It wasn't me saying it was baseless.

And the South American 'legacy'??, is Ayahuasca vine.

Why is it that people always want to put their faith in ayahuasca and Amazonia?

If you seek the wisdom of a medicine, why not grow it and "cultivate" a direct relationship? If you seek the connection of tradition, why not visit the local indigenous people's where you are and preserve/protect their language/history/mythology/stories/songs/ceremonies? If you seek the knowledge of the elders, why not call your grandmother?

You might be surprised at the resources available in your own backyard, if you take the time but to look around you.

I think if you want an adventure and want to see the world, then by all means, make an educated decision and visit an ayahusquero in south America. If seeing the world and exploring other cultures is your goal, than by all means, I would not discourage travel. Travel in itself can be a total restructuring of perspective and world view.



Also, I'm not trying to say that there there are not skilled shamans which are worth consuming entheogens with, though they are few and far between. Generally you will have to make your way through a herd of charlatans and end up consuming loads of swill and nonsense before finding one of these actual shamans. I'm not sure most understand the intensive endeavor that this entails...worst yet, some may be given a "sham" experience, and may return home thinking that they reached the peak, when in reality they barely scratched the surface...

Most shamans are charlatans, and it's the entheogens that are the true teachers.

If it's Entheogenic experience you are seeking, and if you want what the entheogens offer, all you need to do is obtain the plants or compounds, you don't need to trek the globe for this experience, we can all have it in the comfort of our own homes.

In the "Hamilton's pharmacopia" episode where he covered psilocybe fungi in Mexico, Hamilton was directed to a man who had large psilocybe fungi growing on his property. Hamilton was collecting these mushrooms to later consume in ceremony with a shaman, however the man with the mushrooms on his property encouraged Hamilton to consume the fungi. Hamilton asked "how should I do it? what do I do?", and the man replied " whatever you feel you should be doing, let the mushroom guide you" he was essentially saying that ritual was unnecessary, all you must do is eat the mushroom. This man with the mushrooms on his property encouraged Hamilton to take a large dose and "go with the flow" and to just allow the mushroom to do what it will, he also warned "most shamans are charlatans, frauds, or unnecessary, it's the mushroom that should be revered as the wise teacher and guide"
Hamilton then goes to eat mushrooms with a "shaman". This man is deeply focused on ritual and prayer, he gives Hamilton a miniscule amount of fungi, and performs a 2 hour ceremony. In my opinion it was the man with the fungi growing on his property who had the Entheogenic experience understood, far much more than the so called shaman...

Traditionally, when you would go see a shaman, it would be the shaman consuming the entheogen, not the patient, and because the shaman has learned how to use the entheogen for various practical means which apply to the real world, the shaman would be using the entheogen as his tool to diagnose and treat disease and ailments, both physical and psychological. In this case the entheogens can be seen as medical equipment. At 46 minutes into this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oIAq8FhU78 , we see that a shaman took ayahuasca, he then actually saw into his patient, visually confirming stomach parasites, in this case the entheogen is like an x-Ray machine, or like a diagnostic blood test, it's an actual medical tool.

I think the real shamans understand that it is the entheogens which are the true teachers and guides. The real shamans will see themself as keepers of knowledge regarding these plants, they will see themselves as those, who through experience, have certain talents regarding these plants and entheogens which they can use to help others, they are keepers of knowledge gained from these entheogens, and through experience they understand how to prepare, consume, and experence these entheogens, but they should not have any delusions regarding who the real teacher is...




-eg

"Someone" on "The Internet" once expounded how even mushrooms should be taken with a shaman, like Maria Sabina.
Maria Sabina, who I understand as a child observed a shaman picking mushrooms, and proceeded to pick them and consume them by herself...

Maria Sabina performed rituals, but always made it clear that it was the mushroom that was doing the real work. There was no secrecy, she definately was no charlaton.

But on the subject of Ayahuasca, when we look at the practice of Curanderismo in Peru, we can see a different style of ritual that is based on the capabilities of a Curandero who can actually use it to diagnose and heal illness, along with other skills. This is far more advanced than your Mexican Mushroom Velada, whereby the fungus is allowed to 'run it's course', and do it's thing. One is Active, the other passive.

