ayurveda and psychedelics

[Guest guest]

Does Ayurveda support the use of organic hallucinogenic plants to aid in

purposes of self-reflection and spirituality? I know that many shamanic cultures

have advocated such uses. Just curious what Ayurveda has to say about this

subject?

 

-Robb

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

dear Robb

its important to recognize that ayurveda today arises from a fairly

orthodox tradition, with fairly rigid moral values

intoxicants of any kind are generally frowned up, with perhaps the

exception of wine, which in small amounts is considered to be healthful

(but is still considered to be tamasic)

 

nonetheless, India also plays host to a variety of heterodox

traditions, and within these intoxicants are sometimes advocated, from

cannabis to psychedelic mushrooms - but you probably won't find any

advocate of these within the ayurvedic tradition or mainstream Indian

society - certainly nothing in the classical texts

 

given that India maintains a 5000+ year continuous history, there has

been plenty of time to experiment with such substances, and the general

consensus would be that they may temporarily heighten elements of

consciousness, but they are a kind of trap, presenting an illusory

state qualitatively different from "normal" consciousness, but from a

quantitative perspective, pretty much the same (i.e. any state which

is subject to decay...)

Caldecott

todd

www.toddcaldecott.com

[Guest guest]

I am pretty sure the use of hallucinogenics (even from nature - like

mushrooms) is illegal in the United States. I don;t know about other

contries.

 

hugs

Deana

[Guest guest]

Stay away from drugs/hallucogenics in this case.

 

I would suggest meditation and a spiritual lifestyle.

 

Mathew

ayurveda, eulogy44@a... wrote:

>

> Does Ayurveda support the use of organic hallucinogenic plants to

aid in

> purposes of self-reflection and spirituality? I know that many

shamanic cultures

> have advocated such uses. Just curious what Ayurveda has to say

about this

> subject?

>

> -Robb

[Guest guest]

ayurveda, eulogy44@a... wrote:

> Does Ayurveda support the use of organic hallucinogenic plants to aid

> in purposes of self-reflection and spirituality?

 

Really interesting question!

 

Many authors have written about the subject. David Frawley writes on

the issue in his books "Ayurvedic Healing" and in "Yoga and Ayurveda".

 

Frawley writes in Ayurvedic Healing: "Drugs damage Sattva, the basic

clear nature of mind. Artificially driving the mind and nerves they

create Tamas, dullness, inertia, darkness and loss of perception, even

though their temporary action appears to be opposite this."

 

"Hallucinogenic drugs function by temporarily increasing Tejas, the

mental fire. This results in teh experience of color and heightened

perception, which may give a sense of the deeper powes of our

consciousness. But these drugs function by burning up Ojas, our subtle

vital reserve, causing long term depletion of our primary vitality.

Once Ojas i brought below a certain threshold, it is very difficult

for it to reconstitute itself. The result is drug burnout, a

vegetative state of mind. Hence, teh number of times we can take

hallucinogenic drugs in a positive way is very limited."

 

"Mind altering drugs such as LSD or ecstasy aggravate Vata in

potentially severe manner. Artificially induced, temporarily

heightened sensitization of the nervous system leads to either

long-term desensitization or hypersesitivity. Symptoms of such include

insomnia, constipation, dry skin, weight loss, vertigo or light

headedness, loss of memory, loss of sencory acuity or coordination,

tremors, palptations and axiety."

 

In "Yoga and Ayurveda" by Frawley there is very interesting chapter on

Prana, Tejas and Ojas, which gives much light on the issue. I must say

Frawleys views on the issue are deep, beatiful and enlightening.

 

On quite contrary, In Textbook of Ayurveda dr. Vasant Lad writes:

"Psychedelic drugs suppress the thinkin ability of the brain. The

brain is made quiet, as opposed to being quiet. In drug-induced

tranquility, chemical effects suppress all the thoughts, feelings, and

emotions. Therefore a person feels some euphoria, a sense of well

being, and it looks like real tranquility. But it is illusion. The

true tranquility comes through meditation, where every thought,

feeling, and emotion are completely undertood, and in the process of

undertanding the thought, feeling, and emotion, there is total

freedom. In that freedom, every thouht, feeling and, emotion flower,

and flowering of emotion is ending of it. Therefore, when emotions end

by themselves., when thoughts end by themselves and thought end by

themselves, then the brain becomes quiet, and that quietness is a

natural, spontaneus, healthy traquility."

 

He goes even further:

"So when someone takes a drug, his or her experience is an illusion.

It is not a religious experience. It is not a spioritual experience.

The chemical effects of the drug suppress the thoughts, feelings and

emotions. Therefore the brain is maid limited, temporary affair. It

looks like increased awareness, a glimpses through a semi-transparent

window at marveloysly beautiful scenery. But when the window is

opened, and there is no glass screen, there is a direct experience.

The direct experience of the opened window is a spiritual exeience

compared to the dim glimpses of drug-induced tranquility"

 

Here Lad is writing only his personal point of view. I totally

disagree with this view on psychedelics and see Frawley as being an

authority on this matter.

 

Many yogis have written on issue of psychedelics and their views are

in line with Frawley's and on opposing Lad's. Now, what do we find in

Samhitas or other Shastras on these issues? On Charak Samhita there is

a section on drugs and intoxicants, but it merely deals with

consciousness-limiting substances, such as alcohol.

