Home (theory of the ego death and rebirth experience)
'Goal' Fallacy - Diminishment by Redefining Goal of Spiritual Practice
Contents
Goal of
meditation/mysticism/religion?.
Mystic state value, entheogens,
paradigms
Enlightenment won't necessarily improve
the world
>>What
is the point of *anything*? How does
*anything* "make a difference"?
>All of
it is purely individual, and so personal, despite it seeming to be beyond the
personal, that words don't seem to give the clarity it is deserving of...I feel
as if we are trying to speak of ourself as separate from ourself.....and
because of this, I seem to have lost the desire to talk about it.....and I
wonder, if this is why it has remained hidden for so long behind the poetic
metaphors written....
Trendy
anti-entheogen meditation says the point of meditation is not mystic-state
experiencing, but elevation of day-to-day life. That contradicts what some of the most important mystic
traditions say, that the point of life and highest goal of life is the vision
of God. Such a strong contradiction of
what meditation or mysticism is for, and what religion is for, is worth
discussion.
Existentialism
also enters such a discussion, and is important for studying self-control
cybernetics and gaining in personal self-management power, because cybernetics
is concerned with goal attainment, and existentialism is concerned with the
purpose, meaning, and value of life.
The
problem with omitting mystic knowledge from modern knowledge is that the result
is incomplete, and is incomplete for no valid reason. Modern knowledge is powerful enough to clearly explain and map
out mystic knowledge.
Like
creating the first airplane, this requires just normal genius, normal creative
problem-solving: a strong and relentless desire to understand the mind, to
crack the ancient allegorical puzzles, to study visionary plants and
alternative techniques for accessing the mystic state, lack of gullibility,
sharp discernment and a sense for the reasonable,
Mystic
capacities are available to many more people by using visionary plants rather
than meditation/contemplation alone, or rational study of symbology such as
astrotheology alone. The average person
has full mystic capacity if they combine visionary plants, contemplation,
symbology, dedication to modern reason, seriousness of pursuit, and systematic
model-construction.
I wish for
more neutral terms than 'hallucinogen', but this culture tends to charge and
ruin each term in turn, because the issue is overly charged. It doesn't matter in the end what label we
choose -- hallucinogen, visionary plants, entheogens, psychedelics, visionary
chemicals, cognitive loosening agents.
In studying history of religion, 'visionary plants' may be most
fitting.
Even
without the uselessly narrow connotation of 60s culture, the term
'psychedelics' is too narrow, because an ancient visionary beverage could
create an overall psychedelic effect by combining multiple plants that would
fall under different categories such as deliriant (henbane), sedative (opium),
mild psychedelic (cannabis) and stimulant (ephedra). Plant categorization is fuzzy and depends on usage context and
combination.
Many
people have found ample reason to ascribe divinity to visionary plants. Drugs are a tool that can have helpful
and/or harmful effects. Potent drugs
can loosen cognitive associations, providing a mystic state on-tap. Due to prohibition, study of the potential
of visionary substances has been severely suppressed and distorted.
Mysticism
is dangerous -- any mysticism that lacks danger is false, substitute, denatured
mysticism. To the extent that any
mystic technique is effective, it is dangerous. Safe and tame mysticism is no mysticism at all, just a denatured
superficial spirituality veneer on ordinary life. Mysticism overlaps the realm of hallucinatory experiences.
Such
experiences can be triggered by drugs, meditation, fasting, mental disorders,
and many other triggers, showing that such experiences are an inherent
potential in the typical mind.
Scholarship
understands little about the mystic state and understands little about visionary
plant states. The modern era was almost
exclusively restricted to the ordinary state of consciousness. This is why modern philosophy and psychology
is so limited and why scholars cannot understand the origins of
Christianity.
To
understand philosophy, psychology, and religion, a whole study of the mind is
needed -- not just the modern study of the lower half of the mind, or the
ordinary mode of mental functioning.
The fatal flaw of modern knowledge is that it is incomplete and declares
unreal and irrational that which it has simply failed to study. Modern knowledge specializes exclusively in
studying the world from the ordinary-state point of view.
The
ancients, in Platonist fashion, were equally lopsided, incomplete, and
reductionist, collapsing all of life upward into the mystic state of
consciousness.
There is
no good reason for this half-knowledge, this half-life, this
half-experience. It is not difficult to
study the world from both perspectives, the ordinary state of consciousness and
the mystic state. Mystic states
originated from visionary plants and remain ergonomically accessible. Real science entails systematic
model-construction informed by both states.
Research
has barely begun to determine the extent of the use of entheogen triggers for
religious states, in various eras and areas, among various groups in
societies. The historical extent of use
of entheogens in religion is an open question at this point.
Entheogens
are a tool well-suited for the religious realm. Poor results reflect poor usage technique.