There must be a word for this, when you make a point and someone makes the same point straight back to you as if it wasn't the exact same point you had just made. Happens to me in real life too. Perhaps it's me. Perhaps I speak/write too obliquely?

The mushroom shaman, in this case, was a relative of Maria Sabina.

Yet, I still feel Maria herself may not approved of the job he did, it's also hard to say how well these relatives really knew Maria, or how much she actually taught them.

The story I heard about Maria is, that she was never "initiated" into the cult of the mushroom, she would simply find them as a child and eat them, the way I was told the story is that shamanism had nothing to do with Maria's introduction to the mushroom, all though it's known that the mushrooms were used shamanically in that region for quite sometime.

I have nothing but respect for Maria Sabina, though in this situation, I feel the man with the mushrooms growing on his property was much more in tune with, and connected to, true entheogencia, and connected to the proper manner in which to consume and learn from entheogens. This man with the mushrooms on his property was more of what a shaman should be than the relative of Maria Sabina.

...he said "when the mushrooms appear like this its a matter of luck"...to me it looks as if the mushrooms were choosing to grow alongside the individual who could get the most from them and do the most with them, to me it looks as if the mushroom chose this man, and in my opinion, they made a great choice, there is not a better persons property these mushrooms could have grown on...

Any way, I'm getting way to subjective here, back on track:

Gordon wasson regretted ever publishing that article the introduced the world to Maria Sabina and the mushroom, he saw something beautiful become over-run and abused, he saw something sacred becoming amenable to manipulation and exploitation...it was as if he found the holy grail only to see it turned into a roadside tourist attraction...

Now Maria sabina's house is a tourist attraction...

I think wasson saw what was happening to his beloved mushroom, in the same manner in which many of us view what is happening to ayahuasca...

"Who" on "the internet" said even mushrooms require the supervision of a shaman?

-eg

Unfortunately, this commodification of entheogenic drugs (medicine if you must) is necessary for our commodified culture to assimilate them and make them part of our own culture.
At the point where these substances are fully assimilated, then maybe we can use them to repair a dysfunctional society that does not respect anything that is not a commodity.

In order to make this happen, we must be more inclusive than these cultures that shun modernity without trying to understand and improve it.

(Indigenous cultures may be secretive as a means to prevent the destruction and exploitation of their entheogens. When the Spanish first came to the new world they would dismiss entheogen use as evil, and would seek to destroy the plants and kill those with knowledge of them, the secrecy may be a means of defense...in modern times this is still an issue)



Are you saying that turning entheogens into a business or a product is somehow essential for modern cultural assimilation of them?

I don't think being more inclusive, or urging larger numbers of people to use entheogens is the answer.





I still have more to say on this issue, but don't have time at the moment...I will return to this thread with a more in depth and detailed response.

-eg

Yes, basically a view that mushrooms/ayahuasca are for "us", the cognoscenti, the people of taste and authenticity, spiritual hauteur and accomplishment. They are not for the riffraff, druggies, thrill-seekers who cannot understand them.

That was Wasson's regret, not that he betrayed some little peasant woman's confidence. The secret of the mushrooms was out and the goddam hippies were going to have a field day.

Trying to find meaningful ways in which we are different from those of whom we disapprove is little more than an exercise in parsing hairs, when you look at the big picture.
Seeing the big picture is one of the greatest, to me, gifts of psychedelics, which is why it's such a perennial mystery, to me, why so many involved in psychedelics are so very sanctimonious.

This is because people get "visions" and to some degree see them as the ultimate truth. The reality is that usually only an interpretation of said visions can be brought back into consensus reality and those interpretations are no more valid than interpretations of religious texts. Even a shamans interpretation of a vision is subject to this. I have had visions many years ago that are just now making sense.

Other than that, some people are just super sanctimonious and there are no amount of drugs that will change this. I once watched a person come back from a full DMT experience thinking that he was Jesus reincarnated.

It's not about approving or disapproving of who is using these things, it's more of an approval or disapproval about how they are using these things. If a person is slipping LSD into people's drinks without their permission, you would disapprove, no?

