I agree.


No it's not. It could involve any source of maoi. The essential concept of anahuasca is that it composed of analogs of the plants used in traditional ayahuasca. I think mimosa and methylene blue would be an example of anahuasca.


I sometimes wish more people would consider this advice. Then again, why bother actually reading anything that might question or even disprove sacred truths about "de vine".

Technically, Mimosa can still be used in Ayahuasca, plus Mimosa comes from South America and has a history of use over there from my understanding. As long as one is using Caapi, it's Ayahuasca regardless of what other plants are mixed with it. One could even combine both Rue and Caapi, and as long as Caapi is in the mix, it's Ayahuasca. One can even mix Acacia with Caapi, and it'd still be Ayahuasca, but not traditional Ayahuasca.

The "vs" puts me off
You do a thing and than that is that.

You're wrong. Anahuasca can involve rue. It need not, as there are many MAOI alternatives to Caapi.

I don't.

Pharmahuasca is an Anahuasca

Ayahuasca is made with vine.

This question may be more relevant:

1. Are we gonna consider pharma made with extracted caapi alkaloids to be Ayahuasca?

Anahuasca means analog plants to the traditional ones, so i doubt you could call methylene blue one, since it isn't a plant. Also i have edited my post to make it clear that i meant that i read that you wrongly said that Anahuasca/pharmahuasca, was said to be 'an' Ayahuasca

Ahem, please re read the post correctly.



Correct, i was just giving examples of an Analog plant. Another could be Russian Olive, for example.




This is interesting. Why would anyone go to the lengths to extract Caapi Alks, if they can simply just brew the vine? Isn't it amazing how advanced traditional techniques are, over modern ones!

I suppose you 'could' in this case call extracted Caapi Alks, 'Ayahuasca', yet for the reason that the rest of the plant is eliminated, then this would probably be seen negatively by traditionalists. Surely the main point of extracting the Alks is for the making of Changa.

This thread is getting silly now.

I havent read the whole topic, but lately I've been feeling more and more that its just wrong to take distinct plants, with a very unique story, and call it analog of wathever. Mimosa + Rue are not anahuasca, are not pharmahuasca, they are Jurema! They produce.visions of their own, have their own guides, teachers and protector, very distinct from the ones in the ayahuasca realm, and definitely have a culture and history of use, that doesn't mention at all the purpose of reproducing the effects of aya. I feel they deserve their credit for what they really are truly. I also feel that pharmahuasca its an outdated term, at least as a generic term.

probably a good idea to do so.



Interesting perspective, however it's not Pharmahuasca. But it IS Anahuasca: Which describes substitute plants that can be used instead of traditional ones. Jurema describes Mimosa being used alone, not with Rue.



True.

Anahuasca is seldom used today, rather Pharmahuasca. Indeed those terms are often used loosely, and can only describe something that isn't traditional. Therefore,if describing a brew of Rue and Mimosa, it would add clarification to term the brew, 'a brew called Anahuasca, made with analogous plants of Rue and Mimosa, to substitute the traditional Caapi and Chakruna plants'.

Yeah. Jurema is mimosa hostilis....this does not mean that using it with rue isn't anahuasca......otherwise what would anahuasca be?


I would say :

Anahuasca: Any form of oral dmt that does not involve ayahuasca vine or maoi that has been derived from it.

Pharmahuasca: Any form of oral dmt with chemically isolated/synthesized maoi.


I would consider a preparation of extracted ayahuasca vine alkaloids to be the only pharmahuasca which is not an anahuasca, but an ayahuasca.

Yea, err....Whatever.

Its not that im being picky about little details (or maybe I am ) but since this is an informative, and important forum for the D M T comunity, and Jurema has been one of the main sources where most people gets its spice from, there should be a distinction.

if it does not contain maoi from caapi, why does the brew has huasca in the name, wich is aa shuar term for vine?

Everything that contains caapi will be ayahuasca, even if there are other light plants in the mix, caapi with its own presence, modulates de light plants, there is always a threshold in the light, and caapi will be the main experience.

Rue has a more neutral presence, and acts more like an activator for the light, the more light plants you add, the brighter it gets, and that does not happen with ayahuasca.

^
i dont advocate this as a fact, but is the opinion that i gained, working with all this plants in diferent mixtures.

Oh lawd... enough with the terminologies already. Just have the experience, tell us how it was! Discovered anything new, any profound insights worth sharing, maybe some nice new revelations?... to me it looks like one's stuck in between terms rather than travelling realms of the hyperconscious unimaginable. In the end, imho, words don't count as such or as much...

You have good points to make.


To re-iterate what i have read and understood over the years is that the terminology was to help enable a specific understanding of what was in a brew.

For example AYA-HUASCA is a brew that must contain Ayahuasca vine. Traditionally it may only contain the vine and nothing else, or it may have added 'light' plants and other plants. In the case of Santo Daime, they call it 'Daime', and in their use/ modern day use, the vine may be less emphesized and balanced with 'light' plants. The vine is thought of as having a Spirit of fundamental importance in traditional brews, though less so in Santo Daime brews, for example.

