Meeting the Buddha on the Road

I teach one thing–how to end suffering.

The Buddha

IMHO, Buddhism is the most misunderstood of the world's major religions–not only by those outside looking in, but by its followers as well (bad enough I've got the Christians coming for me with pitchforks and torches, now the Buddhists will be joining them). This is because what I see in Buddhism is NOT (and never was intended to be) a religion. The problem is that Siddhārtha Gautama (i.e., the Buddha) was so far ahead of his time (5^th century B.C.E.) that there was no other paradigm for his teachings. What he actually taught was what today we would call cognitive psychology. Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I submit for your consideration the first two verses of the Dhammapada–the Buddha's first teaching:
Mind precedes its objects. They are mind-governed and mind-made. To speak or act with a defiled mind is to draw pain after oneself, like a cart behind the feet of the ox drawing it.
Mind precedes its objects. They are mind-governed and mind-made. To speak or act with a peaceful mind, is to draw happiness after oneself, like an inseparable shadow.
If this is not cognitive psychology, then butter my butt and call me a biscuit. Cognitive psychology and Buddhism are founded upon the same principle: Our thoughts–which include our perceptions, interpretations, judgments, beliefs, etc.–are the source of, and means to ending our suffering. Put another way, we do not see the world as it is–we see the world as we are.
In fact, the Buddha's lack of any traditionally "religious" content has led some Buddhist scholars, such as Stephen Batchelor, to conclude the Buddha was agnostic–if not atheist–in his religious views. This is, I believe, one of the reasons Buddhism spread so quickly throughout Asia. Without any of the typical religious trappings to get in the way, when Buddhism entered a new country, it simply incorporated its own established religious beliefs into Buddhism (much like early Christians co-opted Pagan holidays to make it easier to gain converts). This is why, for example, Tibetan Buddhism is very different from Japanese Buddhism. In fact, without the iconography of the Buddha–one would probably not recognize these as the same religions.
Another example of this is the widespread belief that Buddhists believe in reincarnation. Many do, but not because of anything the Buddha taught. When studying the origins of a religion, one of the difficulties faced is to separate what is an essential religious teaching from things that are simply artifacts of the time and culture from which it came. In the Indian subcontinent during the 5^th century B.C.E. people did not just believe in reincarnation–it was considered a fact, just like the sky is blue and water is wet. Not only did no one question it, no one would even think to question it. So of course when this new teacher came along and didn't specifically say anything one way or the other about it, reincarnation was just absorbed into the Buddha's teachings. Since reincarnation was seen as a form of suffering and the Buddha was teaching a way to end suffering, it just made sense that the goal of Nirvana was to be freed from the cycle of birth and rebirth.
One would never suspect that within the Buddha's teachings is the concept that we do not have a soul or spirit that exists independently of the mind. The only Buddhists who directly confront this are Ch'an (Chinese) or Zen (Japanese) Buddhists–which were heavily influenced by Taoist philosophy when Buddhism came to China. Ch'an and Zen Buddhism has a distinctly existential–almost nihilistic–focus.
So what then is the core of the Buddha's teaching? First, the Four Noble Truths:

1.    The truth of the existence of suffering;

2.    The truth of the cause of suffering;

3.    The truth that suffering can be eliminated; and

4.    The truth of how to eliminate suffering (the Noble Eightfold Path).

The first of these is pretty much a no-brainer–at times, life sucks. The surprise comes in the second truth–we (specifically our minds) are the cause of life sucking. The actual word the Buddha used for this is dukkha, which is usually translated as "unsatisfactoriness." Simply put, we find life unsatisfactory because it often doesn't meet our expectations. "What is" is not the way we think it "should" be, so we blame what is for not meeting our expectations–never stopping to realize (until the Buddha came along) that it's our expectations that are the true cause of our suffering. Aaron Beck, Albert Ellis, or David Burns (three prominent cognitive psychologists) couldn't have said it better.
The third truth follows from the second–if we know the cause of suffering, we can eliminate it (or at least greatly reduce it). OK, so how do we do this? Enter the fourth truth–the Noble Eightfold Path.
The Noble Eightfold Path is divided into three aspects: Wisdom (1, 2), Ethical Conduct (3, 4, 5), and Concentration (6, 7, 8). Specifically, the Eightfold path consists of:

1.    Right Understanding;

2.    Right Thought;

3.    Right Speech;

4.    Right Action;

5.    Right Livelihood;

6.    Right Effort;

7.    Right Mindfulness; and

8.    Right Concentration.

Now keep in mind that during the past 2,500 years whole forests have been sacrificed to written discourses on the Noble Eightfold Path. I'll just be flying high overhead to give a broad picture of the landscape. You can parachute down and hack through the brush on your own.
Right Understanding is pretty simple–it basically refers back to the Four Noble Truths. This is the "right understanding" of suffering. The Greek stoic philosopher, Epictetus, echoed the Buddha's concept of suffering in the 1^st century C.E. when he said "Men are not upset by things, but by the views they take of them." Right Understanding also includes the law of karma–that every action produces a result (what goes around, comes around).
In the language of cognitive psychology, Right Thought means to identify and challenge one's cognitive distortions and irrational beliefs about themselves, other people, and the world around them.
The first of the three dealing with Ethical Conduct is Right Speech. The specifics of which are basically to be truthful and to not engage in divisive or abusive speech. Pretty straightforward.
Right Action is basically doing nothing that brings suffering to others. I like to think of it as the Buddhist version of the "Golden Rule"–treat others as you would have them treat you.
Right Livelihood takes right action into how one makes a living. Again, the idea is that you do not engage in an occupation that brings suffering to others (Republicans need not apply. Opps! That's not right speech. Shame on me!).
The last three have to do specifically with the practices of meditation. Right Effort primarily has to do with mental discipline. Not only in keeping the first five steps on the path always in mind, but also to provide the discipline for the remaining two steps.
Mindfulness is a specific Buddhist meditation technique, the goal of which is to bring mindful awareness to everything we do. Right Mindfulness is specifically referring to this last aspect.
Finally, we get to Right Concentration, which is actually the practice of meditation itself. Within the Buddhist tradition there are many specific meditation techniques, but all require focused attention and concentration.
There it is–Buddhism in a nutshell. As I said, one could spend many lifetimes (if you buy into the whole reincarnation thing) studying the details of all this, but this is what I consider the essence of what the Buddha taught. Once I was able to peel away all the superfluous B.S. that had little, if anything, to do with the core teaching–I found a genuine affection for Buddhism. But, I still would file it under "Psychology," rather than "Religion."

The Tao that can be told

The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.

The name that can be named is not the eternal name.

The nameless is the beginning of heaven and Earth.

The named is the mother of the ten thousand things.

Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.

Ever desiring, one sees the manifestations.

These two spring from the same source but differ in name;

This appears as darkness.

Darkness within darkness.

The gate to all mystery.

Lao Tzu

Tao Te Ching

So begins the first chapter in the Tao Te Ching–the foundational text of Taoism. Taoism has existed as a philosophical system in China since about the 6^th century B.C.E. When I began my spiritual quest in earnest, Taoism was the first tradition that resonated with me. It’s difficult to encapsulate Taoism in just a few words. A fact made even harder due to their being at least 3 major divisions and an untold number of minor sects. However, my interest has solely been in Taoism as a philosophical system.

Perhaps the first thing that attracted me to Taoist teaching was that is essentially non-theistic (i.e., without a belief in a Deity). Instead, Taoism refers to the Tao–a word that is usually translated as “path” or “way.” The Tao is viewed as a cosmic force or energy that underlies all existence. As such, it is the source of the natural laws by which the entire Universe operates. The actions (the manifestations) of the Tao are best understood through studying the natural world. An analogy would be the wind. Think of the wind as the Tao, which cannot be seen (the mystery). We are only aware of the wind by its actions (the manifestations) within the physical universe (i.e., trees bending, leaves blowing, etc.). That which is not in harmony with the Tao will eventually cease to exist. Therefore, a follower of the Tao attempts to live his or her life in harmony with this cosmic force. This is also the philosophy behind the Taoist moving meditation and martial art, T’ai Chi. The practice is designed to help one harmonize with the Universe.

