Well, I was asked to write my introduction essay; so here I am! Before I begin, I have to say I really appreciate the attitude that's encouraged here at The Nexus. I have been a member of various Online, drug-related forums and have found many to be infested with cliques, arrogance, trolling and all of the other ignorant rubbish one has to put up with on the internet. The only other place I've found that comes close to the attitude here is Mycotopia. Between you and them, I have more psychedelic knowledge than I will ever need! Still, thanks for having me!

I have not tried DMT yet. I have some experience with LSD and more with mushrooms, but I am still a baby in this respect.

My mind was opened to this world when I first had the opportunity to try LSD about 3 years ago. This was an amazing experience and I soon wanted to try again. The acid I had access to was pretty weak, very expensive and was only available sometimes, so my friend and I planned to grow some mushrooms. I got my spores and about two months later I had my first mushrooms! I have gotten a lot out of growing them; it's given me a lot of knowledge and whetted my curiosity for the wacky, wonderful world of entheogens.

I will now explain my "Ethos". I have a pretty unique perspective on the world due to my upbringing. I was raised in a Christian community that became a cult. I left when I was 13 and was home-schooled for several years until I studied computers at technical college. I have been steeped in religion since I was a little kid. This has affected my outlook on life and given me an interesting foundation. That foundation was tested throughout my teenage years as I began to see the problems with organised religion and understand the manipulations and other BS that went on at the community/cult. For a long time, I dismissed all of my religious upbringing and decided it was all rubbish and should be ignored. Slowly, and through lots of hard thinking, I came to a happy medium in myself where I have found a faith that works within my frame of reality.

I would like to share my thoughts and beliefs. I need to say that I am not an "evangelical" Christian, I will not push my views on anyone or get into theological debates. I am interested in discussing my thoughts and beliefs, but I am not trying to tell anyone else that this is how they should live. My faith is personal, and while it colours the way I think and put my ideas across; please don't consider my regular references to religious things as any more than my own take on things. I am NOT preachy!

So, here goes: I believe that God is the Universe. God is infinite, omniscient and omnipresent. Has always been here and always will be. This, in my mind, equals the universe. If God is the universe, he has to also be everything within it. This means that the many psychoactive plants that exist have been put on this world for a purpose, and it's up to us to explore and learn what we can. I doubt it's coincidence that we have receptors in our brains that react so strongly to certain compounds. I can go on more about this, but I think you get my point.

Part of my beliefs is a general code of conduct. I think it can be summed up in one line: "Try not to be a dick." There's more to it than that, but that's basically it.

I think that 90% of what goes on in church today is bullshit. The original biblical definition of "witchcraft" has more to do with deceit and misdirection than with the occult. You look at a lot of the hype and pointless rituals that go on in modern churches (and I'm more talking about modern protestant denominations here, not more traditional catholic or Anglican churches) and you can see a clear link to witchcraft. So many pointless traditions and excess shackles that bind and blind a person rather than liberating their minds and their souls. It's a sad state of affairs. So many misguided people causing so much pain, and for what? A better world?

The atrocities and machinations of the Catholic church could fill pages and pages of text, but it comes down to one thing: People imposing man made traditions over a core of "real" divinity and then using them as a method of control and to gain power.

Terrence McKenna said (and I'm paraphrasing) "I am more inclined to believe a man's mysticism the more personal it is. When he tries to make it relevant to everyone is is when one becomes unstuck." I've taken this to heart. I've worked out my own faith with fear and trembling; it's up to each individual to do it for themselves.

Anyway, enough about religion. I may use religious references when I post, but please don't think that it's me trying my to shove my ideas down anyone else's throat. I'm just sharing my perspectives and point of view.

Psychedelics have changed my life. They have enabled me to condense my beliefs and remove a lot of the dross that was picked up along the way. I have an excellent foundation for my life and intimately understand my place in the universe. A lot of this is ineffable, it cannot be explained by words and my attempts to do so are very poor indeed. With that, I will stop this rambling wall of text, and hope that I've given some insight into who I am.

Hi MerryPrankster,

welcome to the nexus.
I think for some people it is hard to use religiously-associated words such as God etc. because they are so poorly defined and often linked to doctrines, atrocities, completely irrational behavior and beliefs that are sometimes very life-negating and justify terrible things, etc. etc.

Even terms like enlightenment, spirituality, consciousness, and my favorite - the ego, are sometimes hard to grasp and use. I think each of us has his own idea of what these things are and often these ideas remain uncommunicated while we are discussing what on the surface looks like the same thing, but in the end is only the same word with a completely different meaning manifesting in each of these parties.

