• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Why do all the major religions frown upon drugs?

The main objective of most organized religions is to manipulate and control its their followers... it's a little hard to do so when they're all off getting high some where.

Seriously though, I believe it has to do with the fact that a drug induces a "false" and unnatural state of mind... at least thats the buddhist perspective.
 
wastedwalrus said:
Seriously though, I believe it has to do with the fact that a drug induces a "false" and unnatural state of mind... at least thats the buddhist perspective.
Click to expand...

yeah i'm christian and that's my perspective too.
 
ENTHEOGENS anyone??

I dont know a lot but i think that e.g in Zen or certain schools of Buddhism it wouldn't be frowned upon if the person is not ATTACHED to it but just uses iit as a tool towards enlightenment.
 
I'd like to clear up a stereotype about the buddhist philosophy. A lot of people I've spoken with believe that drugs are condoned in buddhism. This couldn't be more far from the truth... It's forbidden to indulge in intoxicants.
 
I'd like to clear up a stereotype about the buddhist philosophy. A lot of people I've spoken with believe that drugs are condoned in buddhism. This couldn't be more far from the truth... It's forbidden to indulge in intoxicants.
Click to expand...

Different schools of buddhism have different views on the subject..
Indeed some consider psychedelics as 'false enlightenment'..

But take Tibetan Buddhism for example ;)

In zen I think the use of entheogens is not frowned upon as long as the individual uses them as tools, and is not attached to the experience repeating it every now and then but stops taking the 'drug' when there's no point or when he feels like he can't get anything more from it...
 
wastedwalrus, I never got that either. Most serious buddhists would definitely agree that drugs cloud the mind, so they hinder the search for ultimate clarity.

I think a lot of people mistakenly think of Buddhism as permissive in many ways because it doesn't seek to force its ways on anyone, especially through public policy. It doesn't say "doing that is a sin and/or makes you a bad person". It simply says "doing that won't help you. it's your choice, but when it doesn't take you where you want to go, don't say we didn't warn you."

Buddhists feel no need to come down hard on drug users on principle, just like organizers of marathons don't need to make a rule against runners drinking coca cola instead of water. That doesn't necessarily mean they're supportive or encouraging.

Part of this lore might come from confusing and associating the homophones Buddha and Buddah, the latter of which I would guess comes from 'bud' and has no common root with the former.
 
drugs and religion are the same. there is no differentiating in the end effects. i've never been able to feel the difference in elevation of emotion and bodily function by way of drugs and by way of religion. i was religious before i did drugs. both are entirely, completely, and ultimately psychedelic.
 
I believe it has to do with the fact that a drug induces a "false" and unnatural state of mind... at least thats the buddhist perspective.
Click to expand...

Good point. I believe the Christian bible states that we shouldn't do some drugs because "it takes us away from the protection of god". Which is true I believe, ever had a bad trip? Or maybe it could mean that drugs can lead you to addiction which makes you not yourself.
 
psychedelicious said:
drugs and religion are the same. there is no differentiating in the end effects. i've never been able to feel the difference in elevation of emotion and bodily function by way of drugs and by way of religion. i was religious before i did drugs. both are entirely, completely, and ultimately psychedelic.
Click to expand...


Drugs induce temporary states.

Religions develop permanent states.



There are very strong connections between the two but very important differences as well.
 
I don't think religions frown upon drugs as they do upon addiction and the stuff that is associated with drug use. Then again what is a drug? Caffiene and heroin are both drugs. What if I take xanax for anxiety and someone else for pleasure? Are we both sinners? I don't even believe that religion even discourages recreational drug usage. Alcohol is a drug and Jesus had wine.

Your body is a temple according to religion and anything you do that might harm it is considered a sin. It's not the drug, but the obsession that religion wants to abolish as well as the negative effects of drug usage. Smoking pot all the time makes most people lazy, yet so does eating a lot of cheeseburgers.
 
TruthSpeaker1 said:
Alcohol is a drug and Jesus had wine.
Click to expand...

Jesus had wine pumping through his veins! In the words of Peter Griffin, "Man, this guy must have been wasted 24/7!"
 
yougene said:
Drugs induce temporary states.

Religions develop permanent states.



