545) Psychedelics: Cutting-edge science or shamanic ritual?

Homological scaffolds of the brain before and after psilocybin (Petri G., et al. 2014).

Introduction

This article builds on the previous discussion, which explored how psychedelics are increasingly being framed as “cutting-edge science,” embraced by “all the professors”—and, most troubling in my view, promoted as a new expression of Jewish mysticism and experientialism [Kotzk Blog: 544) Acculturating Alcohol and Sanctifying Psychedelics: It’s time to stand up]. While this article departs from the usual style of discourse on this platform, a recent encounter prompted me to dig deeper. After hearing an average, conservative, middle-aged man explain that he was about to embark on an ayahuasca journey because of its “proven scientific value” and its common use among “trusted religious people” in his community, I decided to examine the academic literature on psychedelics more closely. I aimed to assess how solid the claim of a scientific foundation truly is. In the interest of fairness, I have included scholarly arguments both for and against the use of psychedelics. 

History

In 1938, Albert Hofmann first synthesised Lysergic acid diethylamide or LSD. He was working on a drug to stimulate circulation, and a few years later, he accidentally ingested a tiny amount of his new chemical, which had both wondrous and terrifying effects on him. On the other hand, molecules known as psilocybin, from a little brown mushroom, have been known for hundreds of years and were used in Mexico and South America by indigenous people as a spiritual sacrament. After the Spanish conquest—in what was probably the first war on drugs—the Roman Catholic Church in 1620 prohibited the use of both peyote (cactus) and psilocybin (mushrooms). The “magic” mushroom was only rediscovered in the Western world in 1955 by Gordon Wasson on a trip to Mexico. 

During the 1950s and 1960s, the psychiatric community welcomed and considered both LSD and psilocybin to be miracle drugs. Then, from the end of the 1960s, the dark side of psychedelics began to be exposed, and a general cultural panic set in. These drugs became illegal, and their users went underground. This clampdown continued for two decades until the 1990s, when a small group of psychotherapists and scientists rekindled the previous interest in psychedelics. Particularly after 2006, there has been a profound resurgence in the research on psychedelics. This has been welcomed in some cirles but criticised in others because this research was often conducted by scientists “inspired by their own personal experience of the compounds” (Pollan 2018:3).[1] Notably, many of the early academic studies in psychedelics, were not “well controlled by modern standards, and some of them were compromised by the enthusiasm of the researcher involved” (Pollan 2018:45). In early research conducted by the Swiss pharmaceutical firm, Sandoz, an official “researcher” was simply “any therapist who promised to write his or her clinical observations” (Pollan 2018:143). The question now is how much of that has changed in our times? 

How psychedelics work

Based on the idea that the best way to understand something is to disrupt it—and then study what happens—neuroscientists have begun to deliberately disturb the normal waking consciousness of volunteers. In doing so, they dissolve the ego and structures of self, producing what is often described as a “mystical experience” (Pollan 2018:4). This disruption is achieved through psychedelics. But sometimes it has the opposite effect, because the: 

“privilege of having had a mystical experience tends to massively inflate the ego, convincing [the subjects that] they’ve been granted sole possession of a key to the universe” (Pollan 2018:239). 

It is rather unusual for science to be discussing “mystical experiences.” Yet a peer-reviewed scientific paper published in the journal Psychopharmacology is titled “Psylocybin Can Occasion Mystical-Type Experiences Having Substantial and Sustained Personal Meaning and Spiritual Significance” (Roland Griffiths 2006). This was the first modern study of psilocybin, and astoundingly, Griffiths did not focus on the potential therapeutic applications of the drug, but rather on its spiritual effects! Griffiths was more interested in phenomenology—how people subjectively view their experiences—than in the actual science. Griffiths acknowledges that “we were interested in a spiritual effect and were biasing the condition initially [in that direction].” 

It is difficult to perform such experiments with psychedelics. They rarely affect people the same way twice, because they magnify whatever is taking place within the mind at that time (Pollan 2018:6). 

Alleged “safety”

According to Pollan (2018:14), it is almost impossible to die from an overdose of psilocybin or LSD, nor are they addictive. The effects of these drugs are indeed sometimes frightening to the extreme, but he insists that they are not dangerous. He warns, however, that those with a history of mental illness should not experiment with them as they can trigger psychosis. He also warns that those under its influence can do dangerous things, like fall off buildings and cliffs. Therefore, these drugs—also called “medicines” by the initiates—need to be administered under professional care. 