One of the essential aspects of the Tao’s manifestation in the Universe is constant change. The most recognized icon for Taoism is the T’ai Chi (usually referred to as the “yin/yang”). This circle divided into light and dark symbolizes the constant interaction of two complimentary elements–yin and yang–which are the source of everything (the ten thousand things).

That which engenders Creation is itself uncreated; that which engenders Change is itself unchanging. The Uncreated is able to create; the Unchanging is able to effect change. That which is produced cannot but continue producing; that which is evolved cannot but continue evolving. Hence there is constant production and constant evolution. The law of constant production and of constant evolution at no time ceases to operate.

Lieh Tzu

I like Taoism’s reverence for the natural world and the idea of trying to live in harmony with it. A good example of this can be seen in traditional Chinese landscape paintings. In these landscapes, people (or the evidence of people such as buildings, etc.) are virtually invisible–hidden among the majesty of the natural world. Most Taoists saw society as a corrupting influence on the individual and would often live as hermits in the forests or mountains. Thoreau–though not a Taoist in name–certainly lived in accord with many Taoist principles.

Taoists were–for the most part–very rational and scientific. They studied nature to understand the underlying principles at work. In so doing, Taoists by-in-large founded the principles of traditional Chinese medicine. They tended to see the “big picture” and knew that anything–even if left alone–would eventually change. It seems they viewed the Universe as a wondrous mystery just waiting to be explored.

A word of caution: If you decide you would like to do some study of Taoism, be aware that there is a magical-shamanic folk religion that uses the name Taoist and has little–if any–connection to Taoist philosophy. This is typically called “Religious” or “Popular” Taoism.

 

Mysticism, Spirituality, and Organized Religion

Some of you may have wondered about my use of the term Mystic along with Counselor and Educator under the vision of my benevolent countenance. A mystic is a person who practices mysticism.

Mysticism (from the Greek, mystikos) is the pursuit of communion with, or conscious awareness of divinity, spiritual truth, or God through direct experience. Mysticism usually centers on a practice or practices intended to nurture such experiences or awareness.

I consider myself to be a mystic in that–following the Buddha’s advice–I accept as truth only that which I can verify from my own experience. When it comes to spirituality or religion this means I do not believe anything unless I have direct experience of it, which–by definition–means mysticism.

Mystics and organized religion have an ongoing love–hate relationship. Religious traditions need mystics for their origins (Where would Christianity be without Christ, or Buddhism without Buddha?), but mystics are very disruptive to the status quo once a religion is established around them. If you’ve got a means of having direct experience of the divine, who needs an ecclesiastical hierarchy as an intermediary? We can’t have ordinary people running around communing directly with God as this doesn’t bode well for church attendance and–perhaps more importantly–the Sunday collection plate.

In order to guard against this threat to their spiritual monopoly, religious organizations do one of three things:

1)    They segregate those with any mystical inclinations away from the masses by relegating them to monasteries, convents, etc. while also making admission to these groups unattractive with requirements such as vows of poverty, celibacy, etc.

2)    They claim that mystics are “special” people (Saints, etc.) favored by God that we should worship and revere, but not try to emulate.

3)    They attack mystics as being heretics who blaspheme the true doctrine and therefore must be excommunicated, banished, punished, or killed (sometimes all of the above).

I think this is one of the reasons–perhaps THE reason–established religions and even new age spiritual “gurus” (sorry Alan) shun the use of entheogenic substances by their followers, as they make the mystic experience far too democratic. It’s much easier to allow for a spiritual democracy when everyone in the tribe is wearing a loincloth and living in a hut with a dirt floor. Democracy of any kind makes those in power very nervous.

The problem is that once the spiritual experience becomes a religion, it ceases to be about individual spirituality and instead becomes centered around idolatry. Even though many religions–particularly the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam)–pay lip service to idolatry as a sin, the reality is quite different. They get by with this on a technicality–idolatry by definition is worship of a physical object as God. Since people are not considered physical objects, it’s OK to worship Christ, Mohammed, Buddha, etc. and not call it idolatry. Of course idolatry is always what the “other” religions do, not one’s own.