The psychedelic experience often causes this mystical experience where you feel like you are in the presence of something so very sacred, something divine... Sometimes I feel like there is something watching me, an omniscient sentience that partakes in every moment of existence. A sentience that is existence. I have had moments where I have wanted to scream out to the world that the cosmos is alive, and God is with us.
I am not a religious person. But these feelings exist.

What do we do with these feelings and how do we communicate them? I suppose it is like trying to tell someone about a trip to a different country. Even if you have photos or videos of your trip, nothing will be able to truly give the impressions you had. And even your memories will, for yourself, not be able to re-enact these feelings. It's only real when you are in it IMO. This I think is what is so hard about talking about these things. They are not objective realities that one can point to and with which our language can deal easily. They are something else.

I think however that most things can be communicated well enough and at least give ideas of what these feelings are like. I think art can work in this way and so can proper wording when writing a text. I've personally come to the conclusion that things like enlightenment or God can't really be talked about from an objective perspective without falling way short of their entirety. But when speaking out of these realities while one is still, so to speak, in resonance with the experience thereof, then it becomes much more probable that these concepts can become more transmittable. IMO this goes for almost any concept though. The more you are actively conscious of what you are saying and the flow of the communication, the more will the thing you are communicating about become alive.

And this I think is tantamount to true communication.

So, whatever concepts one chooses to use, whatever references, I think it's primary to reflect upon and consider in detail the aspect of communication there. What kind of communication do we wish to achieve? Is it about objective information (science or so)? Is it about subjective information (relaying an experience)? Is it about intersubjectivity (contact with other beings)? Or is it a combination of all three of them? How can we best achieve this?

Moving on, I guess there is a lot to be said about religion, but personally I don't find it very beneficial to get hung up on it. We've read the history books and we can criticise these organizations and groups at length, but where does that leave us? Instead of responding to these things and thereby continuously reinforcing their existence both in our minds and in the outside world I think we can just acknowledge their existence and our opinion about them and leave it at that. Move on to create a better world. Move on to embrace life in its multifacettedness without the restrictions imposed by systems of belief or trained associations.

I wish you all the best my friend.
Hope to hear from you again,

cheers & love
Enoon

Thanks for the warm welcome. I really appreciate it. This is the first time I've tried to express my own particular feelings on these subjects because on most forums, I'd just be shot down and ridiculed. I am extremely thankful that I can enter into rational discussion about things very dear to my heart. A reason why I am always a little nervous when discussing matters of religion and mysticism are the negative connotations that come along with them. I mention God, Jesus or the Bible and people automatically think of bible bashing, hypocritical, judgmental christians. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of people who call themselves christians are exactly this. I think Ghandi put it best: "I like your Christ, but not your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." I want to put that on a shirt and wear it to church (which I don't attend any more, I've had enough of that to last a lifetime.) Either that or: "Personally, it's not God I dislike, it's his fanclub I can't stand."

A lot of what we're trying to discuss, be it the psychedelic experience or religious/mystic experiences (which at the end of the day, in my mind, amount to the same thing) are entirely ineffable. Language fails to describe what is happening, so we're stuck with trying to muddle along. Once I reach a certain point when tripping on Mushrooms, I almost entirely stop talking because language just seems so inadequate for what's taking place.

I don't get too hung up on religion. I have borrowed a lot of my personal mysticism from Christianity, and because of my personal (negative) involvement with the church I may tend to harp on and draw comparisons from that. I think that organised religion has more downsides than its benefits. I have to quote this bit of your post again:



I could not agree with this more! Too many people spend so much time pointing out the negatives everywhere, rather than getting off their asses and actually doing something about it! Life is too big and amazing to put into a little box. The people who believe they have all the answers are usually the most narrow minded of the lot. The more you know, the more you realise there is to know. I suppose that some people need restrictions imposed on them so they won't hurt themselves or others; but as long as you follow a basic moral code (Try not to be a dick!) everything else is optional.

I think that's enough for now, thanks for the warm welcome! I love this place. The fact that you filter new members helps keep your "temple" pure and unadulterated from the usual detritis that appears on most internet forums. You have my respect for this, and I hope I make a welcome addition!

MerryPrankster,

Welcome to the nexus! Wow I have to say that your intro essay was very well written. I especially like the paragraph about your ethos. I also have experience with being in a cult.
I was born and raised Catholic.

lol!