David Nutt, an expert on addiction (although he was fired from the British government’s Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs), maintains that alcohol is more dangerous than both cannabis and LSD, and that Ecstasy is safer than riding a horse: 

“[P]sychedelics overall are among the safest drugs we know of…It’s virtually impossible to die from an overdose of them; they cause no physical harm; and if anything they’re anti-addictive” (Nutt 2012:254).[2] 

On the other hand, according to psychiatrist Paul McHugh, the psychedelic experience is just another form of “toxic delirium”: 

“Doctors encounter this strange and colourful state of mind with patients suffering from advanced hepatic, renal, or pulmonary disease, in which toxic products accumulate in the body and do to the brain and mind just what LSD does” (McHugh in Commentary, cited in Pollan 2018:76). 

A large population-based study conducted in Canada in 2024 shows a 21-fold increased risk of schizophrenia spectrum disorder (SSD), following hallucinogen use. Nearly a million people with no history of psychosis, who required emergency hospital treatment after hallucinogen use, exhibited increased risk of SSD. According to researcher Dr Daniel Myran, this describes individuals: 

“who are profoundly paranoid, who may be seeing things that aren’t there and are having a total departure from reality.”^[3] 

Research in favour of psychedelics

Robin Cathart-Harris, David Nutt, and their colleagues (2014)[4] presented a groundbreaking paper arguing that human order and selfhood come at a cost to the mind, exerting “limiting or narrowing influence on consciousness.” They proposed that ancient humans operated with brains oriented toward supernatural and “magical thinking,” a mode they termed “primary consciousness.” It was biased by emotion and magical thinking, which reduces uncertainty—but it was not a good model to ensure the long-term success of the human species. Later, they argue, a higher form of thinking emerged where ego, selfhood, the ability to self-reflect, and self-reason, dominated. This is known as “secondary consciousness,” and it was good for the species because it was a more reality-based cognitive process involving ego and self-preservation. 

The authors contend that psychological disorders arise not from a lack of order in the brain, but from an excess of it—too much self-reflection, where the ego becomes overbearing, as seen in conditions such as depression. This is where, they claim, psychedelics come in, because they “disrupt stereotyped patterns of thought and behaviour by disintegrating the patterns of [neural] activity…” In other words, psychedelics offer regression to a “more primitive” form of cognition, and have the potential to reshape attitudes towards all forms of authority (including the self), which probably played a part in the political upheavals of the 1960s. 

Another study, also conducted in 2014,[5] showed that after psilocybin, lines of communication within the brain are radically reorganised. Everything gets connected and lights up. In fact, thousands of new neural connections emerge simultaneously, linking regions of the brain that do not ordinarily communicate with each other. This can give rise to synesthesia, where sensory information becomes entangled—sounds may be perceived as colours, and colours as sounds. (This is evocative of Sinai, where tradition holds that the people “heard what is usually seen and saw what is usually heard.”) The argument is that such an experience creates fresh perspectives and allows for stagnancy to give rise to creativity. 

Research strengths and weaknesses

In one study, Fadiman and Harman administered LSD to artists, architects and engineers, who were stagnating in their work. Fadiman admitted that “[w]e used every manipulation of set and setting in the book,” priming them to be “fascinated by their intellectual capacities and would solve problems as never before.” This group included some who went on to revolutionise computers (and invent the mouse, email and videoconferencing, for example). However, the study was not controlled; it relied on the subjects’ own impressions, and it ended before it was completed (Pollan 2018:179). 

Rick Doblin carefully reconstructed one of Timothy Leary’s famous experiments with prisoners at a maximum security prison in 1961, and concluded that Leary had grossly exaggerated the data, by claiming that only a quarter of prisoners—who were administered psilocybin—landed back in jail after their release, compared to the typical rate of 80 per cent who returned to prison after their release. The researcher Sidney Cohen also remarked that, “it was the sort of research that made scientists wince” (Pollan 2018:191). 

