Psychedelics, Hypnosis, NDE and the really real

MysticMonist

I had the joy of stumbling on Aldous Huxley’s books the Perennialist Philosophy and the doors of perception.
I linked the doors of perception here (it’s more of a long essay, excellent read) https://www.maps.org/images/pdf/books/HuxleyA1954TheDoorsOfPerception.pdf

Huxley relates his reflections on taking mescaline for the first time. I was astounded by how simmilar his experience (minus the visual trippyness) is to my meditative experiences and accounts of mystics throughout the ages.

So wanting to know more I talked to some users online. I found much of the same things. This particular post was interesting
“I’m a strong atheist and I have what some might call spiritual experiences on mushrooms. The first time... it brought on a strong feeling of unity with my body and the universe. We all have the capability to have these intense experiences within us.”

Stronger psychedelics, like DMT, have experiences I’m unable to relate to such as experiencing your own death or traveling to another realm, something well beyond the realm of sober sanity.

Here’s my theory: that since an atheist or a non-spiritual person can take a pill or snort or inject something or have a heart attack and experience a profound mystical experience, then it means mystical insight and divine illumination of our minds and hearts exists apart from belief or religion. This makes sense, we are created and sustained by God apart from our religious identity.

I think these experiences work by doing something to impair our normal sensory processing and mental schema of reality that allows us to perceive the really real that is always there. Our minds are conditioned on mundane things because spiritual insight won’t help you buy dinner. As Zen, says it’s not worth anything. But if we break down that regular function sometimes we gain insight. Other times like with schizophrenia, that processing becomes overactive and you get a jumbled mess with zero deeper meaning. So impairment doesn’t always equal insight.

I would venture further to say if we all received divine illumination then we all receive “salvation” which for me is really the same thing. If are not eternally condemned to hell and eternal life is a given then the focus becomes on embracing this illumination in our lives. I’ve been a universalist for a while but this fits in nicely here.

Of course having insight is different than following it and being virtous. The divine light shines on all of us, but we still need to turn towards it to appreciate its warmth. But there’s nothing we can do to stop it’s shining.

I don’t know if there is a name for this philosophy since it’s purposely unsystematic. I fully accept I do not understand God but I’d rather have a uncontrolled, overflowing, astonishing God than a prepackaged, predictable one. The emphasis is on a balance of mystical insight to gain wisdom and perspective with then living out God’s Will in the world. A cycle of listening and doing.

Perennialist philosophy seems attractive but I think sycrenatic frameworks fall into two categories. The first is where other traditions are assimilated into one superior set of principles, examples are Islam which says Allah gave his message to many prophets and many peoples but only the Qu’ran is the perfect revelation. Another would be Catholicism, where they acknowledge divine truth in other faiths but the church is the best expression of this Truth and the surest path of salvation (you are taking your chances elsewhere!)

The second approach is what I think Huxley does as a Perennialist and the Unitarian Universalists do and other realitivist groups. They say there is no one right or more right tradition and they freely quote mystics and scriptures to draw commonalities. This is probably the most accurate description of Truth, for me, there is no best way. However, this approach cherry picks it’s references and for every conclusion Huxley reaches by polling the mystics, I think he could have reached the opposite conclusion with a different selection of sages. If everyone is really equal, you can’t get a systematic world view. So I don’t think Perennialism is really a coherent philosophical school. It could be a philosophic path, in a platonic sense, which is a general and never ending search for truth but with any codification of belief. But then we shouldn’t give it a title. As stated above I don’t think beliefs matter and have nothing to do with experiencing God’s Light nor following His commands. So let’s not have them or since it’s not realistic to discard all beliefs let’s not pretend they have any divine origin.

Cavacava

↪MysticMonist

I think these experiences work by doing something to impair our normal sensory processing and mental schema of reality that allows us to perceive the really real that is always there

If the following information is correct, these drugs appear to open up channels, which are normally segregated, or which became segregated as we matured. It renews connections between what is normally segregated and parts of the brain that don't normally communicate but now do under these drugs.

BC

Here’s my theory: that since an atheist or a non-spiritual person can take a pill or snort or inject something or have a heart attack and experience a profound mystical experience, then it means mystical insight and divine illumination of our minds and hearts exists apart from belief or religion. — MysticMonist

Maybe, maybe not. Harvey Cox, a 20th century theologian (Baptist background, I think), Harvard professor, joined a group out in the SW desert for the purpose of taking hallucinogens. He had a good experience and wrote about it. I haven't read the book for decades, so I can't remember what all he said about it. The Christian mystics, like St. John of the Cross (late medieval, early renaissance) achieved remarkable results through meditation and prayer. (The Cloud of Unknowing is about that.)

