smoking as meditation

[Smoke]

do you think that somebody with an addiction could achieve enlightenment? Not in my oppinion.

Why not?

I certainly think somebody with an addiction could achieve enlightenment, but my view of enlightenment is probably idiosyncratic. And my view of addiction may be, too.

 

[Arav]

First of all, absolute necessity doesn't exist. We only need food and water in order to stay alive. There is no imperative that we need to stay alive. There is no, indeed, absolute imperative anywhere governing the action of a self. If there are absolute imperatives, they operate at a scale higher than that of an individual ego. As such, we don't NEED food and water. Plus, utter un-attachment to the world includes those things that exist in the world. Specifically, food and water exist in the world. Are you saying that achieve enlightenment we must detach ourselves from food and water? Gautama Buddha would disagree: he even said so to the ascetics.

I further disagree with the thesis that complete un-attachment to the world is the only path to enlightenment, because I don't believe that there is a single path to enlightenment. We each have our own Dharma, and that is our path, our Way. Enlightenment can be attained through a complete lack of attachment to the material world, or it can be achieved through a complete immersion into the material world, and an infinite number of other ways.

To claim that there is one Way is to make the same mistake that plagues the Abrahamic faiths and has led to war, death, and unrest throughout history. In striving for truth, we must recognize that there are ten thousand ways to come to truth, and no named Dharma has monopoly on access to that truth. We start on our paths towards enlightenment before we are aware of it, and once we begin actively seeking that end, we have already set our selves into certain modes of operation, and these pre-conditionings make it so that we are closer to the truth by one path than another.

My Dharma is not your Dharma. But my Dharma leads me to the same joy and understanding to which your Dharma leads.

Ok

 

[Smoke]

First of all, absolute necessity doesn't exist. We only need food and water in order to stay alive. There is no imperative that we need to stay alive. There is no, indeed, absolute imperative anywhere governing the action of a self. If there are absolute imperatives, they operate at a scale higher than that of an individual ego. As such, we don't NEED food and water. Plus, utter un-attachment to the world includes those things that exist in the world. Specifically, food and water exist in the world. Are you saying that achieve enlightenment we must detach ourselves from food and water? Gautama Buddha would disagree: he even said so to the ascetics.

I further disagree with the thesis that complete un-attachment to the world is the only path to enlightenment, because I don't believe that there is a single path to enlightenment. We each have our own Dharma, and that is our path, our Way. Enlightenment can be attained through a complete lack of attachment to the material world, or it can be achieved through a complete immersion into the material world, and an infinite number of other ways.

To claim that there is one Way is to make the same mistake that plagues the Abrahamic faiths and has led to war, death, and unrest throughout history. In striving for truth, we must recognize that there are ten thousand ways to come to truth, and no named Dharma has monopoly on access to that truth. We start on our paths towards enlightenment before we are aware of it, and once we begin actively seeking that end, we have already set our selves into certain modes of operation, and these pre-conditionings make it so that we are closer to the truth by one path than another.

My Dharma is not your Dharma. But my Dharma leads me to the same joy and understanding to which your Dharma leads.

I like this post so much I read it aloud to my husband, despite the fact he couldn't care less about any of this.

 

[SageTree]

So what you are saying is that all Rastafarians and Native north and south americans say that you need to use substances to acheive a state of bliss?

I didn't say that for sure.

I'm only saying some people in these cultures have a different idea of what is sacramental compared to the norms and mores in a more Euro model of things.

 

[YmirGF]

Having walked that path, I have to agree with this. It is, indeed, far too easy to convince oneself that one is reaching levels of "higher" consciousness, when instead one is just reaching DIFFERENT forms of consciousness. It is, indeed, common to convince oneself that what one sees and thinks and understands while altered is some "truth" greater than that which is experienced while sober.

Though it is possible you have gone further down this path than I, it is not a particularly likely scenario. Personally, I strongly object to the "no-mind" concept and consider it to akin to the psycho babble of those who know little. Theoretically, one could find themselves in an altered state after sniffing a cup of steaming coffee or relishing a spoonful of delicious ice cream. Altered states are much closer to ordinary consciousness than people's habitual thinking allows them to perceive. It is true that certain drugs can blast past all that, but one should never confuse modes of transportation with the picnic at your destination.

The downside with "external agents" is that the individual has a tendency to develop an unhealthy reliance on said agents - AS IF those agents were actually necessary. They aren't. As long as one realizes that once "awareness" dawns that one no longer needs ANY intermediary, all is fine. After such a point, if one continues to use these "external agents" then one is simply running over familiar territory and has stopped learning.

The bottom line, no pun intended, is that using the external agents to get to where you want to go, is one thing; but relying on them after you know where you are going is an selling yourself short.

Trust me: Been there, done that; burned the T-shirt. Forgot where I buried the ashes.......

 

[zenzero]

Friend Cypress,

smoking as meditation

Personally since taking smoking as a meditation have cut down smoking and the attachment is seen as dropping.

Love & rgds

 

[bain-druie]

Cypress, just saw this thread. The Druids sometimes used smoking of one kind or another for centuries, though it's uncertain when the practice was instituted. It was accepted as a part of some ritual, certainly during the Revivalist period of Druidry that began in the 1700s, to aid in journeying 'between the mists', particularly if one was aiming for a shamanic journey. It was a more advanced practice, as I understand it, and generally the province of the Ovates (the diviner/healer type of Druid).

At times they would not smoke directly, but would put the herbs over embers and breathe in the smoke as it came to them. I do this with incense.

In modern times, it's common for some to smoke cigars, and we sometimes share them around the fire as we pass the horn of mead around. We don't do this for meditations, at least not in groups, but I can see how it might contribute to a meditative state.

The impact on neurological patterns would create an altered awareness all on its own; visual cortex stimulation results in enhanced visual awareness, and so forth. This happens without smoking, however; just by breathing correctly you can achieve this.

But then Druids are earth-based, and believe that all natural things are also spiritual.

 

[Comet]

I should like to point out that smoke/smoking is a very sacred thing to many NA Indian tribes.....