the more you know!
2007-06-14 01:27:24 · 20 answers · asked by Mike 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
It certainly is possible that he did. Contrary to answers given by others, marijuana WAS known and used at the time and it IS native to Indian subcontinent.[1] Marijuana was used throughout Asia for textiles into prehistory, and its use as a drug was commonplace among Hindu holy men, of whom the Buddha was certainly aware.[2][3]
But just because you've heard of weed doesn't mean you've smoked.
I've also heard interesting theories about Jesus mixing marijuana with olive oil and using it as some sort of balm.[4] I've also heard that Jesus and Buddha were actually the same person. Like I say, interesting theories... ;)
2007-06-14 05:25:50 · answer #1 · answered by ganjanaut 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
RE: Buddhists View on Marijuana? I know one of the methods of buddhism is to not indulge in any substances that clouds the mind of the right perception. Im a learning Buddhist and I cant see why we cant use marijuana for meditating and spiritual use. I meditate atleast twice as better when i smoke marijuana and i still feel the...
2016-04-01 07:08:38 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Okay? And the point is? Since I don't follow buddha that has little meaning for me.. just confirms what I already suspected anyway.
2007-06-14 01:36:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Most great leaders of men rocked a joint at some point.
Take a look at Bill Clinton. If he had only inhaled, he wouldn't have gotten caught with his pants down.
2007-06-14 01:34:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Anyone who encourages people to think they'll die and come back as somebody else (or something else) has to be high; so it's not surprising that buddha was a pothead.
2007-06-14 01:41:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
lol evry body smokes marijuana so iam not surprised its the best thing grown on earth
2007-06-14 01:30:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Interesting to see your 'evidence'.
As the plant is not indigenous to the subcontinant & not known to the old World at that time.
.
2007-06-14 01:42:33 · answer #7 · answered by Rai A 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yea, but probably not. That genus is not native to the Indian subcontinent.
2007-06-14 01:29:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Did he get that belly from drinking beers too?
Still more evidence that there is only one that is the way of life, and proved it by example.
2007-06-14 01:30:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
This is ignorant baseless conjecture which means you've made yourself look like an idiot -- how many times now?
2007-06-14 01:32:26 · answer #10 · answered by jaicee 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