The atheist, non-religious, non-spiritual, unreflective, not very thoughtful lump can't count on a short cut to depth and profundity. Neither can the religious, spiritual, reflective person. Hallucinogens will produce an experience of some kind. So will lots of other things. Maybe the Holy Spirit produces results too (though that's very hard to test).

I'm not against the careful, occasional use of hallucinogens, but one should keep one's expectations fairly low.

MysticMonist

The atheist, non-religious, non-spiritual, unreflective, not very thoughtful lump can't count on a short cut to depth and profundity. Neither can the religious, spiritual, reflective person. — Bitter Crank

So perhaps we are combining insight with real action/change. This isn’t a problem unique to psychedelics. What about people who have religious experiences on Sunday morning but cheat and lie and pursue wealth the rest of the week? I think that divine illumination is universal but embracing that Light is not. Though I don’t think we have the power to truly deny it, so I reject hell.

Personally, I don’t think I want to pursue use of drugs. There are inherent problems with use of chemicals primarily that are illegal and can be addictive. But also I don’t have the control I do with meditation or hypnosis. I can exit a trance like state or vision whenever I want, i can’t become sober as easily.

Nils Loc

The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World, by Iain McGilchrist

praxis

↪MysticMonist

Au contraire, one can have a stroke of insight.

praxis

But also I don’t have the control I do with meditation or hypnosis. I can exit a trance like state or vision whenever I want, i can’t become sober as easily. — MysticMonist

What sort of meditation and hypnosis techniques do you do?

MysticMonist

↪praxis

Mindfulness, breathing meditation, visualization based on religious texts (some Pure Land Buddhist or Kabbalistic texts), other kinds of visualization, listening to repeated songs or read prayers and scriptures.
What I realized is this may not be necessarily spiritual, but there are more of hypnotic qualities to it.
I’m actually not that knowledgeable about hypnosis, but I think the basics is relaxation plus focus, right?

praxis

I’m actually not that knowledgeable about hypnosis, but I think the basics is relaxation plus focus, right? — MysticMonist

Plus suggestions of some sort, yes.

I've been experimenting with some self-hypnosis in my morning meditation.

MysticMonist

Au contraire, one can have a stroke of insight. — praxis

This is an interesting example. So I think it would be a mistake to identify spiritual awareness/insight with one particular function or area of the brain (in this case the right hemisphere) because of the changing nature of brain science. I would run the risk of being like Descartes with his penal gland as the gateway to the soul, which is laughable now (though not really because of the amazing role of the endocrine system).

But sure I may have been putting the wrong emphasis on illuminaton being external to the self. Yet really the Divine is neither external nor internal and the parts it illumines are definitely parts of us, whether that be a hemisphere or the whole brain or whatever.

The only way this type of brain science refutes my claim of illumination is to say that all experiences of transcendence or spirituality (drug, stroke, or prayer induced) are straight up delusion. Like impaired vision from cataracts with no basis at all in any external reality. Simply an inherent flaw in our mental programming (cause there is no programmer to debug us!!!). That may be so... but then it really doesn’t matter if we are delusional or not.

MysticMonist

↪praxis

It wasn’t till lately that I realized that I had a consistent pattern in the type of stuff I practice since I’ve drifted away from traditional zazen “just sitting” meditation. I’m going to try to see a hypnotherapist to have some help figuring it out actually.
What is the difference between meditation and hypnotherapy anyways? Reading a few things online isn’t probably enough to answer this. I would say that meditation in its fullest sense though is about a lot more than just sitting on a cushion. It’s a comprehensive way of life and self-renunciation. I don’t think hypnotism teaches this.

T Clark

I think these experiences work by doing something to impair our normal sensory processing and mental schema of reality that allows us to perceive the really real that is always there. Our minds are conditioned on mundane things because spiritual insight won’t help you buy dinner. As Zen, says it’s not worth anything. But if we break down that regular function sometimes we gain insight. Other times like with schizophrenia, that processing becomes overactive and you get a jumbled mess with zero deeper meaning. So impairment doesn’t always equal insight. — MysticMonist

I listened to an episode of "The Philosopher's Zone" in my car this morning. They were talking about transcendence. The philosopher talked about his two daughters. His 5 year old was still in a place where she saw things with a different eye. He said it showed up especially in her grammar. She expressed things in a cockeyed way. She sees things that we as adults no longer see. About his 11 year old, he said "She has joined the rational world."