As an example, shortly after 9/11, I overheard two people discussing Islam. Because one of Islam’s most well-known icons is the crescent moon, one was telling the other than followers of Islam “worship the moon as their god.” I’m presuming this person was sharing this as evidence that Islam practiced idolatry and was, therefore, an inferior religion. I wonder if this person would apply the same “logic” to Christians by saying they worship a “wooden cross as their god” and that this too is idolatry. It can be a slippery slope from religious iconography to religious idolatry, and the difference is often  only a matter of perception.

A footnote: To anyone who doesn’t already know, Jews, Christians, and Moslems all worship the SAME God–the God of Abraham. A fact that would make the conflict among them laughable if not for its deadly consequences.

My own definition of idolatry is more–dare I say it–liberal in that I view any form of worship that puts the messenger before the message as idolatry. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with reverence for the messenger, unless in the process the message gets lost or marginalized.

And there is nothing “wrong” per se with religious worship. In Hinduism–the world’s oldest living religion–there are four paths to union with Brahaman (Universal Soul). These are each referred to as a form of yoga (interesting coincidence, the etymological meaning of the word yoga and religion are virtually identical). These are:

Bhakti Yoga–the path of love, devotion, and worship,

Karma Yoga–the path of right action and good works,

Raja Yoga–the path of meditation, and

Jñana Yoga–the path of wisdom.

Hinduism does not see any one of these paths as better than any of the others. They are simply ways toward the same end. Different paths are suited to different people and one may choose any as their primary path. Also, this does not mean that a particular path is chosen to the exclusion of others. I believe anyone with a genuine spiritual inclination will engage in aspects of all these at various times.

It is not surprising that most Hindus–indeed most people of ALL religious faiths–choose Bhakti–the path of love, devotion, and worship–as their primary path along with a little or a lot of Karma–good works–thrown in as well. These paths are the least difficult for the everyday person who has to manage daily responsibilities such as work, family, etc. You go about your business with love in your heart, devotion to your faith, and do such good works toward your fellow man as you are able. Nothing wrong with that. In fact the world would be a much better place if more people did this.

Others (such as yours truly) are more attracted to the paths of meditation and/or wisdom. Usually, because of the amount of time these paths require, they are more accessible to people with both the time as well as inclination to devote to them–clergy, religious scholars, monks, spiritual gadflies with access to a computer and internet connection, etc.

An Apple Tree, not a Buick

The observant reader will note the rather curious web address for this blog and may have wondered, WTF? Well your patience shall now be rewarded. Before I continue, I must express my appreciation for Alan Watts, who provided the nucleus for this idea. In fact, I have probably done little more than to expand upon his ideas and frame them within the context of natural pantheism.

An apple tree, not a Buick refers to my own way of explaining natural pantheism. The word “pantheism” comes from ancient Greek pan meaning “all” and theos meaning “God.” The basic idea of pantheism is that there is no entity that exists outside of and apart from creation. Pantheism is therefore nondualistic in that it does not view “God” or divinity as separate from us (I and the Father are One. –John 10:30). God is a part of everything, not apart from everything.

“Natural” pantheism views existence like an apple tree–it grows. Growth is the natural process of existence expressing itself. The tree already exists within the apple seed. It is self-creating. This is a natural rather than supernatural process.

In contrast, many religions view existence like a Buick. A Buick doesn’t grow–it’s manufactured. Something outside of it must create it. This is dualistic–creator and the creation are separate entities. Without the creator, there is no creation. Therefore, the creation is and always will be subservient to the creator.

Natural pantheism leads to what I call the “Big Namaste.” Namaste is a Sanskrit word that is a common greeting in India and Nepal. It is said while placing the hands together in a “prayer” position in front of the heart and bowing from the waist. It means “the One Spirit in me acknowledges and bows to the One Spirit in you.” Not bad for just one word! Its origin is from the Hindu concept that we are all an expression of the Divine. Pantheism takes this a step further in that we are not only an expression of the Divine, we are all part of it. In fact, EVERYTHING is a part of the Divine.

Once, just before sunset, I was walking alone in a meadow at Tipsoo Lake on Chinook Pass. Walking across the meadow towards me was a lone bull elk. The elk and I stopped when we were about 50 feet apart and looked directly at each other. I brought my hands together in front of my heart, bowed slightly from the waist, and whispered “Namaste.” Immediately afterward the elk and I continued our walk across the meadow, passing about 20 feet from each other. This is an example of “Big Namaste.” Whether it is another person, an animal, or a grain of sand–it’s all God.