It's only about "us" and "them" when "us" means those with respect for the entheogens and "them" being those who seek to abuse the entheogens.

Personally, I don't care if a person uses an entheogen for recreation or for spirituality, this is not the issue.

I don't care if you are a shaman, a new York billionaire, a farmer, a hippie, or whatever, all humans as humans deserve access to these compounds, but they do not deserve to exploit them.

*Entheogens can be abused, I shouldn't have to bring up "MKULTRA" or south Africa's "project coast"*

Do you really think ayahuasca tourism has been good for Entheogenic consumption?

How often did you hear of an ayahuasca death before the ayahuasca tourism trade?

Was peyote threatened in the wild before the capitalists knew it was chemically valuable? Of coarse not!

---

I don't think wasson hated hippies, even though that's what most would tell you, I have even made this agreement myself, though it was in regard to wasson intentionally misidentifying soma amanita muscaria, his motivation being he did not want to do what he did to Oaxaca to these small towns in India, and most importantly he could not stand to see something so sacred be exploited so badly...This was the pinnacle of human being, a living, existing miracle and mystery, these entheogens were gateways to the divine, and then to see them being treated like a roadside tourist attraction was the ultimate disrespect...it would be equivalent to turning the Vatican into a strip club, or something...

Any way, we actually agree far more than we disagree, as I feel the entheogens can awaken anybody who wishes to learn from them...I have used entheogens with recreational intentions and received transformation, recreation and curiosity are NOT abuses of these compounds!

However, there will always be those who are threatened by entheogens and who wish to destroy them.



Psychedelics inherently frighten anyone who clings to deeply to reality as it has been culturally conveyed.



As psychedelics dissolve any culture which they encounter, they are seen as a threat to every established culture in existance.




-eg

I don't want to push this discussion too far off topic and I'd be haapi to move this to another thread for discussion if need be, but I felt like it should be addressed.

You know there are some who would say Gordon Wasson and his ilk intentionally released psychedelics upon the people and were integral in creating the hippie "counter culture" movement. Far from being distressed about these sacred medicines falling in with the wrong crowd, it is said it was a highly orchestrated plot of the intelligencia to get these things into the hands (and heads) of the public at large.

Now I'm not sure I buy this whole story, and Jan himself rubs me the wrong way in a lot of ways, but he has amassed a lot of evidence. Even if I don't agree with all his interpretations of it, it's probably something that people interested in the subject should at least be familiar with.

Give it a look, I'd be interested in to hear you folques thoughts on the matter.

R. Gordon Wasson The Man, the Legend, the Myth Beginning a New History of Magic Mushrooms, Ethnomycology, and the Psychedelic Revolution

I know what you want to say but not all ney sayers come from the same place.

If I say that powerful entheogenics are not for those that are incapable to meet the minimum requirements to use it responsible wise[**] , I think that doesn't make me an entheogen-snob, but speaking words of love for those about to get a drama due recklessness, and preventing the scene from examples that only lead to harder prohibitions. Who's served with that?

Then usually follows the argument: "Let anyone have his/her faults and learn from that". I disagree: we learn to drive cars, bicycles, operating machines, etc. There's nothing snobbish in teaching people how to, or pointing to people who are on the verge of going south. I agree with you Swayambhu that some go way to far in that, and become snobbish elitist. Many things under the sun there are.



[**] I realize that it is hard to conclude who's to say what. But overly clear examples are not hard to find. When someone is not granted to use the stuff, I think that is not a definition to be brought on by someone else, but simply showed by the fruits of those who use. Dry facts speak for themselves.

No, you weren't. Instead when someone posted thoughts that challenged your views, you called them out on saying it. I just pointed out they didn't necessarily say that. ;P


I kinda dislike the use of concepts such as "more advanced" in the context of spiritual or psychedelic experience. More complex, probably. More involved, possible. Requiring more study, okay. More 'advanced'? Who are we to decide?


I see your point, though I'm not sure I agree with such a black-and-white view. What exactly counts as exploitation...?