Regarding the Psilocybin Project, Herb Kelman responded: 

“[T]his work violates the values of the academic community. The whole program has an anti-intellectual atmosphere. Its emphasis is on pure experience, not on verbalizing findings” (cited in Pollan 2018:196). 

In 1998, the UCLA psychiatrist Charles Grob wrote that psychedelic therapy was a little too close to shamanism: 

“[B]y blurring the boundaries between religion and science…the psychedelic model entered the realm of applied mysticism” (cited in Pollan 2018:207). 

To this day—although there are exceptions—a recent survey of thirty-four peer-reviewed articles between 1991 and 2023, with almost 20,000 participants, shows that there are still problems with the way the research is conducted. In the evaluative “study strengths” versus “study weaknesses,” following voluminous contemporary research, we typically find the following weaknesses listed in the research reports:

·         “samples being self-selected”

·         “not representative”

·         “subjects recruited using chain-referral method”

·         “white, highly educated”

·         “researcher knew several participants”

·         “mainly male”

·         “no control group”

·         “study used some ad hoc and unvalidated measure”

·         “retrospective self-report design”

·         “only included participants who endorsed belief change”

·         “insufficient demographic information”

·         “small, homogeneous sample”

·         “no empirical measures used”

·         “high rate of non-completion” (Schutt, Exline, Pait and Wilt 2024:26376-26382). 

So, while there is solid academic research on psychedelics, there appears to be a significant amount of substandard research being published as well. 

Reported mystical effects of psychedelics

Besides what is most often described as “mystical experiences,” the participants (especially the terminally ill) maintain that they lose their fear of death. Many report that such experiences rank among the most spiritually meaningful of their lives. They describe it as being in a place where physical laws no longer apply. According to Bill Richards, a psychologist and international leader in the study of psychedelics, “You go deep enough or far out enough in consciousness, and you will bump into the sacred,” and this happens to “nonbelievers as well as believers” (cited in Pollan 2018:55). Gordon Wasson—who, as mentioned, had rediscovered psilocybin in 1955—wrote that he was “seeing all the archetypes [such as] the Platonic ideas” and these “were not blurred or uncertain” (cited in Pollan 2018:111). 

Around 1999, some universities began the study of “entheogens,” which is what they called the substances of peyote (cactus) and “sacred” mushrooms. They called for volunteers who were “interested in the Spiritual Life”. These are phenomena not usually dealt with in the scientific community. Similarly, Huston Smith  (2006) writes in distinct non-scientific language that: 

“psilocybin can occasion genuine mystical experiences. It uses science, which modernity trusts, to undermine modernity’s secularism…it offers hope of a re-sanctification of the natural and social world, a spiritual revival that is our best defense against not only soullessness, but against religious fanaticism” (cited in Pollan 2018:81). 

In other words, psychedelics form a contemporary science-based spiritual and mystical system that challenges and sanctifies modern secularism as well as religious fundamentalism. Sometimes this quasi-religious terminology turns into quasi-ritualistic language as well: 

Ritual, mysticism, “set and setting”

The subjective notions of “set and setting” are crucial to the occasions where psychedelics are administered. The “set” is the mindset and expectations that one brings to the event. “Setting” is the mystical aura and environment, which is often made ritualistic in terms of special items on altars, shamanic practices and incantations. Some events have the distinct hallmarks of “religious ceremonies” (Pollan 2018:22). 

Suggestiveness and subjectivity

Recent studies reveal that: 

“psychedelic use is linked with a variety of subjective indicators of spiritual growth, including stronger perceived connections with the divine, a greater sense of meaning, increased spiritual faith, increased engagement in religious and spiritual practices” (Schutt, Exline, Pait and Wilt 2024:26372).^[6] 

Notably, the operative words are “subjective indicators,” which are not related to reality or empirical evidence. In other words, this research reflects the participants’ self-reports and perceptions of their experiences. Therefore, these findings do not necessarily demonstrate objective religious transformation. This may explain why: 

“[M]ore than two thirds of those who identified as atheists before encountering God while using psilocybin no longer identified as atheists after the experience” (Schutt, Exline, Pait and Wilt 2024:26375). 

Similarly: 

“[N]early 50% of participants who traveled to the Amazon for an ayahuasca ceremony reported (re)-discovering God or the purpose of life, in addition to overall spiritual development…Beliefs in ultimate reality or a higher power increased from 36 to 58%” (Schutt, Exline, Pait and Wilt 2024:26375). 

