Are alcohol/drug induced mystical experinces valid?

[JohnDamian]

This is being approached the wrong way.

I shall start by saying; Alcohol or Drugs cannot induce a mystical experience.

Thus;

A mystical experience is one of God; an experience of God is not induced by the consumption of things; but by a real and willing communion with God.

Firstly; We can see in the communion; by the act of the person of Christ the materials of bread and wine are substantially changed into that with which one can partake in mystically; that is; in sacramental and real communion with God.

This communion necessarily is a product of Christ acting through the Priest; or “in persona Christi”; “in the person of Christ”.

Now; onto “experiences” with drugs and alcohol.

It is plausuble people who have consumed certain drugs or alcohol may have a mystical experience; but that mystical experience is **not **induced by the drugs or alcohol; but by God himself - he is the author of the mystical; not some chemical.

 

[Moonstruck888]

Not all mystical experiences have anything to do with the Christian God, and it matters not a jot what method is used to bring about the experience.

So yes, they are as valid.

 

[JohnDamian]

Not all mystical experiences have anything to do with the Christian God, and it matters not a jot what method is used to bring about the experience.

So yes, they are as valid.

Mystical experiences are essentially communion with God; some religions which are not God centered; or perhaps do not even have God’s; such as some sects of Buddhism maintain that Mystical experiences are still a communion with some spiritual reality.

What definition of “mystical”; are you using Moonstruck; for I fear a misunderstanding is inevitable if we have equivocal use of the word.

 

[Moonstruck888]

Mystical experiences are essentially communion with God; some religions which are not God centered; or perhaps do not even have God’s; such as some sects of Buddhism maintain that Mystical experiences are still a communion with some spiritual reality.

What definition of “mystical”; are you using Moonstruck; for I fear a misunderstanding is inevitable if we have equivocal use of the word.

Mysticism: (from the Greek μυστικός, mystikos, an initiate of a mystery religion) is the pursuit of communion with, identity with, or conscious awareness of an ultimate reality, divinity, spiritual truth, or God through direct experience, intuition, instinct or insight. …

I’m refering to personal experience. Using LSD, I’ve had mystical experiences of incredible power and vividness.

 

[JohnDamian]

Mysticism: (from the Greek μυστικός, mystikos, an initiate of a mystery religion) is the pursuit of communion with, identity with, or conscious awareness of an ultimate reality, divinity, spiritual truth, or God through direct experience, intuition, instinct or insight. …

I’m refering to personal experience. Using LSD, I’ve had mystical experiences of incredible power and vividness.

Ok; out of interest which of these did you feel you were in communion or identity with?

If I were to guess I would presume “an ultimate reality”; but then again I don’t want to invest too much in a guess.

And; can you be sure that your reason was not impaired by the use of such materials?, and can you be sure it was caused by the substances themselves; and not by that which was percieved?

 

[Moonstruck888]

Ok; out of interest which of these did you feel you were in communion or identity with?

I can’t explain what it was like. I felt as if I was interconnected with everything and had access to all information. It was powerful. Very emotional. It was accompanied by an ecstasy the likes of which I have only ever felt anything remotely comparable with on a handful of occasions before or since.

If I were to guess I would presume “an ultimate reality”; but then again I don’t want to invest too much in a guess.

I’d imagine everyone who is fortunate in having one of these Nirvikalpi Samhadi experiences feels pretty much the same thing, but relies on the narrative of his belief system to explain it. As such, I tried to explain it to myself in a scientific / cyber-hippy context.

And; can you be sure that your reason was not impaired by the use of such materials?, and can you be sure it was caused by the substances themselves; and not by that which was percieved?

My reason was not impaired. One effect LSD has is in enhancing the activity in the temporal lobe, the part of the brain that reconciles emotional concerns with intellectual analysis.

 

[JohnDamian]

I can’t explain what it was like. I felt as if I was interconnected with everything and had access to all information. It was powerful. Very emotional. It was accompanied by an ecstasy the likes of which I have only ever felt anything remotely comparable with on a handful of occasions before or since.

To be fair; a feeling of interconnectedness is not per se mystical. Not to impugn what sounds like a rather good experience; I cannot see how it is connected to anything spiritual; godly; mystical etc – or even for that matter an “ultimate reality”; since as you put it it seems that substances such as LSD merely excite the physical functions of the brain to increase and alter perceptions and analysis.

Having grown up with some distinctly odd literary influences; from J.Lilly to Ouspensky I have yet to see a convincing account of a mystical experience that cannot be understood simply as an experience.

 

[Moonstruck888]

Having grown up with some distinctly odd literary influences; from J.Lilly to Ouspensky I have yet to see a convincing account of a mystical experience that cannot be understood simply as an experience.

Excellent. You’re learning. There is no experience of any kind, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be any experience that cannot be understood simply as an experience.

And profound as my experience was, it was the same as ever single other mystical experience any human being has ever had, explicable as an experience.

Fortunately, I wasn’t left with a strange compulsion to drag any of my relatives up to a mountain top and attack them with a sharp instrument.

 

[JohnDamian]

Excellent. You’re learning. There is no experience of any kind, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be any experience that cannot be understood simply as an experience.