Regarding ANA-HUASCA, well that's just other plants being substituted instead, so this explains the term 'Ana', meaning 'Analog', in other words using different plants with similar effects.

PHARMA-HUASCA basically refers to extracted maoi's from plant sources, or chemical based maoi's, and extracted dm. People often do this because they want to avoid purging or stomach disturbances.

JUREMA, and VINHO DO JUREMA, as far as i know refers Mimosa, or a cold water extract of Mimosa. Since Rue isn't from Brasil, i doubt that has anything to do with it. (However, Curandero's may call it JUREMA, simply because it contains those plant spirits, in the same way AYAHUASCA is.)




Being specific matters in this forum. It does not help matters to be unspecific. To what is one referring to?, should be important. Therefore, if one is referring to AYAHUASCA, then it should really be AYAHUASCA, and not ANAHUASCA, for example. I think it's important that some understand the basics, and it's so easy to grasp.

For example, 'Maranello 551', want's to impose his/her own ideology, and whilst everyone is entitled to their POV, it may cause confusion in this case. Surely the whole point about making things specific is so that we can ALL understand what is being spoken about?

To further confuse matters PHARMAHUASCA is nowdays used more broadly to sometimes include ANAHUASCA, although i disagree with that, because i think there is enough clearly defined difference, to merit that seperate category.

Whatever, we can all argue our own points, since this has been a topic of confusion it seems for quite a while. However probably the most important thing is that people mention the ingredients used.

This is a widely and most accepted view, yet making a traditional ayahuasca brew is extracting maoi's and extracting dmt by boiling the plants in water. People easily refuse to recognize that boiling plants in water is actually extracting them, by definition and facts. Boiling plants in water is even a chemical extraction, there's no way around this. Boiling vine is a chemical wise extracted maoi, only it is done in a very simple and primitive way.

I've eaten vine dust powder few times, 5 to max 7 gr before it got burdening, and it works but I would not call it a traditional ceremony. In my stomach the acid started to chemically extract maoi.

Call me ridiculous or silly

Thank you Jees for saying this, i was wanting to address this.

It is quite an interesting point, however whilst you say quote; 'traditional ayahuasca brew is extracting maoi's and extracting dmt by boiling the plants in water', i do not believe it to be as simple as the way you are making out. Traditional Ayahuasca is MORE than extracted maoi's and dm!

When you do this, you're extracting other full spectrum compounds that make up the 'Spirit of Ayahuasca'. Those PHARMA type extracts used chemicals which purposely remove a lot of the other stuff!



lol, nice try Jees. I'll just call you WRONG.

What i will add is that the closest thing to Ayahuasca will be extracted maoi's from Vine, although it seems that they possibly lack potency compared to vine water brews, which leads me to believe that the vine has a lot more going on than just that. Remember, it's all about that 'spirit in the vine', not just maoi's and dm thang.

This is where things get confusing. Tradition seems to refer to spirits, and mean full spectrum plant extracts using water as the solvent.

Whereas the modern/scientific take with say Pharmahuasca, seems to refer to maoi's and dm, and often refers to isolated extracts made using chemicals, thereby eliminating other plant substances!

Which do you think is more likely to be 'as nature intended'??

If this were true, then rue-based psilohuasca wouldn't feel as different from mushrooms alone, as it does.

It clearly isn't just an activator unless one takes threshhold doses..

False.



I don't seem to be getting my point across effectively..... Any pharma that does not include vine derivatives /is/ an anahuasca because you're recreating ayahuasca like effects without ayahuasca.

Not every anahuasca is a pharmahuasca, but every pharmahuasca (except using caapi extract) is an anahausca.

Like not every fruit is a banana, but every banana is a fruit.....

Utter nonsense!

Anahuasca means analogue plants used instead. Is it really THAT hard to understand?

yes, of course is diferent, but still (from my experience) the shroom will still be the main energy. now take ayahuasca or caapi with shroomz, you wont be able to say the same. and thats not even the point.




if we want to be even more specific let me tell you this:

there where 14 indigenous tribes representants in this 2nd world ayahuasca conference, and they where kinda pissed of (for many reasons, but i will only state one, to not go off topic)
Most of them didnt like that only the word ayahuasca was used (as a generic name), they felt it was taking away their history and tradition.
like it was said by Professor Joaquim Maná Huni Kuin:
"Each tribe has its own name for this sacred brew, and thats not just a simple linguistic denomination. The name tells about the brew itself, but also tells about the spirituality, traditions, and rituals of each tribe. So we have Kamarãpi for the Ashaninka; Kamalãpi for the Manchineri; Hori for the Nokê Koi; Uni for the Yawanawá; Nixi Pae for the Huni Kuin... and so on!

so where im trying to get to, is not about now being picky about the right terminologies of everything we consume, but at least respect the ones that have long history and tradition of use, just that. of course extracted alks have no tradition whatsoever. but Jurema and Rue, sure have. thats the whole point.