Namaste!

Spiritual Eclecticism

Most of my prior posts were about how I got to be who I am. My future posts will be more about who I am and who I am becoming.

One of the spiritual realities that I have learned in my wanderings is that no one tradition has a monopoly on truth and that by remaining open-minded I am able discover truth wherever it may be. I cannot with any degree of honesty pin myself down to any of the established spiritual or religious categories. Although I love dogs, I can’t stand dogmas. So let me begin to answer two seemingly simple questions, “What is my religion” and “Do I believe in God?”

I suppose my best answer to the first question would be to just say I’m a “Spiritual Eclectic,” meaning that I draw upon many religious/spiritual/philosophical traditions, but ally myself with none. If I had to put my beliefs in one sentence, the best I can come up with at the moment would be: I’m equal parts Taoist, Buddhist, Natural Pantheist, and Existentialist bound together with a liberal dose* of Amazonian shamanism. Maybe you can understand why I don’t normally like to get into casual exchanges with people about religion. If someone REALLY wants to know “what I am” the answer’s going to take awhile.

The second question is problematic on two levels. First, it is framed as a “yes” or “no” question. Second, it presupposes that there is a universal definition of “God” that both the person asking and the person answering agree upon. I’m not just being a smart ass (well, maybe a little) when I give my usual response: “First you have to tell me what you mean by God.” This usually ends the conversation (try it if you don’t believe me), but if it doesn’t–this answer’s going to take awhile as well. But you’ll have to wait for my next post.

*Yes, that pun was intended.

Now what?

For every answer, there's a whole new set of questions. Now I'm facing some big ones. I just had a profoundly spiritual transformation that was facilitated by drinking an Amazonian shamanic brew that contains a schedule one controlled substance. And to complicate matters just a bit more–I'm a substance abuse counselor. This is why the word "dilemma" was invented. Oh well, often answers to the most profound spiritual and existential questions involve transcending apparent contradictions.

This was a spiritual crossroad in my life. Was I going to be true to myself, or to everyone else's ideas of who I "should" be? Choose one, and I risk not only possible alienation by my family and friends, but potential loss of my career. Choose the other, and I continue allowing my spirit to die a little more each day. If the consequences affected just me, the answer would be easier. But I have to think about Christina as well. How might my decision impact her?

Right in the middle of all this–the Universe decides to manifest this quandary within my physical body. August 2002. It was a Monday and I was getting ready to go to work. For about a week I'd been experiencing physical symptoms that seemed like heartburn. They would only last for about 20 minutes. Once, the "heartburn" was accompanied by some slight nausea and I seemed to have a little trouble breathing. Monday morning I had the "heartburn" again, along with numbness and tingling in my left arm (I think you see where this is going). Christina insisted I call the Group Health Consulting Nurse before going to work. I promised her I would. The nurse told me to go to immediately to St Joseph Hospital ER. About two hours later I was having emergency angioplasty to relieve a 100% blockage in one of my coronary arteries. For at least a week I was having small heart attacks. I could have dropped dead anytime and probably would have if I'd gone to work that Monday.

My heart problem was probably due to the extra 40+ pounds I was packing around, but I believe that living out of synch with what I believed to be true didn't help. I decided that I'd wasted enough of my life trying to live up to everyone else's expectations. Whatever it took and whatever the consequences–I was going to find a way to start living with more authenticity and integrity. This blog is the latest installment in that ongoing experiment.

A major challenge was going to involve the perceived contradiction between my profession–a substance abuse counseling specialist–and the latest accompaniment on my spiritual voyage–DMT in the form of an ayahuasca analog. The "problem" was not one that I struggled with–to me there was no contradiction between the two. It was more a problem of society's perceptions, misunderstandings, and prejudices. There's also the legal conundrum it presents (more on that in another post).

