I am having some thinking done in me, about names in the modern western context. Names of the skill set(s) and habitual reliance upon those skill set(s). Perhaps specific words can be found to have specific orientations of Set and Setting, aligned with names practitioners have identified with. Or rather, aligned with individuals as defined by their acceptance of the label they are inhabiting, as a skill “set”.

For example, Terrence McKenna identified as an academic, instead of holding himself in any other kind of identification pattern, and persons who engage in use of psychedelics in connection with listening to his lectures, have a stronger orientation towards academic qualifications. We don't always know what is cause and what is effect, for example, question does academia lead the process of naming, or does the process of naming lead academia.

I am inviting the dmt-nexus community to use this thread to discuss what word names, of any person's skill set, are applicable, (before we might just choose to rest in the title of having a skill set). For example, the skill set of a “psychonaut”, seems to hold the meaning of having had multiple breakthrough psychedelic experiences within a Westernized mindset, (and potentially in that the Westernized mindset needed to be unravelled before breaking through). That is when compared and contrasted with the common place use of a word like “Ayahuascero” as used in Peru, meaning could be good could be bad, but will have Ayahuasca available.

Where I am coming from, is the point of view of having just read and re-read, the DMT-Nexus Hyperspace Lexicon, and noted a particular absence of meaning, which is likely to be rather only lack of overt statement of meaning. Most indigenous cultures, have indications within the names of the entities we may experience meeting, that sometimes the exact entity we meet in hyperspace, (aka Dreamtime or Dreaming or Jukurrupla in Warlpiri lingo, reading the indigenous use of the english word “dream” to be simultaneously metaphoric, and true and real in connotation, with “The Dreaming” translated often as being in all time simultaneous, combined with the locations at which we may realise The Dreaming is reality), might walk up and shake hands. Perhaps I am only questioning myself as to why, when straight spice is the substance, overtness becomes less possible. Perhaps I need to question myself this before I smoke spice straight, perhaps, . . .

I don't know if I am thinking of the possibility of collectively expanding any word, or category of words, currently in the DMT-Nexus Hyperspace lexicon, into a subset of words that might be applicable to my point, that the intergration process of meeting entities, already happens frequently within many indigenous cultures, and thus we ought not expect it is not already happening among spice folk using this forum. Perhaps there is already too much fear of being locked into erroneous social definitions of insanity. (A useful definition of insanity I got given, is that it is any state of mind entered into a long time before enough other persons can also enter into a similar enough state of mind and corroborate it is real.)

Clearly also, awarding any ability to improve anybody's health, to any such word as those we might have in mind, related to an Earthly skill set, and also related to any particular entity, (and knowing it is normal that half of us witness the Earthly presence first before Hyperspace, while half witness the Hyperspace existence first before the Earthbound, and less than 10% won't connect the Earthly with the Hyperspace, although many traditional indigenous shaman believe that connection is always eventually made for everybody, but maybe through an unusual “channel”), can't be observed, because we can't claim any fact of health giving without the full seal of approval of Western Medical Science and Legislators combined. Yet neither might we presume anybody with a doctorate of Western Medical Science, to be more able than any specific psychonaut in navigating hyperspace.

My own experiential reality, all Earth bound, of the names I know, that manifest in both Hyperspace and at Earth, I'll put into another post below, so folk can skim past all that perhaps, down to the last paragraph, which ought flow OK from this post without disrupting your own point of view. Then is a third post with some quotes from the 'Anthropology of Consciousness' journal.

The tradition I have learned within, of the way of healers who might access psychedelic plants, is at once, both indigenous australian, by location and by a little distant ancestry, and simultaneously quite strongly influenced by the life of George Ivanovitch Gurdjieff, and his journey to “Shambala”/”Shangrila”, in the Hindu Kush, where Sanscrit is still spoken.

The place Shambala, as named by Tibetean Buddhist Monks, we know of as Australians in my age group, via the children's TV show “Monkey”, as the home of the long sought after scriptures, (written in Sanscrit). Gurdjieff is the last man known in the public eye for having travelled there, and to return and tell the tale, awarded him a place as teacher to the 13th Dalai Lama.

In general my dream/visionary images, are conditioned by indigenous cosmology and by the West, in that all the faery stories of my childhood, are present, and also by various religions, including Christianity, but notably excluding the Church. I also do not see cartoons, and its always like going straight from ice to water vapour in tiny doses, yet seeing nothing at all in large doses. I know there are folks who will commend that I only need a larger dose, but that tends to wipe me out bad, as in blood pressure drops and I pass out and see nothing, or feel very sick in the gut and want to hike up the nearby mountain to prove a point about whatever I am not looking at, but will no doubt be orienting to within dreams at night both before and after the trip.

