Illegal drugs and this forum

Just my 2 cents, I understand the 5th precept as being against all intoxicants-- both drugs and alcohol. I see much harm in posts promoting use of intoxicants, but much value in threads helping people quit using them.

That said, I don’t know that the moderators here are asking our opinion on what to do with these kinds of threads so I am not sure this very discussion is worthwhile unless they are interested in hearing.

2 Likes

Except “intoxicants” is so broad that it usually means anything we don’t like.

It’s common for some Theravada monks to smoke in Theravada countries. It’s definitely not good, but is it breaking the precept? Should they be expelled for it?

In the West, a new attitude towards the use of psychedelics is beginning to change the psychological profession’s opinion on these substances. One can easily see a time when they would be used as part of treatment. Even now, many take part in traditional Shamanic rituals in which these substances are used in a ritual context.

Should Buddhists who participate in this be seen as breaking the precept? These are important questions and I think relevant questions.

Buddhists in the modern age will be facing these questions more and more, and a rigid and irrational response which just labels all these things as intoxicants won’t be acceptable to most.

At least it isn’t to me.

3 Likes

I would regard breaking legal laws of wherever I am, and regardless of differences in personal opinions about use or misuse of any substances to rather be a question about wholesome or unwholesome acts - it does not comply with total practice in my opinion, or will create unnecessary doubt.
Personally I have no doubt about the negative aspects on my own ability to be mindful when taking just one little sip of alcohol - it doesn’t mean I become heedless by such a minor amount, but the mind becomes closed off for that which sees, and leaves me stuck with my dumber mind - and since I discovered the eightfold path quite late in this life, im sick and tired of my dumber self, no need to spend time with that character any more

its just not worth braking the nice but vulnerable tread of constant awareness, for so little fun

Be sober and bright! :apple:

:slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like

The precepts which I take chant every day are translated (at Abhayagiri too) as “I undertake the precept to refrain from consuming intoxicating drink and drugs which lead to carelessness”. That’s informs my understanding about the precept. That means alcohol and drugs which cause intoxication.

There are innumerable places in the canon which the Buddha specifically encourages practitioners to hold the precepts and encourage others to keep them, and also discourage others from breaking them. As someone who holds the 5 precepts and sometimes 8 (trying for 8 full time currently), I view it as my responsibility to discourage anyone from using drugs when the subject comes up or I am asked my opinion.

I do not find it the least bit compelling to say that because aspects of modern culture outside of Buddhism (shamanic rituals/modern psychology/new age) have an interest in psychedelics and drugs that Buddhists need to change how we approach basic morality. The dhamma is fine the way it is and has no need to change its morality because the modern world doesn’t view its values as “acceptable”.

This forum is about dhamma at least as I understand it-- there are many places online to discuss drugs, shamnistic practices, psychology, etc. but very few dhamma talk places…

2 Likes

This is part of the point I was trying to make. Legal and illegal are not constants.

I agree that Dhamma can and should be applied to all aspects of living in the current age.

This includes applying Dhamma when discussing the idea that some topics should be banned.

As with so many things in the Suttas, when interpreting things in real life examples, a whole range of things need to be considered. This compound-topic is so complex that it requires a great deal of ‘un-packing’ to be able to handle it with wisdom. Far too great for this type of discussion.

Eg I’d suggest that as a first step it is split in 2 categories

  1. dhamma as it pertains to banning discussion and,
    2 Intoxicating substances and their use (legal or illegal).

I’d say the dhamma position on intoxicating substances is pretty clear - ie that the Buddha advised against them

But the first one, I would be interested to know what the Buddha said about censorship.

https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/sorry-guys-we-wont-being-having-a-practice-corner/5624?source_topic_id=6071

I just found this topic which partly answers some of the concerns questions on the topic of banning topics about illegal drug use.

I’d still like to know what the Suttas say about restriction of debate and questions, on censorship and issues related to banning content. I’ll try to set up a new topic and a link to it

Learning the system :grin:

here it is :smiley:

A key phrase of that concern is “wrongly associate” – thus wrongly infer, wrongly come to a conclusion that. With enough imagination any dharma can be said to “open space for people to wrongly associate” the EBTs with approval for some act or belief.

I would caution any group of principled persons about adopting similar reasoning. One can imagine or that some other person(s), through a chain of specious “reasoning” (a wrong association), might come to a wrong, so-called “conclusion”.

There may be a collective judgement about the appropriate level of danger/concern from wrong associations in the number of times the responding comments refer to it.

2 Likes

This is begging the question.

You’re assuming that the fifth precept covers all possible substances called “drugs” by modern culture. You’re assuming all these substances are “intoxicating” (a term which you haven’t even defined or tied to any classical pali term - I take it you mean associated with pamada, but that need not include every substance called “drug”).

The question is really which drugs directly cause pamada?

That’s definitely not an easy or simple question to answer, its quite a complicated phenomenological and psychological question actually.

I agree alcohol does and so does marijuana. The former because the Buddha directly said this, and the latter because its pretty clear from modern psychological studies that marijuana affects memory.