By the sounds of your intro I understand that religion has been a driving force an different periods of your life, just curious... does religion and use of psychedelics merge at all in your life or how does or how has psychedelics influence your religous/spiritual beliefs?

I look forward to hearing more from the MerryPrankster in the future.

Welcome

IH

Haha, thanks for the welcome Ice House.



I think organised religion is bullshit. It has its uses for some people, but each person needs to work out their own faith. My faith includes psychedelics. I belive that God created everything, therefore he put these plants on the earth for me to use and learn from. It enables me to "see God" in a way that hours in church or days of fasting never did. Whenever I trip, before I ingest whatever substance I'm intending to take, I say a little prayer and give control of the trip over to God. Most religions put their deity into a box, say that God only likes this and that; and it's rubbish. He will use anything to speak to you, if you let it. You just have to be open and hear. Psychedelics have cemented my faith in a higher being more than years in church did. There is much more to this unirvise than I can percieve or even concieve. These substances show me a glimpse of it. And I'm in awe at the wonder and beauty of creation.

These words are impossible to describe the depth of my feelings here. I believe we were created. It doesn't mean I'm a Creationist... They're crackpot fools. Evolution has been pretty much proved, I'm happy to worship what is merely "the universe". It's something infinite and impossible to comprehend. I just think I understand my place in the universe if I'm overawed by that.

Welcome to the Nexus !

So you say you havent tried dmt yet, do you have any plans to? Interested in extractions? What about oral dmt?

Oh and one question: why call god "he"? Considering the misunderstandings regarding the word god in general, dont you think escaping the sexist definition would be one of the ways forward into creating a broader understanding of god and our relationship with the universe?

Good questions. I call god "he" simply because of my upbringing. The way I understand it, it's just an easier pronoun than "it". God is bigger than male or female sexes. I guess it can get lost in translation when talking to other people, though. I don't really put much emphasis on it, though.

I am very interested in DMT, it's why I originally signed up to The Nexus. (Come for the drugs, stay for the people!) I am going to procure some MHRB soon to do my own extraction, but a friend of mine has just acquired some, so I will help him with his extraction and experience DMT that way. Then I can return the favour later on. I am interested in doing an extraction first, then trying other things. Changa fascinates me, simply because of the wide variety of experiences available by mixing in various other plants. Ayahuasca interests me, but I'm not sure if I will experience this any time soon.

I've always been interested in what the christian take is (or should be) regarding psychedelics.

As for "god" being in plants (or putting plants into the world), wouldn't it also be plausible for christians to believe that SATAN altered the plants, as well? After all, one of jesus' biggest hobbies was exorcisms (if you believe stuff written in the new testament--a VERY problematic historic belief itself)--meaning jesus himself held that "demons" can apparently get into anything.

One major problem with christianity is that there can be NO FOOLPROOF WAY to determine whether messages or insights that are revealed to believers are from god or satan. As a matter of fact, members of one sect are quite fond of claiming that revelations of OTHER sects are indeed from satan

You make good points here. I'll try and be as succinct as possible. Firstly, when it refers to Jesus driving out demons, don't think of this as driving out demons "the Exorcist" style. Sure, there might have been a bit of that; but physical diseases and parasites were also considered to be evil spirits or "demons" at the time, so consider it more him healing the sick and driving out parasites.

Christians love to blame "the devil" or Satan for all the ills of the world. This is kind of ridiculous. It says in Genesis that God looked over all he had made and said it was "good". The only way "Satan" could have perverted them is not by perverting the plants directly, but our perceptions of it. The Garden of Eden motif kind of applies here, even though it's obviously allegorical. There are so many stupid christians who will spout all sorts of bullshit. The idea of a malevolent entity out there who is orchestrating all the evils of the world and this evil entity has a bunch of minions to do his bidding is a little crude and the metaphor only goes so far. Humans have free will, they are capable of the most atrocious things ALL ON THEIR OWN. Humans don't need any influence to be violent or to inflict pain on someone. It's just their nature, what's automatically programmed in. It takes discipline and dedication to NOT be these things.

You said "As a matter of fact, members of one sect are quite fond of claiming that revelations of OTHER sects are indeed from satan". A quote I read the other day goes as such "When god starts to hate all the same things you do, it's obvious you're making him in your own image.". Christians are all too guilty of this one.

SWIMfriend, don't you think this is a question every being kind of has to ask himself anyway, regardless of religious context? Are the things I believe in and follow really aimed towards something positive or am I deceiving myself? Or is something else deceiving me. Am I really conscious of the nature of the powers that are present in me; which aspects of my psyche are in control? Thanatos or Eros? How can we ever know for sure other than by the results?