 

I wish we have fruitful and enlightening discussion on this matter.

[Guest guest]

ayurveda, Todd Caldecott <todd@t...> wrote:

> given that India maintains a 5000+ year continuous history, there has

> been plenty of time to experiment with such substances, and the general

> consensus would be that they may temporarily heighten elements of

> consciousness

 

I am borrowing just a short piece of a Story from "Miracle of Love" by

Ram Dass where this issue is discussed from yogic point of view:

 

"These medicines were used in Kulu Valley long ago. But yogis have

lost that knowledge. They were used with fasting. Nobody knows now. To

take them with no effect, your mind must be firmly fixed on God.

Others would be afraid to take. Many saints would not take this." And

he left it at that.

 

When I asked him if I should take LSD again, he said, "It should not

be taken in a hot climate. If you are in a place that is cool and

peaceful, and you are alone and your mind is turned toward God, then

you may take the yogi medicine."

http://www.neemkarolibaba.com/experiences/mol02.html

 

What is the reason people choose to take drugs? There are generally

two reasons. Person who has not found purpose of (his) life will

develop some addictive behavior. The severity addiction depends how

"lost" the person is. In modern society, most of people are addicted

to tea, coffee, TV, tobacco, alcohol, gambling, sex, sports - or

drugs. Only very few have found the purpose of their lives and are

free of addictions.

 

There are also seekers of truth, who are seeking the essence of

absolute reality. And yogic path is not the only one. Another path

towards realization goes through mind-expanding substances. These

substances are commonly called psychedelics and induce states that

othervice need years of practice of meditation.

 

It is of no concern that this would be a safe way. No, there are

severe risks. Psychedelics do not primarily cause addiction. But there

are numerous risks, including buring up the nervous system,

imbalancing the mind and risking one's mental health. But it is also

possible to manage them. If one prepares his body and mind with

fasting and going to a sattvic environment free from distractions, the

risks can be managed.

 

Psychedelics will by no means give instant enlightenment. They can

merely give a flash how world would look like from enlightened state.

Having a glimpse to the ultimate for a few moments, and soon falling

back to normal consiciousness.

 

Regarding to other substances, like stimulants (coffee, cocaine) and

depressants (including alcohol) and addiction, there is excellent

article on Ayurveda & Recovery From Addictions by Swami Sada Siva Tirtha:

http://www.holistic.ie/main/essays/ayur8.htm

[Guest guest]

to me it just seems like Lad is speaking of 'why' and Frawley is

speaking of 'what' in the experience. Lad explains why one feels

the effects and Frawley just explains the aftermath of what happens

to the person - I don't feel it's an issue of one over the other.

 

 

 

ayurveda, "zync0"

<ossi.viljakainen@i...> wrote:

> Many authors have written about the subject. David Frawley writes

on

> the issue in his books "Ayurvedic Healing" and in "Yoga and

Ayurveda".

>

> Frawley writes in Ayurvedic Healing: "Drugs damage Sattva, the

basic

> clear nature of mind. Artificially driving the mind and nerves they

> create Tamas, dullness, inertia, darkness and loss of perception,

even

> though their temporary action appears to be opposite this."

[ Further part of this quoted message is available as archieves, being lengthy,

d, deleted from this post]

[Guest guest]

> Here Lad is writing only his personal point of view. I totally

> disagree with this view on psychedelics and see Frawley as being an

> authority on this matter.

>

> Many yogis have written on issue of psychedelics and their views are

> in line with Frawley's and on opposing Lad's. Now, what do we find in

> Samhitas or other Shastras on these issues? On Charak Samhita there is

> a section on drugs and intoxicants, but it merely deals with

> consciousness-limiting substances, such as alcohol.

>

> I wish we have fruitful and enlightening discussion on this matter.

 

we can if we can suspend the question of morality and look at it from

other perspectives, e.g. culturally, historically, scientifically etc.,

for e.g. LSD experiments in the 1960's in which people with severe

addictions and mental disorders obtained enormous benefit from a

limited exposure, powerful enough to change really entrenched behaviors

and perceptions

 

i refuse to see it as a moral issue - its a matter of choice

we need to educate people, not moralize, and let them make up their own

mind

so much pain is caused by other people forcing their beliefs on the

rights and freedoms of others - esp. in the united states

 

i wonder to what extent either Lad or Frawley have experimented with

these substances, and thus to what extent they could possibly be an

authority other than from a moral perspective

 

traditional peoples from all over the world have used altered mental

states to reveal "hidden" information

you can do this in a variety of ways - drugs (e.g. cannabis,

mushrooms), altering breathing patterns (suppression of breath,

hyperventilation), trauma (piercing, sundance), prayer, oracles,

dreams, visions etc. etc. etc.

 

from the highest perspective, none of us is an authority the ultimate

benefit of any of this because they are all temporal and thus all

reflections of maya - the path to truth is beyond morality, beyond our

description

 

masters such as ramana maharishi certainly didn't recommend meditation

as an end in itself, and sometimes prescribed against it - to cut

through our illusions and attachments, whatever they may be - just

realize who YOU are...

 

other than that, we all want to be happy

so may all beings be happy :-)

 

 

 

>

> Caldecott

todd

www.toddcaldecott.com

[Guest guest]

I couldn't agree more with what you wrote about educating and not

moralizing - that is far more effective and breeds less resistance -

if God gives us all free will, shouldn't we give each other the

same?