But as far as other substances goes (like certain popular shamanic “medicines”), you are reaching and making claims without evidence.

4 Likes

I met a few 20-something “shamans” at house parties in university. They have a pretty open-concept notion of what a ritual is sometimes! :sweat_smile:

Fake teachers are a problem in every tradition no? I’ve heard quite a few stories of fake monks asking for money in New York.

2 Likes

There are no shamanic influences in EBT that I know of.

with metta

1 Like

Clearly not, but there’s nothing in the precepts or EBTs which say that Dhamma follower cannot participate in a shamanic ceremony or use these substances - unless said substance causes pamada.

And even that is arguable, given that these traditions see themselves as healers and these substances are seen as medicine, and we know the Buddha allowed substances which caused pamada to be used as long as they were medicine.

To technically if Western psychology were to accept these substances and incorporate it into its practice, a Buddhist could take them (presumably under the supervision of a therapist trained in this) and not break the precept.

I’m just arguing the same would apply to traditional healers who use ayahuasca or psilocybe cubensis, etc.

Obviously this requires the presence of the traditional healer or modern therapist who is a professional. This does not mean that a Buddhist can take these substances willy nilly for recreational reasons - that would break the precept.

1 Like

After a certain point, you have to decide if you are practicing the Buddhist path, or not. If you want to practice shamanism, that is fine, but let’s not pretend that the Buddha approved of the use of drugs for spiritual practice. He very clearly didn’t.

You can try to force a square peg into a round hole and claim there is a loophole in the precept which allows someone to use drugs, but let’s be honest-- those who want to use drugs will always find a justification. Mental gymnastics abound.

1 Like

You didn’t really address much of what I said.

He very clearly didn’t.

Where? I’m not saying he did, just that he didn’t argue against it either. He could have easily said: Don’t take soma, its intoxicating. He didn’t

1 Like

If you have them close at hand, I’d appreciate citations to the EBT and/or a online reference to the topic that has the citations.

Regarding medicinal marijuana:

Like many people before and since, the Buddha recognized the medicinal value of cannabis and he recommended it as a cure for rheumatism (aṅgavāta). The patient should be placed, he said, in a small room filled with steam from a tub of boiling water and cannabis leaves (bhaṅgodaka), and inhale the steam and rub it on the limbs (Vin.I,205).

https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Cannabis

Regarding alcohol, Bhikkhu Bodhi says:

The taking of intoxicants is defined as the volition leading to the bodily act of ingesting distilled or fermented intoxicants.[10] It can be committed only by one’s own person (not by command to others) and only occurs through the bodily door. For the precept to be violated four factors are required: (1) the intoxicant; (2) the intention of taking it; (3) the activity of ingesting it; and (4) the actual ingestion of the intoxicant. The motivating factor of the violation is greed coupled with delusion. No gradations of moral weight are given. In taking medicines containing alcohol or intoxicating drugs for medical reasons no breach of the precept is committed. There is also no violation in taking food containing a negligible amount of alcohol added as a flavoring.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel282.html

this essay

cites the Horner translation of the Vinaya for allowing medicinal intake of alcohol:

Horner IB (1969) The Book of the discipline. (Vinaya-Piṭaka). Sacred books of the Buddhists, vol 13. Luzac, London, pp. 385–386

1 Like

That’s not going to get someone intoxicated.

1 Like

By your argument as long as in the Suttas don’t specifically prohibit drugs, by name, then it doesn’t break a precept? :thinking:

Well putting some substance into your body, that hasn’t been thoroughly tested against a set of standards, is not having much loving-kindness towards oneself. We aren’t living in a time when such testing isn’t available.

The intention for using these substances is also important. If the intention is intoxication, hallucination etc and not genuinely medicinal, then there is a problem. They may be harmful on the long term - I have come across many young people who may have not developed Paranoid schizophrenia if they haven’t been smoking skunk which affected their teenage brains.

Those people who are addicted due to underlying emotional problems bring upon themselves another layer of complications relating to the substances they are abusing. It takes a long time to overcome one problem, if only to get to the underlying core problems, because therapy wont work for an intoxicated mind and the medication wont work for an intoxicated body. It is tough situation- I am sympathetic, but having seen two different cultures handle addiction, I cant say having a relaxed attitude within a community towards it makes things better. It makes thing worse, IMO.

4 Likes

By your argument as long as in the Suttas don’t specifically prohibit drugs, by name, then it doesn’t break a precept?

No that’s not what I said. To break the precept one must have the intention to take a substance which causes heedlessness (pamada), and it can’t be for a medicinal reason (ie its done recreationally or just to feel pleasure/hallucinate etc).

Note, other Buddhist traditions allow certain psychoactive substances in their rituals such as small amounts of grain alcohol, I’m mainly thinking of Tibetan Buddhists. Do they break the precept while doing this? They argue that they do not since it is done for tantric reasons. Clearly this is not in the EBTs but one could say they are using it in a controlled ritual setting and that perhaps this is allowable as a form of spiritual practice.

My point boils down to this: it is mostly about your intention, not so much about literal ingestion.

2 Likes