I'm thinking that, if you're going to be a christian, you MUST believe exactly what jesus said (and I'm positively NOT a christian!). So if jesus says there are demons, he has to be taken at his word. Christianity isn't christianity if you don't take all the jesus stuff literally.

But...I probably shouldn't be involved in this discussion--I've been known to be rather caustically "anti-christian" (actually, anti-abrahamic religions in general. actually anti-THEIST in general )

But I'm NOT anti the thoughts expressed in your introduction. It's my opinion that if people want to believe that "god is in everything--or, more directly, god IS everything" then why bother with the "god" part?

It seems more direct and simple to see EVERYTHING as having a "sacred" essence, without invoking the VERY confusing and over-used concept of "god."

Though I'm even iffy about the word "sacred..."

ABSOLUTELY! I think the FUNDAMENTAL REALITY of human consciousness is DELUSION--I think that delusion is EXCLUSIVE to human beings, and that it doesn't exist anywhere else in the universe (i.e., delusion seems to be part of "higher mental function" that can exist in animals like ourselves--or other animals of sufficient conscious development that might exist elsewhere).

I think we should all be asking, all the time, what is true and real, and what is not. IMO if you DON'T, you're not journeying and growing, you're just...reacting.

EVERYTHING IS TRUE...except a lot of the stuff in our heads. That's an interesting state of affairs, actually.

Enoon, you summed up what I was trying to say so eloquently. I agree with everything you say.


I understand what you're saying SWIMfriend, and I really appreciate the fact that we can have this discussion, even though we're on completely opposite sides of the fence. I ignore a lot of the legalistics of christianity and focus more on the essence. Unfortunately, a lot of the words I use to describe my thoughts are from a religious context, with all of the connotations attatched so the overall meaning gets diluted.

Two things though: First, I don't think that the bible is meant to be taken 100% literally. There are gaps in language, translation and intent that cannot be divided. There has also been heavy editorial work done. The first 5+ books of the bible were compiled by the deuteronomists who took a bunch of loose writings and put them into a solid work. They did a lot of heavy editorial work, including adding the bit about "A copy of this book is in heaven and therefore the words in this are immutable". I think they did this as a bit of informational hygiene, but that's another story. A lot of christians think that once they're "saved" they can throw their brain out and don't have to keep thinking.

Secondly, I use the term God because that's what I'm comfortable with. It's what I've grown up with and I can fit that into my view of the universe, which I think is pretty balanced. That's just the label I attatch to make it easier for me. There's a lot of convoluted thoughts and feelings behind that, but that's just how it is. Words like divinity, sacred, god, enlightenment, spirituality, etc all have subjective connotations that mean different things to different people. It's impossible to put across an untainted idea. But that's just a limitation of human language. I use the language that I'm personally comfortable with, even though it might invoke different meanings for other people. I hope I'm making some sense here!

MerryPrankster,

I have to bow out of this. It's not appropriate to hijack your introduction thread with religious debate.

hehe, but I can't resist one final word: Those who profess "christian" faith must admit that the originating SOURCE of their faith MUST be the bible; it's all there is from which to learn about jesus. To then say that the bible may not be ACCURATE, but that they still believe in "christianity" is to make up one's own religion. If the bible doesn't relate literally true things, then christianity is just something you've created from your own imagination.

...not that there's anything WRONG with that...but (from experience) such inventions invariably then pick and choose from the bible, and THEN proceed to PRETEND that certain things from the bible ARE true, while others not. The entire process becomes a mass of delusion, based upon another mass of delusion. Some people actually imagine they're "sophisticated," by removing the "bronze age superstition" from the bible...not realizing that, once you do that, you might as well throw the entire bible out and start fresh (i.e., just make it up as it suits you).

....and, if I'm not already ENTIRELY HORRIFIED by most of the theist religions of antiquity, I'm even MORE horrified by all the cultish variants that continue to be MADE UP fresh (as you say you were subject to yourself in your youth).

I'll admit to my personal sensitivity to what I see as the great harm caused by "god cults."

I actually have more respect for insane fundamentalist christians (or the muslim taliban)--who have something that can be called "integrity" in trying to take literally the information from their ancient texts--than those who would claim those texts are "wrong" and then turn around and USE THEM to invent yet a new religion.

Sorry. Just my pet peeve, having been brought up in a country that plasters "In God We Trust" on everything.

what about gnosticism - which is also considered a christian sect - where they claim that the direct experience of the divine is over all, not the bible?

