himalayanspirit wrote:...I guess I should just stick to taking advice from non-westerner Buddhists from now on...
himalayanspirit wrote:When I read the other thread, I was a bit depressed and was almost in the verge of losing faith (I am not initiated into any sect but have developed some faith and interest in Buddhism in some years) that Buddhism only probably attracts hippies, druggies and losers. But now I am somewhat relieved to regain the faith that the mental states gained by taking mushrooms, LSD or other drugs are nothing but a great illusion and the taker opens gateways for hell by doing so. I was almost into thinking that what the past Buddhists so vividly described in Sutras and Sastras was probably of the same nature as the Shaman who described Spirit-journey by taking Ayahuasca; and therefore Buddhism is probably not any useful in understanding reality or eliminating suffering. But I started reading about the Eastern Buddhists and have finally regained my faith..


himalayanspirit wrote:I dont want to be misguided by an former hippy who took up drugs, had lots of sex, and accumulated heavy karma, telling me that you can reach the first two Jhanas by taking LSD.
Personally, I feel that drugs are bad for human beings just like how cigarettes and alcohol are bad (both are listed as "drugs" anyway)
You should first introspect why people take drugs to begin with. Here in India, people in the rural areas usually take up alcohol and become addicts to ease themselves out of some trauma or failure or depression. It gives temporary relief. But they end up becoming nuisance to the society, sometimes beating wives, creating a scene in public etc etc.
I guess all Buddhists should denounce drug abuse.
But now I am somewhat relieved to regain the faith that the mental states gained by taking mushrooms, LSD or other drugs are nothing but a great illusion and the taker opens gateways for hell by doing so.
himalayanspirit wrote:I opened a thread about the effects of a drug I read about and how the mental states it leads to are explained in Buddhism. And what I get is a bunch of ex-hippies advocating the use of drugs, narcotics, psychedelics etc? LOL

KeithBC wrote:If you start a thread about drugs (or a drug), then you have to expect that the subsequent discussion will be about drugs. That is the most basic karma. It doesn't indicate the preoccupation of the majority of people here.
For the record, I am a hippie, neither "former" nor "New Age". My drug choices have always been legal and not particularly extravagant.
Om mani padme hum
Keith

KeithBC wrote:If you start a thread about drugs (or a drug), then you have to expect that the subsequent discussion will be about drugs. That is the most basic karma. It doesn't indicate the preoccupation of the majority of people here.
For the record, I am a hippie, neither "former" nor "New Age". My drug choices have always been legal and not particularly extravagant.
Om mani padme hum
Keith
catmoon wrote:You will find academics quietly discussing the sutras, people building a Buddhism based on faith, others building on practicality, some working with rules and regulations, and still others working with formal reason and logic. And as you will have noticed, we have some very high-volume posters who appear to represent the board simply because they post a lot of stuff. But like so many things, it's a misleading illusion.
kirtu wrote:What is a hippy, an ex-hippies or a New-Age person? I know we have people from the 60's here.
Kirt
a person, especially of the late 1960s, who rejected established institutions and values and sought spontaneity, direct personal relations expressing love, and expanded consciousness, often expressed externally in the wearing of casual, folksy clothing and of beads, headbands, used garments, etc.
LastLegend wrote:So we have 4 identified hippies: KeithBC, Chaz, edearl, and Sonam.
Damn hippies!
gnegirl wrote:Not an ex-hippie.
Ex-wicca. Go figure that one....
Users browsing this forum: Son of Buddha and 7 guests