It really comes down to an issue that is often brought up by many of my clients–especially those who smoke pot. They often want to take the focus off their own issues with marijuana by arguing that is should be legal. My response–the legality or illegality of a drug has little, if anything, to do with whether or not a person develops a significant problem with that drug, and it definitely has nothing to do with recovery from such problems. Alcohol and tobacco–two legal drugs–are directly and indirectly responsible for far more deaths and social problems than all other drugs combined. In the U.S. only about 8% of people who consume alcohol develop alcoholism during their lifetime. The other 92% enjoy alcohol throughout their life without problems. Substance abuse counseling is about helping people who have major life problems due to the misuse of alcohol or other psychoactive drugs. It's not about enforcing societal prohibitions on people who are not causing problems for themselves or others (that's what law enforcement does).

If I use a psychoactive substance in a responsible manner as part of my spiritual practice and it presents no potential harm to others, what exactly is the problem? How does this have anything to do with my helping people who DO have substance use problems? What if it helps me to be a more effective counselor, or helps me to be a better person and member of society?

I rest my case (for now).

The Spirit Molecule

The first time I drank [Santo Daime], I found everything I was looking for. I died and was reborn–the man who drank the Daime never returned; the one who came back was a new man.

–Alex Plolari De Alverga

Forest of Visions

Time for a little break to discuss this new element in my spiritual journey–dimethyltryptamine, or DMT. In physics, the Higgs boson particle is a theoretical particle that gives other particles their mass. It has been dubbed the "God particle" by the media because it could be the source of all matter in the Universe. Likewise, DMT has been called the "Spirit molecule" because it may be the biochemical source of the human spirit or soul.

Let's take a closer look at this mysterious chemical.

So what is dimethyltryptamine? It is both one of the world's most powerful "psychedelic" substances and one of its most ubiquitous–being found in dozens of plants throughout the world. Oh, and one more thing–it's also naturally produced in the human brain. DMT first appears in the brain on the 49^th day of fetal development and, for most of our lives, quietly resides in the pineal gland–an endocrine gland about the size of a grain of rice that sits atop our brain stem. DMT's role in the brain is not fully understood, but the most common theory is that it may have some role in sleep and dreaming. It may, however, have a much more profound role.

University of New Mexico psychopharmacology researcher, Dr. Rick Strassman, did a 5-year research study on DMT involving 60 volunteers. The results of his study are documented in the book and film, DMT: The Spirit Molecule. One of the things participants in Dr. Strassman's study consistently described were experiences virtually identical to those reported by people who have had near death experiences. After receiving an intravenous dose of DMT, participants described being surrounded by a white light and feeling as if they were being lifted up. They would also encounter visions of dead friends and relatives that seemed to be telepathically speaking to them. For many people who have had them, near death experiences are spiritually transforming. They no longer fear death and find their lives significantly more meaningful. It has long been suspected that near death experience phenomenon result from a powerful neurochemical reaction. Dr. Strassman's studies would suggest DMT is a very likely candidate for being this mystery chemical.

Now here's where some interesting coincidences begin. Throughout history, the pineal gland has been associated with human spirituality. Rene Descartes called the pineal the "seat of the soul" and believed it to be the connection between mind and body. The pineal also has a long history of being thought to be the physical location of the "third eye" found in many spiritual traditions. Generally, the "third eye" is believed to be the point of connection between individual and universal consciousness. It has been associated with enlightenment, visions, clairvoyance, and out-of-body experiences.

"Spirit molecule?" "Seat of the soul?" Could it be that DMT's natural function in the human brain is that of a biochemical catalyst linking mind and body with spirit? This contradicts all those spiritual teachers who claim the use of psychoactive substances was not a legitimate spiritual tool. In fact, it appears that many people are regularly using DMT-containing elixirs such as ayahuasca to enhance their spiritual lives.

DMT was around during the Sixties, but was not as widely used as other substances such as LSD, Psilocybin, etc. primarily because of its lack of oral activity. In order to experience the effects of DMT it had to be smoked. When smoked, DMT produces a very intense, but brief effect. The experience is reportedly SO intense that a person is pretty much rendered non-functional because of profound visual effects. It became known as the "businessman's trip" because of its short duration (10-15 minutes) as opposed to the 8-12 hours of other psychedelics (although I doubt there were very many–if any–"businessmen" who ever used it). Its traditional use in South America involves the use of a monoamine oxidase inhibitor to make it orally active. This produces a longer lasting (8-12 hours), but less intense experience.