Exoteric
religion results from the pointless avoidance of ergonomic methods. Meditation without entheogens is a
reasonable approach as a kind of training wheels for the classic entheogenic
method, which is more potent and effective than meditation alone.
The animal
state of consciousness is that which is uninformed by the intense mystic
altered state. Using visionary plants
is easy in itself, but to accomplish anything with them requires hard work. Bunk "magazine Buddhism" or "book
mysticism" condemns or accuses entheogens without an adequate
defender. There are few adequate
defenders of entheogens because of the oppressive state of prohibition.
The finest
minds cannot step forward to defend entheogens against the false and diminishing
accusations leveled against them. The
bogus and ineffective, substitute path is meditation-alone, not
entheogens. The truth is the opposite
of what the anti-entheogen magazine Buddhists can so freely assert. When someone publishes a statement that
meditation is valid and entheogens aren't, the world supports that
publishing.
There are,
in contrast, many reasons working against the publication of a statement that
entheogens are vastly more valid and effective than meditation alone.
Meditation
is safer and more predictable than entheogens because it is less effective at
producing the mystic altered state.
Meditation alone fails to produce much danger, unpredictability, or
mental transformation (whether transient or in some way lasting).
When the
use of visionary plants is not listed in a mystic's or seeker's biography, this
might be because they were lacking, or because they were used but not mentioned
due to prohibition.
I don't
know if mystics claim to provide firm epistemological or spiritual ground --
most of them would waffle and qualify this.
What if
such experiences led to a philosophical conclusion of no-free-will? Ordinary life would remain basically the
same. Compare the mystic experiential
realm and one's sex life. Does one base
significant worldview premises on one's sex-life? Some do, some people don't.
Sex life is simply part of life, and has some limited effect on the
overall life.
Same with
the mystic realm -- it is simply part of life, and has some limited effect on
the overall life. The mystic realm is
easier to access than mystics and nonmystics think, is more sure than the
skeptics think, and is more limited than the mystic advocates assert.
My view is
that mystic knowledge is easy to access, is sure, and is limited.
The
skeptic view is that mystic knowledge is hard to access, is highly unsure, and
is limited.
The
conventional mystic advocate view is that mystic knowledge is hard to access,
is sure, and is hardly limited. They
put it on a pedestal, make it seem nearly unattainable, and glorify it as
thoroughly life-changing.
Transient
states of consciousness often leave lasting changes in the mental worldmodel.
Discernment
of mystic-state insights seems like an intractable problem, but it is the most
normal and ordinary problem that affects knowledge in general. Knowledge in general is problematic in
various ways, but it comes down to judgment, reasonable paradigm selection,
effective means of collecting observation data, and effective discussion and
communication of theories or models.
Finding a
useful means of discernment or theory selection is a problem common to many
areas of research. It's not necessarily
easy; there is a certain amount of work involved.
Can mystic
experiences "improve the lot of humankind on earth"? If modern man remains ignorant of and
baffled by the realm of the mystic altered state, solving such ignorance and
bafflement would surely be some type of "improvement of the lot of
humankind on earth".
To
scientifically or coherently understand mysticism, use reason skillfully,
together with more effective triggering of the intense mystic altered state.
To those
who live almost exclusively in the ordinary state of consciousness, it is more
real, legit, and relevant than the mystic altered state. The mystic state is a small part of our
experience if we don't often use effective triggers for it, but even so, it
potentially towers in profundity over the mundane ordinary state.
When
considering experiential data from the ordinary and mystic states, the mind can
form a rich mapping of the relation between self and world, seeing ways in
which there is duality and ways in which there is nonduality, and experiencing
both perspectives. The nondual
experience is a description of a common experience in the intense mystic
altered state.
It feels
nondual compared to the ordinary-state feeling that is relatively more
dualistic and emphasizes separateness.
The mystic state emphasizes nonseparateness of self and world.
Studies of
the real origin of the Jesus figure should shine light on the valuation of the
mystic state, as one of the motives for constructing the Jesus figure. Without a compelling motive, the
no-historical Jesus view isn't very convincing -- people are committed to the
"compelling big-bang" explanation in which Jesus' charisma caused the
gradual euhemeristic construction of a bigger-than-life Jesus figure.
To them,
there is a compelling motive for the historical-Jesus scenario, but no
compelling motive for the no-historical-Jesus scenario. Yes, a major part of the reason for
constructing the Jesus figure was anti-Ruler Cult, and part was astrology, but
also a compelling part was mystic experiencing -- the use of the Jesus figure
to personify and convey experiential insights encountered in the intense mystic
altered state.
These
various reasons worked together tightly; all areas of ancient thinking were
tied closely together by common reference to the mystic altered state, which
almost seems like the ordinary state of consciousness for the ancients, due to
their emphasis on it. Today's
diminishment of the mystic state is arbitrary and simply reflects the modern
failure to use the visionary plants that lie so close at hand, possibly unlike
the ancient world.