Eg. I see Dutch smartshops carrying truffles and good advice as a force of good, even though clearly following a commoditized, business approach. They are, however, sustainable, honest and (mostly) benevolent. When commoditization as a prerequisite to assimilation by our culture came up, I think probably this was the main line of thought.

Jungle tours, on the other hand, are in my opinion barely sustainable, somewhat dishonest, and oftentimes quite damaging.

So there's good business and bad business.


Education, concern and judgement are different things. Generally you can see the difference between these in how someone speaks.

Education is invaluable. I mean stuff like the Nexus Wiki. Provided to all, promoting good attitude, calling attention to the risks while not negating the potential benefits, operating from a point of inclusion.

Concern is a sign of an empathetic human being. You see someone ranting about how they drop ten pills of MDMA at a party, sleep two hours total over a long weekend, and are concerned about the malicious DMT entity that now set up camp in their bedroom, well it's perfectly right to tell them that maybe they should, probably, take a break if they don't want to end up psychotic or dead.

Judgement, on the other hand, is something quite different. When people talk about "the uneducated" or "the general public" with mock concern, that's judgement. It's like XVIII. century nobles talking about how "the filthy peasants aren't ready for freedom of press". It's exclusive and self-aggrandizing, a viewpoint of hybris.

Actually, it was ghanesh saying "it" (ie. Amazonian traditions) is baseless, albeit in the form of a rhetorical question.

What I in fact did say is that ghanesh's fear mongering against self-administered ayahuasca was baseless FUD:


Ghanesh then twisted my words as if I was calling Amazonian traditions baseless, in passing suggesting that his particular brand of fear mongering is representative of these traditions, which I believe is not generally the case.

What is the set and setting for a first time psychedelics user?

Setting is his mindset plus what information he got here or there about tripping.
Set is: is he confident, is he with people he trusts?

My first time could not have been with psychedelics users. I didn't know any and from my point of view that world and it's inhabitants were scary.
On the other hand, Ayahuasca was out in the open world, you could buy a ticket for a week or more, to discover something mystical, healing, spiritual, staying within the law. Some of these guys were making documentaries, movies.. What to be scared about?

That is the problem for people who jump in this world on their own, who will you trip with first?

I understood on the second day of tripping that the teacher was Ayahuasca and myself, not the shaman. Still I'm grateful to them for introducing me to this world and to myself.


So if you like to venture in the jungle, beware, they are dangers, and shamans who see themselves as gurus, but they are probably some good people too. About doing it underground in your country, I don't know anybody else than me doing it, so I don't know. And I know I would have the tendency to become a guru myself. So there is danger here as well ^^

This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that psychedelics need to be commodified in order to be assimilated by our culture. At the moment, it is the drug war that is the primary impediment and I truly believe that this was one of the driving forces behind it.

The psychedelic experience in S. America has been commodified via ayahuasca and san pedro and this is why they are "getting the business". But of course, there is many problems with this. Other than being dangerous, the primary issue I see is that they have modified their culture in order to accommodate ours. Other than the drugs/medicine doing what they do, the entire "ceremony" is a facade. I was particularly pissed about this because that was the primary reason behind my journey to Peru.

Our culture is fairly new in the world and doesn't have any sort of heritage of entheogenic use outside the Beats and the Age of Aquarius, neither of which are sustainable or have any cohesive spiritual practice. Despite this, this is what the ayahuasca retreats are catering to and have adapted the spiritual practices of the Amazon to accommodate. It is entirely opportunistic. Some of the individuals involved surely have good intentions, but those intentions are misplaced and being taken advantage of.

The current state of commodification is not doing justice to either the cultures in the Amazon or to our own. Once the prohibition is lifted and we can operate above ground, we can finally develop a culture around entheogens that is our own and reflects our values, mores, and sensibilities. I think that once this happens, as a society we can finally turn an enlightened eye upon our own culture of commodification and ask if this is a good path forward. I personally feel that commodities will not go away entirely, but will become a single facet of how we approach economics of the material world in the same way that any modern government utilizes concepts of all the governments that came before it.

Fearmongering? What on earth are you talking about?!

Pitubo, have you actually drunk with a Curandero? You appear to doubt parts of their tradition.

Why is that?

Do you have more experience than they do?