Now now; I thought you were suppost to be the critical atheist – we cannot assume that there is necessarily an explanation or understanding for every experience or thing that occurs. That is called in philosophy the “principle of sufficient reason” – advocating it universally as a total rule requires more faith than believing in God!!!

Just because I have neither experienced; nor heard of an experience; which qualifies as a “mystical experience” in a universal sense does not mean it is impossible; or for that matter; potential. Even Biblical accounts are only, objectivelly speaking “experiences”; it is only through faith and not reason that we can believe that they are “mystical experiences”.

Nonetheless; it would be overconfident to argue a hard version of the principle of sufficient reason – not everything must happen for a knowable reason; to assume that would be fallacious.

Fortunately, I wasn’t left with a strange compulsion to drag any of my relatives up to a mountain top and attack them with a sharp instrument.

The binding of Isaac makes a very interesting study; to which nothing immoral was contained. A healthy adult allows his father; who is around a hundred years old; to sacrifice him and they both agree it is a good thing, Speaking ethically; as both were following their convictions; and both were happy to follow their convictions; and neither were miserable at the (potential) consequences of their actions, and the action itself is not objectivelly immoral, the action is a just and ethical one.

But that is a different topic alltogether…

 

[Moonstruck888]

Now now; I thought you were suppost to be the critical atheist – we cannot assume that there is necessarily an explanation or understanding for every experience or thing that occurs. That is called in philosophy the “principle of sufficient reason” – advocating it universally as a total rule requires more faith than believing in God!!!

Just because I have neither experienced; nor heard of an experience; which qualifies as a “mystical experience” in a universal sense does not mean it is impossible; or for that matter; potential. Even Biblical accounts are only, objectivelly speaking “experiences”; it is only through faith and not reason that we can believe that they are “mystical experiences”.

It most certainly does not require more faith than belief in God. If I drop a glass, it will fall at 32 feet per second per second. That is because the freefall speed in Earth’s gravity field is 32 feet per second per second. Now, it does not require much faith at all to accept that if I drop a glass in ten minutes time it will fall at freefall speed.

SInce people have been having mystical experiences since long before Jesus was born in places where there was no experience of the Israelite God, it seems to me that I do not require faith to accept that the Israelite God is not necessary for mystical experiences to occur.

Nonetheless; it would be overconfident to argue a hard version of the principle of sufficient reason – not everything must happen for a knowable reason; to assume that would be fallacious.

If there’s something we can’t know then we’ll never know it. If we can know something then one day we will.

Q. If a tree falls in a forest in the absence of an observer does it make a sound?

A. Who gives a ****?

The binding of Isaac makes a very interesting study; to which nothing immoral was contained. A healthy adult allows his father; who is around a hundred years old; to sacrifice him and they both agree it is a good thing, Speaking ethically; as both were following their convictions; and both were happy to follow their convictions; and neither were miserable at the (potential) consequences of their actions, and the action itself is not objectivelly immoral, the action is a just and ethical one.

In an enlightened society they would both have been sectioned under the Mental Health ACT as a danger to themselves and others, and locked up for their own protection.

 

[Light1111]

I think the question can be tricky, due to our associations as we read the words “alcohol and drugs.” For the average person, particularly one raised in Catholicism, it would be difficult to argue that yes, such mystical experiences are valid (or could possibly come from the light, from God, etc.).

However, it seems to me that for those cultures who use those substances only to attain to a certain place within the mind and spirit, through which one then connects to the Source or to God, there can be (and has been) mystical validity.

The Native American traditions have used certain plants and tobacco in spiritual ritual, where reverence to the Creator is upheld–not a desire to “get high.”

But like I said, if you are from outside that tradition and have not been raised in it, and have not been introduced to it, it might be difficult to approach the “ceremony,” so to speak, with the proper reverence, respect, and sincerity necessary to achieve the results that Native Americans achieve.

I read a great book where the author attempts to visit tribes in Peru, to partake of a hallucinogenic plant they use in ritual. Where the tribal elders received visits from Angels, and felt themselves to have met God, the American visitor had terrible, horrific experiences, from which the elders needed to apply their focused concentration to assist him in “coming down.” He had a “bad trip,” I guess you’d say. To me it sounded like he simply didn’t have the proper preparatory context in which to participate in this ritual. Also he probably carried his baggage with him, the idea that you do just “get high” when using such substances, while the elders had no such association to the drug. To them, one uses it only to attain to a higher spiritual calling; “getting high” is not even a consideration.

I wonder though, perhaps from time to time as a person is socially drinking, he has had a spiritual encounter, unwittingly. I myself haven’t but don’t discount the possibility. God speaks to us in strange ways!

The main reason I find this could potentially be a valid form of mystical experience, is because of the great respect I have for the unconscious. If one is able to “lift up the layer” that separates one’s unconscious from the conscious, he ought to have a better ability to “meet his spiritual side.” Conditioning and socialization can make us feel that “we are not special enough” to have a mystical experience where we can truly know God. That is the purpose of hypnotism, for instance – to lift up that separation between the conscious and the unconscious. For most individuals, if they have not spent time in contemplative prayer or meditation, reaching beyond the conscious self is an arduous task, and seldom achieved. Prayer typically comes from the conscious self, thus limiting the extent to which one can feel they’ve truly “met God,” in their prayer experience.