Put it another way then: let's say human capability and capacity is vastly more than we suspect. Let's say people like Jesus, Buddha and Muhammad have developed these unseen capacities. What evidence is there that they have? Well, so-called 'miracles' would be one. Detachment from 'things of the world' would be another and we could throw 'wisdom' into the mix too.
So my question would be then: does use of psychedelics lead to these capacities and capabilities? Is there an example of a 'modern day Jesus'? Who? Leary? Hahahah! Pinchbeck? !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! See where I'm going with this?
They were running around doing miracles? They're up there with Guatama Buddha, Lao Tsu and the highest metaphysical minds the human race has so far produced? Wow.
I used to do a lot of drugs back in the day so I could be in the running myself! All I need is a couple of hapless disciples - who's with me? You don't have to sign up for the long haul... you could even betray me in the final chapter as long as you help me get in the Pantheon! PM me!!!
They're not really though are they? If define - for example - that a dog is a certain species having certain characteristics then you can fit into this category animals that meet your criteria.
You COULD argue that a cat is a dog and try to change the goalposts (atheists do this all the time) but it's really a pointless activity if you're trying to do anything other than score a point or win an argument. The point is that the label that's being applied is not to 'win' but to be able to use and assess the thing labelled.
In this case we're discussing something that esoteric and wisdom traditions call 'enlightenment'. You may or may not believe in this concept and that's fine. But what it IS in the abstract is (regardless of whether it exists objectively) surely how it is defined by these traditions.
Put another way, all esoteric traditions - without exception afaik (you may have a counter example) - claim that the end-goal of their practice takes a long time and is the result of ongoing practice.
People maybe argue for the psychedelic Jesus or psychedelic Buddha or psychedelic Muhammad or whoever but what they can never do (again afaik - you may be able to argue against it with examples) is actually show authentic texts from these traditions that show Jesus/Moses/Zen Master X etc actually saying "just take this.... you don't need any other practice, this will get you to the status of insert Guru here". It just isn't out there.
All that can be really done is to take those traditions and try to insert Kesey or whoever into them.
You seem to have misconstrued my position on this. Or vice versa. I am neither pro nor con on DR. Brown's position. All I am trying to point out is that entheogens can be a valuable adjutant to accessing the spiritual realm. Or to experience the miraculous.
I am also somewhat Skeptiko of any attempts to qualify another human beings experience.
I'm not anti it but I do disagree with it vehemently. I think it's a cheapening of both traditions to try to meld them. They are really - and demonstrably - not related. You could say that is my opinion (which is true) but I am not sure how much weight I'd put on that. Atheists say exactly the same thing - that it's just my opinion - when arguing against materialism. Hell, even Trump used it now for his opponents.
Yeah I got that, lol! I just disagree. I've probably had about 100 trips, more or less, and also what some might call 'mystical' experience and (in my opinion - but what else is there to judge by for any of us but our own experience?) the two are not in any way related. Imo. Also I just don't see the evidence is there from esoteric tradition for any equivalence.
I don't deny that hallucinogens lead to 'something' and that throughout history many groups, often religious, employed them to find this 'something' - I just am arguing that the 'something' is not the same thing as the founders and exemplars in esoteric teaching were dealing in. It doesn't need to be either - both can be useful in their respective areas. We don't need to claim a screwdriver is a hammer or that one is better or worse. That's not what I'm saying... just that a screwdriver is not a hammer. Right now my tasks need a hammer! Yours might need a screwdriver and that's fine!