This is a very old thread, but I'll say something.
Enlightenment means analytically "being in the light." To be enlightened... But by which light?
Then you see there are many different lights, and some of the lights are little flickerings, which are usually ones that are wired to other ones wired to other ones and so forth. By the time the chain reaches them the energy output is not as strong.
I think "enlightenment" is outdated. To say it is outdated however is not to say it is wrong, or that being contemporary is immediately better. No, I think it begs the platonic question... Which light? How is it? Let's describe its forms and then categorize... etc. etc. And it's all downhill from there.
Christopher Hitchens remarked that Aristotle had drank heavily, although I don't know where he cites this specifically.
I think mushrooms can facilitate something like what we would call 'enlightenment' but... it's really a literal thing that mushrooms do with light, specifically phosphenes, the little lights that dance around when you close your eyes to sleep, and then those are the same lights that make geometrical patterns and.. other interesting imagery.. when you take psychedelics and look into darkness, whether with your eyes closed, or in a dark room, etc. Etc.
These lights are generated by your own eyes, and the occipital cortex processes the sensory data in such a way, that it is not only a process that creates the images... but the very operation of the brain projected onto the darkness as a screen.
You can see your memories projected onto this screen. You can see all kinds of things. And even become a part of the screen and seemingly be interconnections themselves in the midst of the experience. There is a reconfiguration that can happen if you can maintain yourself and know you are safe. This is the most important thing. How I have always done this is knowing exactly the effects of how much I am doing and whatever it is. Knowing the science and history around certain things can provide a safe backdrop for the experience, where whatever strange or disconcerting things you may encounter will be easier to cast aside and think through. There has to be something to ground you, and I think, really, that is love and a good-heartedness, and that is a recognition of humanity and its history. It is a spiritual thing, and when people run from the spiritual aspect of it, they find difficulties. It is exactly what Carl Jung noticed in his patients. He found that many of them were reluctant to tell him directly about what their real spiritual beliefs were. And he found that this is central to people. And this is part of why Carl Jung endeavored in the direction he did. He was, you can say, reaching for Enlightenment. He painted a large book of his dreams, and he wanted to document what the human is, and this is The Red Book. This is Carl Jung's spirituality painted onto those pages because he had to for his own sake, regardless of whether it can be logically explained. Truths may not have an explanation that gives any assurance, but this doesn't mean they should be denied. The debate between Freud and Jung is extensive. I side mostly with Freud, but that is another subject.
Sartre criticized "being an intellectual." He said it was outdated and bourgeois. I think it is the same thing with us.
Michel Foucault, after taking LSD in California, said he burned his first few books because he thought it was not right at all. And he changed his entire outlook. He says in an interview... Well.. He asks the question "What is life before the experience of certain drugs versus after... This is not a marginal question... This is central. This cannot be excluded, the experiences of certain drugs, and how they can subsequently make you see things very differently." I am paraphrasing here.
Enlightenment has this sense of superiority to it. I think Cicero puts the subject how it ought to actually be put... in De Officiis
Quote: Who kindly sets a wand'rer on his way Does e'en as if he lit another's lamp by his: No less shines his, when he his friend's hath lit.”
In this example he effectively teaches us all to bestow even upon a stranger what it costs us nothing to give. On this principle we have the following maxims: Deny no one the water that flows by; Let anyone who will take fire from our fire; Honest counsel give to one who is in doubt; for such acts are useful to the recipient and cause the giver no loss. We should, therefore, adopt these principles and always be contributing something to the common weal. But since the resources of individuals are limited and the number of the needy is infinite, this spirit of universal liberality must be regulated according to that test of Ennius—“No less shines his” —in order that we may continue to have the means for being generous to our friends.
I think everyone has a light to share, and I think we should all believe in our inner lights. We are actually in a real sense made of light... It is cliché at this point, but that always fascinated me.
In order to see the light sometimes another light has to come and allow you to clean out the cobwebs and remove the slime that covers them, or to be able to make the appropriate repairs.
Mushrooms themselves are a tool. They are a spiritual medicine. I call it myself, because I'm an odd person, eccentric or whatever you want to call it MEDICAMENTVM SANCTVM Sacred remedy
I think we do need these sorts of things to keep us from ossifying in our associations in the world, which can lead us down rabbit holes where we feel we cannot mentally escape it, because we lack the sufficient neurological situation to make different connections in a dramatic way. This is what psychedelics do. If one can understand the experience, which entails doing one's own research and 'looking into themselves' then they will find all the answers they need. And then they may see the real wisdom in things like "know thyself", or many other philosophical wisdoms psychedelic (for lack of better words) people throughout the ages have written.
|