Again, the operative and subjective words are “identified” and “reported,” which indicate “perceived spiritual growth.” A study by Griffiths (2006) shows that two months after taking psilocybin, participants rated that experience as one of the most meaningful of their lives (Schutt, Exline, Pait and Wilt 2024:26394).

Compare the above to the research conducted by Rabbi Aaron D. Cherniak, a PhD candidate at Stockholm University and a research fellow at Reichman University in Israel. After examining data from over 22,000 people in the UK, he made some interesting determinations: 

1) “[P]sychedelic users were more likely to leave the religion they grew up in than people who had not used [psychedelics]. However, this trend was the same for using other illicit substances, too… We [also] studied whether people felt more religious or spiritual over the two months after a psychedelic experience. Surprisingly, we found no changes in either” (American Psychological Association, September 22, 2025). 

2) “[L]ifetime use of psilocybin predicted greater likelihood of stable nonaffiliation and disaffiliating from the religion one was raised in…

[P]sychedelic users were less likely to report a religious affiliation (past and present) and less likely to believe in God and the after-life than nonusers” (Cherniak and Granqvist 2025).^[7]  

This research is not easy to conduct scientifically because it relies on personal reports and subjectivity (known as phenomenology), which is variously felt by different participants, rather than focusing on the science of the chemicals. This seems to be at variance with scientific practice. At the time of Pollan’s psychedelic experimentation, there was little in the way of: 

“solid medical information about potential side effects or dangerous drug interactions [because] little research has been done” (Pollan 2018:274). 

Some early researchers in the mid-1950s, like Sidney Cohen, who was the dean of LSD researchers in Los Angeles, were already uncomfortable with where psychedelic research was going. He claimed that, “under LSD the fondest theories of the therapist are confirmed by his patient” (cited in Pollan 2018:158). This became known as the “expectancy effect.” Thus, we find that Freudian therapists often interpret according to classical Freudian psychology (childhood trauma, sexual drives, etc.), while Jungian therapists often interpret according to Jungian psychology (collective unconscious). 

Shamans throughout the ages have always understood that: 

“a person in the depths of a trance or under the influence of a powerful plant medicine can be readily manipulated with the help of certain words, special objects, or the right kind of music” (Pollan 2018:170). 

Guides

The guides often produce suggestive “flight instructions” to the participants. They are told to just trust and let go and be open (TLO), and are reminded they might experience “death,” which is just the transcendence of the ego. If they see a door, they must open it. If they see stairs, they must climb them. If they see danger, they must not retreat, but head directly towards the danger. Some might argue that the participants are being somewhat primed for the “(mind)set” experience. Often, the “setting” is also suggestive. Either out in a beautiful landscape or in a room with specific décor (usually tribal). There are sometimes special aromas. They wear eyeshades and listen to specifically selected music (often religious-sounding) through headphones. “If you are told you will have a spiritual experience, chances are pretty good that you will” (Polen 2018:145). Pollan describes his own experience where these props or settings “cast a spell that allowed me to suspend my disbelief,” and the facilitator was “acting more like a shaman than a psychologist.” The facilitator recited a long Native American prayer to help guide him through the journey, and Pollan had to eat a huge psilocybin mushroom, which was referred to as the “mushroom teacher who brings us back to our soul’s purpose for being here in this lifetime” (Pollan 2018:256-7). 

On another experimental trip, Pollan came in contact with the “toad,” which is one of the fastest-acting psychotropic drugs available. It is the venom of a poisonous toad found in the Sonoran Desert, which is squeezed from a gland onto a mirror, allowed to dry and turn into flaky crystals like brown sugar. This is then vaporised in a glass pipe and inhaled. After his intense experience with the “toad,” which only lasted about half an hour, he asked the facilitator whether the effects he felt were from the drug itself or if it was a genuine spiritual event. The reply was “That’s an irrelevant question,” again emphasising the subjective element.  

Mysticism and evangelicism

When Pollan wrote his book in 2018, “microdosing,” or taking small “subperceptual” doses of LSD, was “all the rage in the tech community” in places like Silicon Valley. Word had quickly spread that psychedelics aid and foster creativity. One tech company even uses psychedelics in their management training, and others have “microdosing Fridays” (Pollan 2018:175-7). 