There are very strong connections between the two but very important differences as well.
Click to expand...

a drug user can stay as high on drugs as he or she chooses, for as long as he or she chooses. a relgious person stays as holy/high as he or she chooses for as long as he or she chooses. religion has opened my eyes to the potential of the mind and soul, as have drugs. both resulted in a permanent state, but the primary effects of both drugs and religion are no longer with me, unless i choose to redose/meditate/worship. these are my experiences, what are yours?

it seems to me that drugs and religion in combination yield far greater enlightenment than either singly, and i have a great appreciation of this. just another thing to put out there. and as somebody in this thread has already mentioned, at the root of all religious organizations, there is a psychoactive something or other. i think that, in the beginning of human history, we did not have the luxury of being able to just sit around and ponder higher things, but that we spent our energies trying to survive. in order for humans to experience god/enlightenment, we were 'given' psychedelics. now that our civilization has evolved to the point where we no longer need to spend so much of our lives trying to survive, religion as a social phenomenon is far more prevalent than religion as a drug phenomenon. both are equally important, though separated by time and social progress.
 
I love how Christians believe God put everything natural on this earth yet they reject marijuana as if it's as bad as cocaine or heroin.
 
sc4t said:
I love how Christians believe God put everything natural on this earth yet they reject marijuana as if it's as bad as cocaine or heroin.
Click to expand...

yeah because everything that natually occured on eath is good for you to consume.
 
Does anyone have sources for these claims that major religions prohibit drug use? I want specific actual scripture quotes here, and not vague ones that you could possibly interpret any way you want.
 
As far as I can tell, there's nothing in Jewish or Catholic scripture against the act of substance use. C'mon, Jesus in the New Testament turned fuckin' water into wine! And they mentioned it at least four times! If that's not a goddamn endorsement, I'm not sure what is anymore.

But I did happen to chance across a nice little vignette in Genesis, the book of Noah specifically, that actually demonstrates said character getting drunk to the point of him passing out without any clothes on. And then one of his sons, I think it was Shem, sees his father's naked body and decides his(Shem's) two brothers(Ham and Japheth, for those of you that care) really needed to know about it.

And as far as I can tell, alcohol is the only Judeo-Christian mind-altering substance really mentioned. But I think these examples I picked out really show the idea "they" were trying to get across:

Sure, alcohol(and drugs, by logical extension) are fun, but don't go overboard and make an ass out of yourself. Making an ass out of yourself is not a cool thing to do. Your perverted son might see you naked.

I'm not really sure where the total ban came from. I know that Islam has a ban against it. I think it was American Puritannical ancestry that started it, which offshooted into Temperance movements, something about heroin addiction in the late 1800's, and we get drugs are bad. I'm not sure how religion got into there, referencing my earlier example of JESUS TURNING WATER INTO FUCKING WINE, but I digress. My theory is that someone threw in a J-bomb with a couple of G-bombs, and the sheep followed. And the Puritans got it from the Calvinists, I think.

Just my thoughts, with some vauge scripture references and some extremely abbreviated, probably wrong history. Have a nice day.
 
Last edited:
Yeah Coolio, I wasn't referring so much to doctrine as to the attitudes among followers that tend to hold sway. We can argue all day long like a couple of old Orthodox Jewish men about dogma as it's written, but when it comes down to it, it's how people nowadays feel about an issue that really matters. Many religious people form opinions about things not with reference to ancient codices, but just because that's what their clergy or follow congregation members taught them to think. Obviously then, many religious institutions see it as practical to promote the attitude of being against drugs, as have many in the past.

The exact quote from the Koran goes something like "Strong drink and games of chance are very sinful." And that's it. The Hadith might expound upon why alcohol is wrong, but I haven't read it. I interpret this Koranic verse to imply that anything potentially addictive or abusable, anything that gives instant gratification, ought to be avoided because of its enormous power to corrupt.

I was raised Catholic and went to Catholic school, and I can tell you the majority of practicing Catholics I've known look down upon drug users as 'weak' and 'diseased'. They're not sinners per se until they hurt others due to their habit. But they're definitely shamed, gossipped about, and treated with a sort of snide pity in Catholic communities. Same goes for immoderate drinkers who aren't rebellious adolescents anymore -- they're not so much rejected as made to feel like shit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top