Changing subjects - I remember watching a program on the US's Public Broadcasting System (PBS) quite some time ago. It was about the cave art of American Indians. They compared the non-representational patterns and shapes found painted on the walls, apparently by shamans, to images described by people exposed to sensory deprivation and some drugs.

Changing subjects again - Recently I had a discussion here on the forum. I can't remember if was with you or someone else. I was talking about how atheists are unwilling to accept personal experiences as evidence for God's existence. The description you've given here seems plausible and I think it provides some support for atheists understanding of the world. I think it also provides support for my vision - that people's experience of what some call the "ground of being," means that the world only exists as a weaving together of the exterior world with the human mind, soul, spirit, self, or whatever. I don't know how it effects traditional religions where God doesn't live in the world, but transcends it, e.g. Christianity, Islam, Judaism.

T Clark

The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World, by Iain McGilchrist — Nils Loc

Hey, just because you're pissed at me for talking trash about your jokes, you shouldn't use a picture of me without my permission.

Nils Loc

↪T Clark

Self Censored :-x (This is not a joke thread or this thread IS NOT a joke).

MysticMonist

↪Nils Loc

That video was really well done, thanks for sharing.
I still think we are dealing with more than just left and right brain thinking. Maybe an intuitive grasp of a transcendent Reality?
My proposed approach is to avoid putting a name or full definition on the phenomenon but to value the subjective nature of these meaningful experiences. Mindfulness is sort of an example. There is nothing trippy about fully enjoying a cup of tea for its own sake. Yet such an experience can provide perspective and “wisdom” that can help living in a more compassionate and holy way

praxis

The only way this type of brain science refutes my claim of illumination is to say that all experiences of transcendence or spirituality (drug, stroke, or prayer induced) are straight up delusion. — MysticMonist

Curious. In Buddhism such transcendent experiences are generally regarded as awakenings from delusion.

I would say that meditation in its fullest sense though is about a lot more than just sitting on a cushion. It’s a comprehensive way of life and self-renunciation. — MysticMonist

Yes indeed, though I'm not sure what you mean by comprehensive unless you're talking about life in a monastery or something.

I don’t think hypnotism teaches this. — MysticMonist

Hypnosis is simply a method to accept suggestions.

In the modern world we are bombarded by suggestions on a less than conscious level, from media, other people, and internally. A lot of these suggestions are unhealthy, to put it simply. Hypnosis is a method for consciously making positive or healthy suggestions to our subconscious.

Many contemplative practices induce a 'trance state', which is the ideal state in which to deliver hypnotic suggestions, so the two practices overlap in this aspect, as I see it.

Wosret

I still think we are dealing with more than just left and right brain thinking. Maybe an intuitive grasp of a transcendent Reality? — MysticMonist

This is the funny thing about it, as the video attempts to illustrate, the one form of grasping through precise models, details, and formulations is always to some degree empty. Framing it in terms of hemispheric function is going to get the whole message across better to certain sensibilities, because all of the pieces that are used to paint the picture seem more real, or persuasive, attention grabbing, significant to a certain mindset. The double edged sword though, is that it appeals to people that do not find more mystical, traditional representations persuasive, significant or true. Those that do though, will find this sort of representation as cheapening, or reducing the reality of the message by painting it in more materialistic, mechanistic, functional language, rather than that of art, emotion, spiritual grandeur.

Wayfarer

In the Greek philosophical tradition it was assumed that most people would have neither the capacity or the interest for the higher truths. It was unashamedly elitist in modern terms. Doesn’t sit well with modern liberal democracy. Nowadays its important that every opinion is treated as equal.

The point about hallucinogens is they rend the veil, they make it obvious that most live in a ‘consensus reality’ by copying those around them, and that that really there’s a fundamental sense in which we’re all basically in a state of delusion. My most vivid peak experiences under lysergics were an astonishing realisation of the luminous and utterly amazing reality of nature that we are normally completely dead to. How, I thought, can one live in such a state? Obviously not by tripping. But that was behind a lot of the 60s movement.