>Brain
scans have been used extensively to explore the mechanism involved in
meditation-induced, altered states of consciousness.
>Have
brain scans been used in the case of chemically-induced altered states of
consciousness?
>According
to Owen Flanagan "The mind/brain does its magic through the operation of
neurons, with axons and dendrites that form synaptic connections, and via
electrical and chemical processes that mediate attention, remembering,
learning, seeing, smelling, walking, talking, love, affection, benevolence, and
gratitude."
>Is
there a fundamental difference in the electrical and chemical processes leading
to altered states of consciousness
between meditation and chemically-induced altered states?
>Has
this question been explored, and if not, why not?
>Heinz
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22brain+scan%22+%22altered+state%22
My
specialty is a William James-like focus on cognitive phenomena, rather than
hardware, though I assume the two run parallel and shine some light on each
other.
The
subject of entheogenic versus drug-free spirituality warrants extended skilled
debate -- unlike the baseless claims and cliched assertions of the entheogen
diminishers that are posed as "debate" today. I cannot at the moment comment on every
point people have raised.
rialcnis
wrote:
>What
is frustrating, is the constant misinformation about religion---the confusion
between reality and fantasy, literalism and symbolism and ultimately the way to
allow entheogenic use to actually permeate the society in a positive,
scientific way, that will allow for the reprogramming of the way humans behave on the planet.
>Give
me a 1000 Osama bin ladens, George Bushes and Sadamms, neo - nazis, Buddhist
Priests, catholic or Christian Priests, rabbis, Islamic leaders, hindus etc,
and a thousand comforatable isolation tanks, a large supply of some excellent
entheogenic material and plenty of advanced and properly prepared Multi-media
and excellent devices, ----and the time to straighten them out and the whole
world could change.
>If the
goal is individual and group awakening intially and then actual social change
at every level, arising from many individual awakenings, then that goal has not
been approached, by institutionalized religion or entheogenic religion either.
>The
"Mystics," who claim profound experiences without EVER using
entheogens, are either liars, schizophrenics, Manics or just plain
charlatans. Those who buy into them are
suckers and people with misplaced idealism.
This blocks any useful change in humankind and just promotes eternal
sheepism. So far ALL religions have
failed miserably to provide real solutions to the problems of people.
I am
skeptical about the ability of entheogens to improve life as measured in
ordinary terms. My strategy for success
in accomplishing philosophical-religious goals is by restricting my goals: my
goal is to clearly, rationally, and explicitly explain the nature of the ego
death experience, and enable everyone to have a full ego death and rebirth
experience according to a well-suited clear definition of ego death, easily and
routinely attaining a certain specific climax and fulfillment.
Such ego
death, successfully attained and understood, is a personal attainment and a
cosmic achievement, but is distinct from a mid-level social shared
accomplishment -- improving daily societal life. I don't promise that a theory of ego death makes measurable
changes; this way, the validity of the theory does not collapse if diverse promised
goals of societal reform fail to materialize.
This
theory of ego death and rebirth is not a theory of social reform; that would be
a distinct endeavor. It is a theory of
personal metaphysics which certainly changes one's experience and worldmodel,
without necessarily having any effect on daily life and society.
Allegorically
we can jokingly claim that the System of Caesar has been catestrophically
defeated, by cleverly conflating mystic death and rebirth with socio-political
collapse of the current evil socio-political system and its replacement by that
of the transcendently Good spiritual realm -- that is the old Zoroastrian
apocalyptic mythic-mystic allegory formula.
It is mystically true, but when posed literally, is wish-driven
thinking. Societal improvement might
follow mass entheogenic enlightenment, but it might not; I see no strong,
reliable correlation.
I
guarantee that entheogens combined with intellectual study will produce a
certain kind of death and rebirth and enlightenment experience. I do not and cannot guarantee that
entheogens combined with intellectual study will lead to socio-political or
daily-life improvement. By only asking
of enlightenment what it can most centrally deliver -- enlightenment -- the way
is open to seek and obtain enlightenment.
If we
jumble enlightenment thoroughly tangled with socio-political reform, without
differentiation, that's the same old formula that's been tried, leading to
neither enlightenment nor socio-political reform. By analyzing the problem into distinct compartments that may later
be interconnected -- attaining enlightenment versus achieving social reform --
we may stand to achieve both. It
requires two distinct full efforts, not a full effort at enlightenment, with
hope of automatically getting for free a bonus social reform as a result of
success at enlightenment.
No amount
of socio-political improvement will automatically bring about enlightenment,
and vice versa; they are distinct developmental threads.
Home (theory of the ego death and rebirth experience)