I know it is basically alright if anyone wants to call me “Shaman”, that I won't deny the title, and won't presume to myself the guilt of cultural appropriation, because neither can I make any effort to claim such a title. The reason I would not deny, is because, via the Gurdjieff sponsored teaching tradition in the West, and knowing men who know a man who learned direct from Gurdjieff, I have “Dreaming” experiences, (conditioned also by indigenous australians who will not differentiate visions by psychedelic plants, from visions in dreams in sleep at night where I first encountered Alien life, from any other trance type visions, but will insist upon a set of rules I follow, around how to learn from hyperspace dreaming, and how to communicate appropriately around), of being given permission via Shambala, to become called “Shaman”.

I also got recognised by three senior male Ngungkari, from Mparntwe in Central Australia, as a Ngungkari in my own right, via my skill at homeopathy. That was at the Parliament of World's Religions in Melbourne in 2009, with an African Medicine Man present also. Thus I could call myself a Ngungkari. Yet the language I speak is English. Ngungkari is a word in numerous languages of Central Australia, which is not here.

Here, in Brisbane Australia, the local indigenous word is, of unsolved spelling, sounding like “Kediatchure”. A few senior Kediatchure men here accept that it is recognisable that I have forged my own Kediatchure, and that its form is recognisably indigenous, and western, and in English. Indigenous and non-indigenous, simultaneous, which is hardly surprising given my ancestry. And other Kediatchure men locally, might wish I don't be recognised, since my Ketiatchure might show up their apparent sorcery towards better Kediatchure men than themselves. And so I lay no claim upon owning the title of Kediatchure woman.

In medieval Europe, I might have been burned at the stake as a witch. And I can't help but think “witch” is that word “which” might be most appropriately applied. After all, I know that the word “spell” as in how to spell English words, indeed has the same origin as magic spells, and I know that the word “grammar” as in how to construct English language sentences, indeed has the same origin as grimmoire, or a witch's book of lore, and lists of plants, etc. In fact it is as much my understanding of how language can convey health, in which indigenous Ngungkari have called me Ngungkari, as in my use of homeopathy. And then I think, of the obvious word “Druid” (and druidess), and I remember the influence of reading Astrix comics in the school library age 10, and “Getafix” being the first character whose name pun didn't just confuse me. Now I also think it pointless being hung up on what name to identify with, which is not exactly the point here.

Somehow, in between Astrix and Monkey and history lessons about Burke and Wills, all Australians get, and then the secret history behind the survivors of the Burke and Wills expedition having chewed Pituri, it can become very apparent that mainstream culture is yet inclusive of the heritage of healing via psychedelic medicine plants. Inclusive with only a thin veil of legislative tenure, between this understanding, and majority think tank. Yet the tenure of legislation is yet a veil we often don't need lifted in the interests of better health. Because the veil can be thicker for any person fearing threats of imprisonment, despite becoming too thin in the prisons, I have heard.

Perhaps the insight I have into all such various heritages, is ancestral as much as learned. For example, my father's PhD, he completed the year I turned five, and which he tells me of my learning from “by osmosis”, got awarded a first class honour, and he had a job offered him at Harvard that he declined. His research got repeated at Harvard and turned into MRI technology. Many indigenous Australians I tell that fact, immediately assert that this means all MRI technology belongs within indigenous Australian culture, even though Dad won't admit that his mother's claim upon Spanish ancestry, turns out to be an indigenous ancestral thread. Yet obviously there are doctors in hyperspace exemplifying the intercultural nature of the psychedelic experience, and with MRI technology being a tool of many shaman, curandero, ngungkari, … druid.

I once got told about indigenous men with dark skin whose skill is inclusive of having “x-ray specs”, and avoiding thinking of the punk rock star with the same name, and immediately a memory came to me, from a remote childhood dream, of my father having the same skill, to see inside the human body very accurately. Making me now question myself about what happens to names, when a skill set, is moreso a tool in hyperspace. For example if I own x-ray specs in hyperspace, doesn't that make me a something nameable at Earth. But perhaps only if those who name me, have witnessed my use of the x-ray specs, to be possible in an Earthbound way as well as in hyperspace. Dad also taught us all shapeshifting as children in our dreams. Yet he did not give me a word to describe the mastery of these skills, only the word of the methodology of learning, being by osmosis.