(Interesting trivia: it is theorised that at various points in medieval history whole populations became addled by naturally-occurring lysergic acid that had formed in mouldy rye bread; something called ‘ergotomine’; and that this might have played a role in the hysteria about witches that used to sweep rural Europe.)

The perennial philosophy is not a school as such. There is an intellectual clique that are known variously as perennialists or traditionalists, with notable names being Frithjof Schuon, Rene Guenon, Ananda Coomaraswami and even Julius Evola. They’re generally reactionary - they think that modern culture is essentially degenerate and will soon destroy itself or collapse. Interestingly (or depressingly) Rene Guenon has come up in discussions about alt-right Uber troll Steven K Bannon, who apparently had some interest in such subjects; Evola also is associated with fascism and reactionary politics. Interesting blog on the subject here https://traditionalistblog.blogspot.com.au/ by a smart academic.

MysticMonist

The perennial philosophy is not a school as such. There is an intellectual clique that are known variously as perennialists or traditionalists, with notable names being Frithjof Schuon, Rene Guenon, Ananda Coomaraswami and even Julius Evola. They’re generally reactionary - they think that modern culture is essentially degenerate and will soon destroy itself or collapse. Interestingly (or depressingly) Rene Guenon has come up in discussions about alt-right Uber troll Steven K Bannon, who apparently had some interest in such subjects; Evola also is associated with fascism and reactionary politics — Wayfarer

Wow. Thanks for filling me in. I thought it was just a bunch of reinsance guys and then Huxley.

There are a lot of syncretic philosophies and faiths. I definitely believe that the Absolute is encountered in many different ways and that this encounter is more important than doctrine or intellectualization (so I’m a mystic). Yet I find every attempt at explaining this or having a community around this principle falls flat. Probably the ones I like the best are the Baha’i. But even they fall into being dogmatic and put authority in the hands of their ruling body the UHJ.
Maybe it’s that the point of contact with the Divine is so primary for me the only thing to do is to return again and again to it. If God grants us revelation in prayer, why look anywhere else or to anyone else but back to prayer? We might disagree on something so instead of arguing (if we really want an answer rather than just to argue) we should both return individually to prayer and ask God. I know I’m switching the problem of oppressive authority and imposed conformity for unchecked delusion and self centeredness. But I think many people are able to hold themselves mostly in check. If your neighbor is crazy you don’t have to listen to them anyways.
This is sort of stream of consciousness and not systematic. I probably given up on being systematic about God.
Thoughts?

Wayfarer

What interested me about the idea of the ‘perennial philosophy’ was, firstly, that I too am inclined to the mystical, but also because I think there’s a basic truth that various traditions reflect. I got into Uni in my late 20’s via what used to be called an ‘adult entry exam’ (long since discontinued) but as it happened the bulk of the exam was a comprehension test on a long passage from Bertrand Russell’s essay, Mysticism and Logic. And that was just the kind of thing I wanted to study. I enrolled in anthropology, philosophy, psychology, history and comparative religion, and then went about studying that very subject. I had to more or less design my own curriculum to do that, nobody was teaching what I wanted to learn.

So, in brief, and you could write volumes about it, I do believe there is (or are) states corresponding to enlightenment or divine illumination if you will, that are not generally at all understood, but about which you can find similar types of statements in many traditions - exactly as Huxley said in his book, which is why it is a classic in the genre.

I formed the view that this kind of understanding was most probably associated with Gnosticism in early Christian Era, and that it was thereafter suppressed by the successful domination of the church by the ‘pistics’ as opposed to the Gnostics. (‘Pistic’ is related to the Greek ‘pistis’ meaning belief or opinion, where ‘gnosis’ is related to the Sanskrit ‘Jñāna’ meaning insight esp. of a supernatural type.)

I suspect there was some calamitous misunderstanding that happened back in the formation of the Church that resulted in the suppression of the gnostic idea of enlightenment in Western culture whereas it was maintained in Eastern culture in Buddhism, Hindu and other spiritual movements.

Actually there has been a revival of Gnosticism since the discovery of the Nag Hammadi scriptures which were a trove of lost gnostic texts; check out gnosis.org , it has a lot of resources. There are a few writers in that field, notably Richard Smolin, a gnostic bishop by the name of Stephan Hoeller, and also a religious studies writer by the name of Elaine Pagels who write on all these things. (You’ll find them on that site.)