For most of its history, ayahuasca was known only to indigenous people living deep in the Amazonian rainforest. This changed dramatically in the 1990s with renewed interest in so-called entheogens. In Brazil, two Christian–based churches that use ayahuasca as a sacrament–Santo Daime and União do Vegetal–became so popular the Brazilian government was forced to modify its drug laws to allow for the religious use of ayahuasca. Members of Santo Daime and União do Vegetal frequently give testimonials about how the use of ayahuasca has transformed their lives in positive ways. These are not drugged-out stoners, these are ordinary people who go to church on Sunday. They just happen to have found that using ayahuasca during their religious services helps them deepen their spiritual faith.

These churches have spread not only to other South American countries, but also to Europe and the United States. In 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld a New Mexico State Supreme Court ruling allowing the religious use of ayahuasca by a União do Vegetal church in the United States. Chief Justice John Roberts (yes, THAT John Roberts) wrote the opinion! The basic argument was that the government could not show a "compelling interest" for not allowing the ayahuasca use, other than the fact that it contained an illegal substance. The Courts ruled that this alone was not sufficient.

But if DMT is a schedule one controlled substance, doesn't that mean it's REALLY dangerous? Well, keep in mind, that marijuana is also a schedule one substance. Both cocaine and morphine are listed as schedule two. Using the schedule of controlled substances categories as a gauge of dangerousness, this would mean cocaine and morphine are less dangerous than marijuana. How can this be? Well it's because the controlled substances act–like most drug laws–is highly politicized. Alcohol and tobacco aren't even on the list and they kill more people than all other drugs combined. Any drug can be dangerous–even deadly–if misused. There is scant evidence that DMT itself has any significant negative effects on human functioning. In fact, when used properly, it seems to have beneficial effects. That DOES NOT mean it's safe for anyone and everyone to use.

Substances like DMT–the so-called "psychedelics" or "hallucinogens"–do have very real and potentially fatal consequences if used improperly. Usually this has nothing to do with the substance itself, but the fact that the person ingesting the substance doesn't know what they're getting into and is not using it in an environment that contributes to a spiritual encounter. In traditional societies, such as those of the Amazon rainforest, these substances are not used to "party" or "get high." They are viewed as sacred and used as a spiritual or religious sacrament–not unlike wine is used in Christian communion. Using a substance such as ayahuasca for spiritual purposes has as much in common with substance abuse as using wine to symbolically drink the blood of Christ has with pounding Jaeger bombs. What people who have used these substances understand is that when a person has been properly prepared and uses the substance in a proper setting, they may act as a means of enhancing spiritual knowledge.

DISCLAIMER: THE FOLLOWING IS MY OPINION BASED UPON MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. ALTHOUGH I BELIEVE ADULTS HAVE THE RIGHT TO INFORMED CHOICE WHEN IT COMES TO USING A SUBSTANCE SUCH AS AYAHUASCA FOR BONA FIDE SPIRITUAL OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES, I AM NOT ADVOCATING OR RECOMMENDING SUCH USE.

In my experience, DMT–when taken orally in the form of ayahuasca or an analog–has allowed for a much fuller and deeper understanding of the spiritual knowledge I have been studying over the past 38 years. Since my spiritual studies have primarily been in Taoism, Buddhism, and Natural Pantheism the insights I have gained took the form of concepts within these traditions. I believe that had my studies been in other spiritual traditions, my understandings would have taken a form within those traditions. In essence, it is my opinion that DMT did not impart any specific spiritual knowledge, but rather assisted me in gaining greater awareness, understanding, and appreciation for that which I already knew.

Notes

Entheogen: en–within, theo–god, gen–to create. To create god within. A name given to plant-based psychoactive substances used by traditional societies as religious sacrament.

Santo Daime means Holy Daime, "daime" being the church's name for their ayahuasca sacrament.

União do Vegetal means Union of the Vegetal, "vegetal" being the church's name for their ayahuasca sacrament.

Forest of Visions: Ayahuasca, Amazonian Spirituality, and the Santo Daime Tradition by Alex Polari De Alverga is an excellent introduction the spiritual use of ayahuasca.