It's useless for me to get into arguments about theology.

For me, any "theo," in one way or another, has to relate to an "entity," and an entity has to--in at least some way--involve a specific "personality."

I don't think personalities, and especially not personality "cults," are a source or goal of "truth," or a method or utility of finding truth.

If you think that "everything is divine," etc., then there's no use SPECIFYING IT as a name or entity. That's my point.

And as soon as you SPECIFY IT, you're saying that reality is ONE THING, and NOT ANOTHER THING...and you're obviating your "everything is divine" perception.

i have to interject here swim, your words sound authoritarian on the subject and the definition of Christianity. they seem to plainly state what Christianity is and what Christians should believe however they are incorrect.

if there are any Christians in the house correct me if i am wrong but im pretty sure the only qualifying factor to being a Christian is the belief of 3 things, that Christ was the son of god and that he died on the cross and ascended into heaven. some require a baptism but not all do.

secondly- there are Christian groups that are direct translational thinkers meaning they take every single word at face value ie the rapture 7 headed dragons from the sea, garden of eden talking snakes ext.... and there are Christan groups that feel the words in the bible shouldn't be taken literally and have a more realistic approach to translating the bible. they are all Christians though.

im not a fan of Christianity. actually its something i need to keep in check so i dont start feeding the world with negative emotions but i do know they are very diverse and such a black and white definition of them wouldnt be accurate.

to the OP MerryPrank- welcome my freind. your very well spoken and your intro has brought some great insights to the nexus already. you feel like a great addition to the community. cheers

^^ You're right. "Christianity" can be anything that any christian wishes to say that it is (which can include arbitrarily saying that it is fundamentally only THREE things, taken from the bible, and not the OTHER things in the bible).

But with that level of vagueness or mutability, why say it's anything at all?

...thus, in any practical or real sense, it's "whatever anybody decided today to call it."

EDIT: But, in trying to have any sort of serious conversation (a conversation where something MEANS something), it's difficult to include elements that can mean almost anything--but which nevertheless are expected to be taken SERIOUSLY.

^^ yup, even the Christians get to choose ther own reality i guess

In integral theory there are three faces to God or the divine experience.

1) personal - recognizing the divine within - your higher self or the ultimate self-consciousness within you.

2) interpersonal - an "I/you" relationship to the divine. Seeing the divine as an exterior being 'other' than you. This creates a relationship to the divine very different from 1)

3) objective - the divine is in all things, it is out there, it is the context of existence...

Religion often only concerns itself with one or maximally two of these facets of experiencing the ineffable or engaging in what we perceive as a deeper order that is not directly apparent but is in some way related to consciousness.

This is in response to SWIMfriend's comment about 'theo' necessarily relating to an entity. That would be 2) in the integral theory approach. But the broader scope of the spiritual experience can still contain the divine without focusing solely on this 2) aspect of it. Personally I enjoy all three facets and I find 2) very helpful and inspiring at times. But I've made my peace with all these connotations that used to evoke in me gag reflexes and stomach cramps. I can use the terms God, spirituality and enlightenment with a clear conscience these days because I have a clear idea of what they mean to me personally, which is free from historical traumas in the collective consciousness that usually seem to be linked to these words and make them so hard for us to stomach. The idea of considering the cosmos to be a supreme being, a kind of super personality does not bother me, because I see it as just one way of looking at it. One of three, or one of an uncountable myriad.

I think for me the noteworthy thing to say is that we are talking about something we experience, something that is real primarily only through our experience. This means that communicating this will always be more difficult than giving simply objective information about say 'how to put together a piece of furniture'. On the other hand considering that we all share common structures, it would follow that we all share common abilities to experience certain things. Mystical experiences are one of these things and thus I think it is valuable to establish communication about these 'realities' or these experiences.

I don't see the point in arguing about what Christians do or don't do with their scriptures. Our individual explorations of consciousness seem to pose these questions regardless of confession, once one delves deep enough, and provides these experiences as well. What is the deeper order, why are we here and where are we going? What is the self, this existence, what is consciousness and where does it end/begin?
Expanding beyond the body during high doses of psychedelics, communicating with omniscient entities, connecting to the cosmic process, feeling your self flood with sublime energy... We can just as well use different words for them and speak of God here; it doesn't matter as long as we understand that we are speaking of experiences rather than abstract concepts. Because then I think this word really does have meaning, and not just something arbitrary, but something that is accessible by all humans IMO.