However there are many subtleties in the matter, as there is still a somewhat gnostic stream in Western culture and even in some forms of Christianity. (Incidentally I think Carl Jung was to all intents a gnostic.) But the tension between the mystics, Gnostics, and the ecclesiasticals has a long and bloody history in Western culture as mystics often skirt heresy or even fall into it in the Church’s eyes (see A Perfect Heresy, an account of the brutal suppression of the Cathars in Langu’doc). Eckhardt and St John of the Cross are examples of mystics thought to be heretics, although the latter was obviously recognised as a saint eventually. But at any rate, the experiential dimension of spirituality - the dimension of ‘realisation’ which is so vividly represented in Advaita Vedanta and some forms of Buddhism - has been on the whole missing from Christianity, which is far more concerned with right belief (literal meaning of ‘orthodoxy’) as it is (speaking a bit cynically) a lot easier to manage.

But the times are changing, the Churches have had to start to incorporate that kind of attitude again, due to popular demand. It is after all ‘the age of Aquarius’.

MysticMonist

↪Wayfarer

I enjoy the gnostics, especially the Gospel of Thomas, which is my favorite of the gospels. I wrote a “devotional” of the book that’s a bit harsh parady of the Church. It’s a week with the heretical gospel. I’ll PM it to you since you like the gnostics.
I’d like to get more into the gnostic texts (other than Thomas) but being esoteric texts it will take some focused time.

I’m going camping for the weekend with my son and his Cub Scout den. It will be good to unplug. When I get back I’m going to post my philosophy up since I think it’s coming together now in a short and coherent form. I’d be really curious to see what the forum names or labels it as. You’re right I’m not a Perennialist.

Frank Barroso

This one time in the woods. I went off trail, am lost, am jogging bc of knee-high grass, slowly it dawns on me I've been here for 6 hours now and my water and food is running out. Over yonder a clearing appears. The stone trail unfolds before me. I slow down as with each step i realize I am yet again safe, I again have control. Touch my head to the floor like a muslim (totally not a muslim). Take in the beautiful expanse before me. Walk towards this tree. Get closer. Look at the center of tree; and in the tree I see all at once my face, my dads face, my grandpas face, and eventually into a melting face that I can only assume is the face I think my ancestors look like. Begin crying as the unity of it all hits me in waves. This tree - the largest easily within the entire view. A lush variety of flora and fauna surround me. The realization occurs to me that this tree has probably been here the longest, if not close to, out of everything around it. And everything around it lived in part thanks to this tree that stood here for what feels like to us an eternity. And that my ancestors lived, took from the environment, gave back, and so on and so forth through so many iterations till it reached my turn (much larger eternity).

I don't think tripping connects you to something divine. Nor do I think it impairs you; and through a restricted access to your brain's resources something magical or spiritual appears (Science says it might increase, not decrease, one's mental resources). I think that the person has conjured that experience for himself and is individual to him because of past events in his life. And that if your experience matches up with my experience in any way, it's simply that we both came to the same conclusion because our environments weren't so different. I cant imagine your world is much different than mine.

I am under the impression that LSD makes you more observant, selfless, wise, holy; and under that impression It's ever more apparent that we are all just observing our environment and connecting dots about the world. If you think God is metaphorically handing you the knowledge, rather than you drawing the lines yourself; I think your brain conjured that just as it conjured the spiritual experience you initially had. If transcendent reality is a recurring theme, maybe we all just want to escape 'this' reality and go to the nice, idealistic world we just created in our minds. I think It's more about psychology than the divine.

MysticMonist

↪Frank Barroso

Thanks for sharing.
So do you think it’s possibke to have a theory that explains why experiences like these are meaningful to us?

Frank Barroso

We wouldn't have reached our conclusion if the questions we were asking weren't interesting or important to us. So whatever conclusion you reach will be meaningful to you because you thought that question deserved answering. And, you were the one who created the scenario you were in, constructed the experience you held, all so that you could obtain the insight you reached. It was something you wanted all along. A nagging question that bothers you for days on end, you can't pin it, or describe it in words successfully, but that suddenly gets alleviated.
To explain how and why these experiences are universal to humans, Science will eventually explain. The videos on this thread were great and am working through the paper you posted, which seems great so far.

Of course having insight is different than following it and being virtous. The divine light shines on all of us, but we still need to turn towards it to appreciate its warmth. But there’s nothing we can do to stop it’s shining. — MysticMonist

These experiences are meaningful insofar as they provide light for the path before us. If we actually use the insight we came to.

Psychedelics, Hypnosis, NDE and the really real

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions