:26 am

Post by noman »

The dangers, and the recreational use and abuse of these drugs are irrelevant to the question I ask. And I never suggested that psycho-actives could lead to a new mythology. I only contend, that in theory, in the future, when we are not so anxious about the laws, the health effects, and morality of these drugs, that we could use these drugs properly, within the context of an established mythology, and not a counterculture mythology.

Christianity was once a strange religious cult. It was once counter culture. So you can get the gist of my vision.

- NoMan

Aireal
Associate
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 5:58 pm
Location: Mayfield, Ky.

Post by Aireal »

Noman

You come to the crux of the problem. Drug use within the context of an established mythology, and not a counterculture mythology.

Our culture does not have a mythology that condones personal spiritual drug use in any context, so how are we to develop one. Even reconised religions that condone drug use are outlawed, this is not likely to change for several generations at least, if at all.

The Coptic Church has a longer history than the Roman Catholic Church, so they can not rightly be called a counterculture, yet even with a long history behind them, their use of hash is outlawed in this culture. So how are we to develop a culture where this is acceptable. Any new movement would be seen as a counterculture at the start, and put down. Or don't you remember how our own parents called out the national guard to put down hippie protests of the 60's. My father took great pride in "bashing in the heads of long haired freaks who would destroy our way of life." He was one of the cops at Wayne State University when they "put down" a hippie protest.

Point is, any culture is resistant to change. Maybe, in a few hundred years, long after I am dead, it might be a possibility. So in theory, even if it does happen, it won't matter to us. Which is why I don't give it a lot of thought. I try to focus on things that are a possibility within my lifetime, or my daughters. Some thing I can do NOW that has a positive effect or lasting value for mankind is more important for me.

People will always be anxious about the laws, troubled over possible health effects, and concerned about the "moral" implications.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see a Utopian culture emerge where such things were possible. I just don't see it happening.

Little Feather

noman
Associate
Posts: 670
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:26 am

Post by noman »

Aireal,

Every single invention by humankind; material, social, or mythic, started as a vision, an idea. Da Vinci said, ‘someday, man will indeed fly’. It took 400 years, but he did imagine correctly.

But my philosophy, and vision, for a future mythology, does have a contemporary angle. In theory, there is a proper way to use a drug. Drink one five ounce glass of wine each day with a meal and you will be healthier they say – even though alcohol is an extremely dangerous drug.

When ‘First Americans’ smoked a peace pipe once every few months it probably wasn’t terribly unhealthy for them. They probably made like Bill Clinton and ‘didn’t inhale’ -just rolled the smoke around in their mouths. But to inject cigarette smoke directly into our lungs once every twenty minutes along with the smoke of paper – that’s disgusting.

The Natives of Peru chew on coca leaves to give them a lift. I’ve heard it’s not too good for their gums in the long run – but it beats hell out of North American crack addicts.

We have a sick collective mind when it comes to consuming good things. We follow a dictum that says ‘if some is good, more is better’. This problem we have with drugs is part of a wider problem with consumption in general. As Littlewing pointed out, even Timothy Leary, for all his intelligence and knowledge, knew how to over indulge.

But Bodhi’s essay laid out on the table for me the attempt by well meaning human beings to consider what the proper use of hallucinogens might be for spiritual purposes – if such proper use exists at all. I know it won’t happen in our lifetime – but trying to get it right in theory – I think – is still worthwhile. It’s nice to get the opinion of someone who lived in a culture that used these drugs in the way I imagine they may be used in the future. Thx

- NoMan

Aireal
Associate
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 5:58 pm
Location: Mayfield, Ky.

Post by Aireal »

Noman

Have you heard of Sun Bear and his vision?

He had a vision of the destruction of the United States. Many of the survivors returned to Europe and Africa, but some stay. Those that stay will need a new vision and culture to survive. He believed that a return to Native beliefs would be needed, and founded a tribe to teach the white man how to live as an Indian.

He is not the first nor the last to foresee the destruction of the United States. The first of such visions happened even before the white man first arrived on these shores. It would take such a destruction for the changes you speak of to happen. I have been waiting for this most of my life. Many of the signs we were to look for have already come to pass. So you may get your wish, sooner than you think. The shame of it all is the great loss of life that would happen for this change to come about.

History has shown us that cultures are even more resistant to change than religions. Often it takes a great destruction or other great event to change a culture, for good or bad. I fear that is the case with the U.S. also.