Psychedelic evangelism was not lost on Timothy Leary, who wrote in 1968 that after a journey with mushrooms, he just wanted to “rush back and tell everyone”: 

“Listen! Wake up! You are God! You have the Divine plan engraved in cellular script within you. Listen! Take this sacrament! You’ll see You’ll get the revelation! It will change your life!” (Leary cited in Pollan 2018:188). 

Conclusion

Whether the popular claims surrounding psychedelics—frequently promoted today under the banner of “cutting-edge science”—can withstand genuine scientific scrutiny is ultimately left for the reader to judge. 

It is striking how readily the perception—and often uncritical acceptance—of psychedelics’ legitimacy and supposed benefits, both on a conscious and theological level, has permeated elements of the religious Jewish world, and, from what I gather, other faith traditions as well. My concern lies primarily on the theological level: today, the evangelical fervour surrounding psychedelics has begun to extend its reach into the Jewish religious sphere as well. 

The emphases—if not outright exaggerations—often placed by certain religious leaders on mystical, ritualistic, spiritual, and transcendental experiences seem to entice seekers to pursue psychedelics as a step beyond alcohol, once regarded as a “spiritual tool.” Increasingly, these substances are being cast as a legitimate— sometimes “Halachically sanctioned with a kashrut hechsher”—expression of Jewish mysticism. 

It is almost as though we are witnessing the first stirrings of the birth of a new Chassidic movement—one already marked by its emphasis on experiential spirituality. We now find ourselves with what is being touted as a highly effective and practical spiritual shortcut to Deveikut (clinging to G‑d). In some popular religious circles, a new term has even emerged. Superseding the once‑ubiquitous use of alcohol, psychedelics are being rebranded under the provocative label of Chassidelicks. 

Another reason why we are seeing such an explosion of interest in practical psychedelics within our communities may be due to what can only be described as a form of psychedelic evangelism. People are being encouraged to use psychedelics by evangelists within their social circles, while the leadership often turns a blind eye. This mirrors the trajectory of Albert Hofmann—who, as mentioned, inadvertently discovered LSD in 1938—and later became: 

“something of a mystic, preaching a gospel of spiritual renewal…[like] the founder of a new religion” (Pollan 2018:25–26). 

Are we, too, now beholding the birth of a new Jewish evangelical—or Kiruv—movement, one in which simple experientialism with psychedelics replaces the old, uncomfortable but necessary, model of actually grappling with faith and doubt? 

This study has attempted to question the two most often touted justifications for the use of psychedelics in the religious community: 1) Its benefits have been proven by impeccable research and cutting-edge science, and 2) It is unquestionably compatible with Halachic and mystical Judaism.

---

[1] Pollan, M., 2018, How To Change Your Mind: The New science of Psychedelics, Penguin, Science/Psychology.

[2] Nutt, D. 2012, Drugs Without Hot Air, UIT Cambridge Ltd.

[3] Online source: https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/hallucinogens-tied-striking-increased-risk-schizophrenia-2024a1000kq9?form=fpf. Accessed 25 February 2026.

[4] Cathart-Harris, R. L., Leech. R., Hellyer, P.J., Shanahan, M., Feilding, A., Tagliazucchi, E., Chialvo, D.R., Nutt D.  2024, ‘The Entropic Brain: A Theory of Conscious States Informed by Neuroimaging Research with Psychedelic Drugs’, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience.

[5] Petri, G.,  Expert, P., Turkheimer, F., Carhart-Harris, R., Nutt, D.,  Hellyer, P.J., Vaccarino, F., 2014, ‘Homological scaffolds of brain functional networks’, J R Soc Interface 6 December, vol. 11, no. 101.

[6] Schutt, W.A., Exline, J.J., Pait, K.C., Wilt, J.A., 2024, Psychedelic Experiences and Long-Term Spiritual Growth: A Systematic Review, Current Psychology, 43:26372-26394.

[7] Cherniak, A. D., and Granqvist, P., 2025, ‘How does psychedelic use relate to aspects of religiosity/spirituality? Preregistered report from a birth cohort study and a prospective longitudinal study’, Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, vol. 17, no 3, 175-194.