Buddhism and Drugs

It's really a hard question to answer, and the truth is there's not a definite "yes you should" or "no you shouldn't". It is mostly individual, because Buddhism states that actions will have a consequence- and someone may take LSD just like anyone else but if their action is different, it will have a different consequence.

But consider this: in defending the drugs, you are clinging to them. The ultimate goal is "I can have it or I could leave it, and both would be just as well". If you "want" to have them, you have not removed attachment.

It's easy to tell yourself you don't need it, that if it was taken away you would feel exactly the same. My friend is like this; he told me that he loves weed but doesn't rely on it. This was proven otherwise when he asked if he could smoke in my house and when he argued (I flat out TOLD him that he could not smoke pot while my dad was there- he persisted and wouldn't let it go), he went ahead and did it anyway because he couldn't stand to be without it (which I found not only clingy but immensly disrespectful).
Does that mean everyone who smokes pot, or does any drug for that matter is attached? Most certainly not. I'm not trying to imply anything about any one of you, rather, that it is easy to delude yourself into thinking you could do just as well without as you could with- make sure you are not doing so if you want to get anywhere with Buddhist practice.

But this is all in relation to Buddhism, and the idea of attachment. I will say that psychedelic drugs have a huge potential in the spiritual realm, but in regard to Buddhism- it's extremely difficult to use any drug in such a way that it is not harmful to both your awareness and your practice against attachment. Not impossible, but be careful how you justify yourself.

 

Personally, I beleive that marijuana is acceptable. When you take a vow you agree to no intoxicants it refers traditionally to alcohol, but anything robbing clarity of mind (like drugs) is usually included.
If you are more aware or have a drug that opens your perception and fundamentally give you more clarity then I beleive it's acceptable.
The odd time that I do smoke cannabis, I have a profound understanding and acceptance of this earth and the people who reside on it.

Buddha himself said :
Believe nothing, no matter where you read it,
or who said it, no matter if I have said it,
unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.
-Buddha

So whatever your reasoning deems appropriate so it will be.

 

every drug is from nature, just because the process involved in creating some drugs is a little different and more complicated doesn't make it any worse than others. We are human, we have evolved to the state where we can produce some beautiful things, don't reject them because a little science is involved..

 

No, I do not believe the Buddha did say that. In fact he said not to go by (rely on) logical reasoning, not to go by inferential reasoning, not to go by reflection on reasons ... along with other methods one uses to believe without knowing or understanding.

The words you quoted are not in any of the teachings of the Buddha. They are, however, in many cute quote sites on the Internet. The oddest thing is that none of them ever reference where it was ever said by the Buddha, only that it has his title affixed to it.

HTML:

 

You can't be sure that he did say it or did not.

 

Darrell...his words were
Believe nothing, O monks, merely because you have been told it or because it is traditional, or because you yourselves have imagined it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings, that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.

 

The only truth that we can know is one that we accept or can demonstrate for ourselves.

 

Cool ...

Where did you get this from?

HTML:

 

Well I can only trust my sources just as much as you can trust your own.

 

I believe Darrell's comment answered it for me...

 

I have always been led to believe that Buddhists do not do anything that would cloud their mind or judgement. So drugs would be a no. The five concepts include taking no intoxicants.

Of course it isn't like Christianity for example, where it is believed you are harming the body God gave you so you shouldn't take it. But, for a clear, focused mind which is what most Buddhists aim for - you cannot achieve enlightenment if you are clouding your mind.

 

Careful now ...

 

What constitutes a clouded mind or clouded judgment? This statement seems to me to contradict the ontological nature of our biological equipment. Our switching mechanism is either on or off, yes or no.

Our mind is always clear, only one thought can occupy space at any given time, albeit we may be inconsistently focused. As for the sacrosanct body in
Christendom, fear not those who can kill the body.
Helpful is a matter of timing. An apple may be good food, but a baby cannot consume it unless it is further processed. Any substance you ingest has an effect on the chemical constitution of the body and every chemical constitution is legitimate expression. In regarding what might be right, does it help or hinder your own aims. All things are lawful, but not all things are helpful.

 

In the sense I am saying, drugs can cloud your mind. Cannabis, LSD, shrooms they all cloud ones mind. Yeah, things apart from drugs do that too, but that wasn't the question.

 

In each of these substances there is crystalline space, there is a high and low to every substance, plasma, gas, liquid, and solid. It is hunger that distracts the mind, not substances.
I realize whether other substances affect us is not specifically the question, but when answering a question to it's most reliable extent, we consider all aspects of the process in question. This is of course if we desire the truth. If it is comfort that we are looking for, any story you find pleasing will do.

 

I always focus on the question being asked and try not to stray of into different things. If someone asks a question about a horse, I will not use cats to answer my question.

 

And as a conversation evolves do you stop listening? We are still discussing the
relative contribution of drugs to the Buddhists path to enlightenment. The more we discuss something, the more there is to discuss.

 

I don't agree with this. I believe meditation has it's limits, as do drugs. I believe a combination of both is ideal for true enlightenment. But that is just me, everyone has their own opinion. I guess it also depends on how one defines "enlightenment".

 

The mind is naturally abstract. Life mirrors attention which can then be apprehended with intention.