Oh, as a parting note, the natives of Peru wrap the coca leaf around a pile of wood ashes. The lye in the ashes help extract the coke during chewing. Lye is very caustic, and rough on the gums and teeth. The main reason they endure it is not for the lift it gives, but rather because the "lift" allows them to work hard at high altitudes. Also we smoked more than just tobacco in our pipes, and not pot either, that was brought here by the white man and is not a native plant. Now the ingredients for one's smoking mixture varied from area to area, depending on what plants were available. Just thought I would throw in those tidbits while we were on the subject.

Little Feather

bodhibliss
Working Associate
Posts: 1659
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 5:00 am

Post by bodhibliss »

I have been long absent from this conversation, and from the discussion boards in general, out slaying a multitude of hydra headed dragons. I have missed these rich conversations leisurely unfolding across time and space (I think this one spans more than a few continents).

We don't have to plan a myth that embraces entheogens - can't do that, any more than we can determine ahead of time the details of tonight's dream.

But what we do know is that the use of sacred plants - I'm talking specifically the natural and spiritual history of psychedelic substances - spontaneously spawns a mythic structure in harmony with that Campbell identifies in The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Whether ergot at Eleusis, ayahuasca in the Amazon, peyote among the Huichol, or LSD and psillocybin at Grateful Dead shows and Rainbow Gatherings, the resultant rituals are eerily similar, despite relatively minor cultural and technological variations.

Though they elicited laughs, Joseph Campbell and Jerry Garcia were dead serious when they observed that there is little qualitative difference between the ancient Mystery Rites at Eleusis and a Grateful Dead show - which may explain the many Deadheads who followed the band from one city to another with a cultish fervor for three decades - for many, it was church, a vehicle for a personal mystical realization - a collective ritual that developed out of the acid tests in the early 60s and later Haight-Ashbury, extending over 30 years.

Richard Evans Shultes, the legendary Harvard biologist, charted the sweat lodge and roadman peyote ceremonies of the Native American Church in the 1930s. Peyote has long been used among the Huichol in Mexico, but not until the slaughter of the buffalo did the peyote cult emerge among the Plains Indians. They did not "borrow" Huichol cermonies - their rites (which Shultes observed and participated in while living among the Kiowa) emerged spontaneously, but followed parallel archetypal structures - which Shultes finds time and again in later years, with his discovery of the mushroom teonanacatl - the Aztecs' "flesh of the gods" - among the Mazatec prior to WWII, followed by the sacred morning glory (called ololiuqui, then yage or ayahuasca in the rainforests of Central and South Americas

(Shultes, by the way, was no Timothy Leary - he is the respected ethnobotonist who discovered the source of the curare poison that tipped Amazonian arrows, and he gathered over 24,000 specimens over his years in the rainforest, documenting over 2,000 medicinal plants, and giving his name to 120 individual species.)

I suppose we could consciously determine to base a new mythology on psychedelics, but strikes me as unnecessary. Joseph Campbell makes a great case that such spontaneously emerge - especially in cultures where the irrational unconscious has been suppressed in favor of conscious, rational values. We don't have to make up a structure, for one comes with the experience - particularly if approached as a discipline rather than hedonistic escapism.

We do ignore the stirrings I note in my essay at our peril. These spiritual practices, psychedelic rituals, and mythic perceptions are alive and well in our very own society, in the same way gnosticism and alchemy remained alive as an underground current in the dominant cultures of their period.

I'm not suggesting all will one day belong to the Church of Latter Day Shrooms - but the entheogenic tradition will by no means go gentle into that good night anytime soon. It's here, it's active, and it's having a powerful effect in the counterculture, particularly on the internet and among the artists and techno-shamans (a la Burning Man) who are shaping our future. The computer revolution and the internet itself is grounded in the psychedelic experiences of Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak and all those Stanford folk, among others, opening windows in their mind, following the holographic threads in all directions

... and voila - we have an internet that echoes a similar psychedelic pattern, mirroring the shape of the human imagination, following embedded hyperlinks in all directions, from one Window to another ...

I'm curious to see where it goes from here. I believe the use of sacred plants will remain influential in the development of artistic, spiritual, and technological endeavors, but are unlikely to ever mark the dominant culture - indeed, for the last ten thousand years (apart from Mesoamerica), they have receded into the background, used primarily by a cultural elite, whether priests and initiates in ancient mysteries cults, or the bohemians, artists, and technological innovators today - and that's the trend I expect will continue.
But Bodhi’s essay laid out on the table for me the attempt by well meaning human beings to consider what the proper use of hallucinogens might be for spiritual purposes – if such proper use exists at all. I know it won’t happen in our lifetime – but trying to get it right in theory – I think – is still worthwhile. It’s nice to get the opinion of someone who lived in a culture that used these drugs in the way I imagine they may be used in the future
Astute observation, Noman - thanks. I believe that's the theme I hoped to convey.

namaste,
bodhibliss

Locked