--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On May 12, 2007, at 1:23 PM, new.morning wrote: > > > Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity > > > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > New morning was talking about drugs earlier as a way to temporarily > > > alleviate suffering, with the caveat that if we were to use them as > > > a constant solution, we'd end up like Elvis or Rush Limbaugh (I'm > > > paraphrasing here...). So learning to not suffer is just that, a > > > learning process. Not a solution in a bottle, or a mantra by itself, > > > or just thinking different thoughts, but an entirely new, integrated > > > approach, where we transform ourselves in order to in effect live in > > > a different world. One just as challenging and comprehensive as that > > > in which we would suffer, but through our hard won skill, > > > perspective and capacity, the suffering is no longer present. > > > > Explaining my thought a bit better, and it is not inconsistent with > > what you write here, what I was suggesting is that better > > neurotransmitter (NT) / receptor (R), and uptake mechanisms, > > particulalrly for dopamine, seratonin, GABA, noraepi, and the > > endorphin receptor complex ARE a large part, if not the whole part > > of happiness. At least relative happiness all the way through the > > ananda kosha. (how such neurotransmittors relate to polishing the > > reflector of Pure Consciousness is a broader and perhaps more > > interesting issue). > > And this is what psychopharmocology is supposedly doing with various > psychopharms.
No its not. Current neuro-pharmaocological and psychiatric practice (psychiatry these days being primarily focused on medical diagnosis and treatment, not talk therapy) is focused on treatment of disease related to imbalance of neuro-transmitter functioning such a bipolar, depression, ADD, psychosis, schizophrenia tc. No neuro-transitter drugs are approved by the FDA, to my knowledge, for improved cognitive performace (when no formal disease is diagnosed), to enhance well-being beyond "normal". And certainly none are approved to culture higher level qualities such as compassion, intelligence, creativity, etc. And certainly none are approved (or exist) to make one samadhi ready. As i said, while optimized NT function may not be a sufficient condition for sustained samadhi or yogic practice, they may be near-necessary if not highly helpful. > According to some (e.g. clinically depressed patients) they are life > savers, yet to others dangerous and possibly damaging for life. Often due to misdiagnois. Prescribing an SSRI (prozac, celexia, paxil, zoloft, etc) when someone is bipolar can make the bi-polar worse (an bi-polar sufferers are particularly prone to suicide). Yet depression is part of the bi-polar cycle. And non-specialist doctors, and nurse practicionaers/physician assistants (who can prescribe) are typically not trained or knowledgable to make such bipolar diagnoses or to differentiate it accurately from depression. "Damaging for life" is not the case in my knowldege, suicide being the extreme exception. Though there is increasing research that the suicide rate among SSRI users are not different from non-users. " RESULTS: Of 48,277 depressed patients participating in the trials, 77 committed suicide. Based on patient exposure years, similar suicide rates were seen among those randomly assigned to an SSRI (0.59%, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.31%0.87%), a standard comparison antidepressant (0.76%, 95% CI=0.49%1.03%), or placebo (0.45%, 95% CI=0.01%0.89%). CONCLUSIONS: These findings fail to support either an overall difference in suicide risk between antidepressant- and placebo-treated depressed subjects in controlled trials or a difference between SSRIs and either other types of antidepressants or placebo." http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/160/4/790 Regardless, monitoring and warning protocols are much more in force for SSRI's than in the past. > They > provide physical elements of bodily-happiness, that's really all. How do you define bodily happiness it musc be vast y large to encompass the deep core life effects neuro-transmittor drugs -- most of which have nothing to do with minor bodily numbing and/or sensory enhancement of marijuana and such. > I > would not confuse these with the ananada-maya kosha, which is at a > completely different level of subtlety and engenders forms of bliss > which are perceived on subtler than external sensory means. Ok so you do seem to be incorrectly associtating NT drug effects as limited to the sensory level. Since you don't understand NT effects, you do not seem to be in a good position to compare and contrast them to "subtler" bliss structures. > > > > > I suggested drugs as an example of temporary means of achieving > > "better", aka happier, such neurotransmittor/receptor states. The > > larger question is how to culture and create such NT/R states without > > drugs. Or via via better supplements than are now available -- perhaps > > hidden AV rayasanas, soma, etc. > > Yogic techniques for this have existed for centuries, probably millenia. First you say the apparently yogic techniques effect a level far deeper than NTs do, now you say that yogic traditions have long cultured and created such NT/R states. Which do you mean? Per prior comments, I suggest optimized NT function may not be a sufficient condition for sustained samadhi or yogic practice, but they may be near-necessary if not highly helpful. To clarify further, while NT drugs effect a far deeper level than sensory perception and/or "bodily happiness", I hold, and have said previously (at leaast by implication) that there may be even deeper levels that current NT drugs don't directly effect. However, I suggest optimized NT functioning probably synergetically suppports or enhances, sets up the proper conditions, for optimizing / enabling these more subtle levels. And nothing precludes that future pharmecuticals could not effect, enable and optimize such "more subtle" levels -- which was the point of my prior post. Even Patanjali and Maharish said drugs could positively effect such subtle levels. > > > > Even Patanjali said siddhis could be achieved via drugs. > > Your twisting what he actually said. A decent translation of what > Patanjali said might be "botananicals" although I would extend that > to include herbo-mineral preparations, as many preparations > attributed to Patanjali for siddhis fall in this class. Thats a pretty funny distinction. Do you really think I envisioned Patanjali was referring to something Merck makes and you pick up at your local pharmacy? Of course Patanjali was referring to some herbal/mineral "drug" (herb and mineral being broadly defined)-- what else was available in his day? That does not preclude Merck being able to structure/obtain modern drug sold at your pharmacy that does have the same properties. (I say "obtain" in that it may simply be packing some herb or combination of such.) > > > (And if a > > reflection of Pure Consciousness is necessary for siddhis, then by > > implication drugs could be related to polishing the reflector of pure > > consciousness.) And Maharishi said enlightnement could be achieved > > through drugs -- either at Humboldt 70 or Squaw Valley 68. The caveat > > is that they are not referring to current drugs. Still bliss in a pill > > -- time-released I hope, or permanent IV, > > is possible. > > > > Or perhaps full hatha yoga, pranayams etc are such a way to culture > > such. Or Tai Chi. Or perhaps they culture something else which also > > brings on the bliss. > > The full techniques of sun-moon (hatha) yoga are largely lost, > however the intact traditions do precisely work the nadis, the > bindus, the pranas and the four blisses via moving asanas, > visualization and linked to breathing to visualization to cultivate > finer levels of bliss. These have more to do with progressively finer > aspects of kundalini than it does cultivating neurochemical happiness > IME. My question remains, and hypothesis is, that such techniques DO effect NTs, probably significantly, IMO, though that may not be their full effect, that is they may do other things also. Good research is needed to explore this issue. A funny thing in my mind is the TMO, Haiglin in particular, who touts thats TM increases serotonin levels. Yet, anyone who has taken an SSRI, much less taken ectasy, both of which increase serotonin, are "enfants terrible" and may not make it into the domes if thye are open about their use of serotonin enhancers.
