Ninth Words from B.C.

Well. I did get some feedback from the last email. Most of it was along the lines of "What the hell?" I think I may have been a little bit too esoteric for some people. As Darren put it, "being a person with precisely 0 experience and interest in the intoxicating substances, [I] have absolutely no idea what you're talking about." There are three things I must respond to in this sentence. First the matter of having no experience with the substances. This is where I may have fallen short. I mentioned that it is difficult to describe psychedelic experiences given their subjective nature. This is true with people who have had these experiences (subjectively, of course) themselves and even more so with people who have not. Though I tried to keep my descriptions interesting while at the same time somewhat general so as not to completely lose those readers who have not had a psychedelic experience (Darren, Alan, Brian, Brad, Carmen, Joe, Keith, Nicole, my Mom, and Trevor if I am not mistaken), I perhaps did not succeed as well as I had hoped. I will attempt to correct when and if I can. The second thing I must respond to is the matter of lack of interest. This is obviously not something I can help. There are people who read this who are interested in these subjects, and more importantly I am clearly very much interested in these subjects. To put it bluntly, these are my goddam letters and if you don't like them you can go to hell. But I'm not going to put it bluntly. What I would rather do is try to explain these things in a way that gets people to look at them in a new light, and even to inspire their interest in the subject. To this end I will move on to the third matter, referring to the substances as "intoxicating" substances. Granted, I have used this term myself, but given some consideration I believe this may have been a mistake as it carries the negative connotation of "toxic". First off, I think I should clarify just what substances I am referring to. Psilocybin mushrooms, LSD, Salvia divinorum, ayahuasca, peyote, should not be considered "intoxicating" in the strictest sense of the word. To intoxicate is to stupefy or excite by the action of a chemical substance such as alcohol. Certainly I can consider alcohol intoxicating. I would even categorize marijuana under this definition (though again I don't think the negative connotations are appropriate). The effects of these other substances, however, are vastly different from stupefaction and excitation. They should more accurately be labelled "entheogenic" substances. The etymology of this word comes from the Greek "entheos" (god within) and "gen" (becoming). It was coined by R. Gordon Wasson to replace terms like "hallucinogenic," "psychedelic," or "drug" and which I use now to replace "intoxicating." As he said in his book Persephone's Quest, "We must break down the 'Drugs' of popular parlance according to their properties and overcome our ignorance, which in this field is still monumental. 'Entheogen' is a step in that direction." I think what I am trying to say is that these substaces are not simply for getting wasted and having a good time. That's not to say one can't or shouldn't have a good time while using them. Entheogenic trips should be enjoyed, but they also provide opportunities for so much more. They allow for intense personal introspection that is impossible without them. They can ignite fires of spiritual ecstasy that some people may not have thought possible. I speak from personal experience when I say this. And to any that would say that these substances are evil, harmful, and should be illegal I say, Would you prohibit a Christian's sacraments and tell him he cannot commune with his god through prayer? Would you tell a Buddhist that he cannot meditate? Why then would you ban my sacraments and tell me that I cannot experience the joy of connection with the divine that these substances offer? Why would you deny yourself that joy? Now that I've hopefully opened some minds with that little analogy I'd like to go even further with this idea, but hold on to your skepticism for a moment because what I propose isn't as outlandish as it first sounds. I don't think the perceptions induced by these entheogens should be called "hallucinations." I believe they should be referred to as "visions." And here's where most of you would think, "What the hell? Now Tony thinks he's a psychic because he did some drugs that fucked up his head?" And that's when I answer, "No, I don't think I'm a psychic and those drugs haven't fucked up my head." Allow me to explain. A hallucination is an apparent perception of something that is not real but is believed to be so. It is something that happens to people dying of hunger and thirst or with a mental disease like advanced syphilis. A vision is just a perception. I am using the word "vision" to include other sensory perceptions as well. I am not saying that these visions are necessarily telepathic, clairvoyant, or prophetic, but I am not denying the possibility that some of them could be. To label them simply as hallucinations would be to do so. In other words, I don't believe I am a psychic but I do believe that it is possible to have what might be called a psychic experience through the use of entheogenics. You might be back to thinking the drugs fucked up my head but there are millions of people who believe the universe was created in six days twelve thousand years ago so I'm not that fucked up. You know, in comparison. Before leaving this subject (which may make some of you very glad) I would like to mention a few more ideas I had about a universe which is a holographic projection of a single consciousness. I would have included these at the end of my last email but it took me a long time to write and I wanted to get it sent before the weekend was over. Anyways, here's how language, time travel and reincarnation could be explained by this holographic universe: All physical things are illusions so the act of speech which causes the movement of air molecules is actually just the projection of the actions of an interconnected unity of things. It is performed as a communication between two consciousnesses which are actually just different perceptions of the same consciousness. Time is a thing as space is a thing. Both of which are illusions. All time and all possibilities are an interconnected unity of things. Time travel is a matter of changing the perception of consciousness to attune to one of the infinite possibilities. Memories of past lives are simply shared perceptions of the same consciousness. This may not make any more sense to you than the other stuff I wrote but it was only meant to be more of the same.
Let's talk about what I've been reading. That's something everyone can relate to. Unless you're illiterate. But then you wouldn't be reading this so it doesn't matter anyway. As I said before I just read a book of poetry by Charles Bukowski. After that I read Confessions of a Sinner by Saint Augustine. Why? Because it was here and it was short and it's kind of a classic of western philosophy. Was it good? Well, underneath all the "Yay God!" crap there were a couple of interesting ideas and relevant points, but it was mostly horseshit in my opinion. I know that's not going to be the most convincing argument by I don't have the inclination to draw out any rigorous proofs against it. Now I'm on Homage to Catalonia by George Orwell. For those who aren't familiar with the book, it is an account of Orwell's involvement in the Spanish Civil War fighting against the Fascists led by Franco. Like On the Road it reminds me a lot of how the world has changed throughout the last hundred years.
I'm going to keep it short this week and let you all recover from the 4000 words of my last email. Until the next one.

Tony "How many bottles do you need to conquer the world?" Hawkins