Another widespread indigenous word is “Wirran”, yet with a translation that is broader than a Curandero type understanding of the medicine plants, and also narrower in social attitude and merit, more alike “Guru”. And yet so many charlatan Guru are present in India and Indian influenced stories, as that I could hardly want any such title, even if anybody wanted to learn from following my ideas. In fact, although I am good enough at the skill of homeopathy, I didn't finish a western type qualification and don't usually call myself even as much as a lay homeopath. That is despite occassional providence to anybody seeking via my skill.

I have done exorcisms often enough, and by various methods, homeopathy being useful among, yet no more or less useful than psychedelics can be. I got taught in the Gurdjieff sponsored tradition, that psycho-active plants, are those which sustain access to their “ray of creation” at the correct density for the human metabolism to access, yet that all animal, mineral, vegetable substances, have a Ray of Creation, and homeopath's dilutions done well enough, may open that ray. (Most commercial dilution processes are fully mechanized, but all homeopaths are taught to do a few oneself so as to learn; and the process of potentizing via dilution, is much the same as the biodynamic farming methodology of making their “500” product.) A fact all the more believable, if utilizing homeopathy close enough in time to utilizing a psychedelic. That closeness in time, bringing to the fore, a minefield of drug picture contraindications, (“drug picture” is the homeopath's lingo, translated originally out of 18th Century German), that don't help in the slightest with finding a name for the skill of the management of such contraindications.

Another point to consider, is about whether to name bad practice as sorcery, as done by bruja-or-who-they-point-at, as opposed to curandero, and curandero-gone-bad. Aligning moreso within the indigenous australian tradition, and simply letting old words hold their old meanings, was always my choice by default of no choice. “Kediatchure” might be translated as being “the wicca”. “Ngungkari” translated as what to call those persons who, in childhood, fell into the magic potion, like Obelix. Such word meanings, as always in indigenous australian custom, implying could be good and healing yet could also be very very bad and self destructive to be involved with. Thus we all know we need question ourselves constantly as to whether our involvements with anybody else around us have caused a self destructive pattern within us. Without that understanding, and with a heirarchy of reputations promoted in society, any medicine system can fail. This point might be a point which the DMT-Nexus Community might want to apply scientific thought into.

A science of the mystery schools perhaps, and yet science is the means by which all such words have long carried an indefinable meaning, as to goodness versus badness. Gurdjieff taught that the sciences are older than modern Western thought, and within many indigenous cultures, if we look for evidence of scientific method, we find. In fact, my point of view, is that modern western science, teaches us all its own flaw, in that no experiment can be done in a vacuum. The Hyperspace lexicon is a good example, since its availability online, is simultaneously what keeps it alive, and what keeps it in flux. (But as to whether my use of the word “flux” refers to a flux transfer event, I have no idea.) Indigenous and Eastern-in-general, ideas of science don't presuppose the vaccuum. And the variables are stringently kept more minimal, by contrast with trying to fiddle around with multiple variables inside of a non-existent vacuum. Thus I could propose an experiment, in which we could compare two words, by using those words more often in as many contexts as possible, (just talking about the idea of an experiment is enough). One means good spice practice. The other means, could be good could be bad, about spice practice. Hang on, there is already this experimental parameter in place, in the words for entities encountered. By Hyperspace Fool, on the part of a Westerner like concept of idealized heirarches of repute, and by NGC_2264, on the part of a more Eastern like concept of no differentiation of good from bad possible. Commenting in this threat is thus appreciable.

In conclusion, I guess I have to admit that the idea of a “spice merchant” came to mind before dismissing in favour of “spice meister”, (secretly some of whom were the “spice munsters” of course, but that can't be readily ascertained as to who). I had to let the idea of spice merchant go, of course questioning myself, “would that guy be a potential healer, or did the fact that he turned medicine into merchandise make him a sorcorer?” Further questioning of myself lead me to starting this thread, “Does DMT-Nexus Hyperspace lexicon need and/or want to name any skill set, and perhaps use names that could be good or could be bad”, only to find I answered the question by realising the process is already going down without being quite as specifically addressed as the Earthbound notion I am proposing. Yet is it that a question remains, about whether to fit into the spice lexicon words like Wizard, Witch, and druid, or are all such names perhaps only too obvious.

Bearing in mind that I incompleted myself as an anthropologist, and as a linguist, long before incompleting myself as a homeopath, perhaps I should add that the whole question belongs in the realm of anthropologist's cries out against the cultural misappropriation they have always had a hand in for themselves. And isn't it odd that the worst I could be called, as a witch, is what I may have incompleted a history course so as to be. Perhaps all I am saying is that the existing lexicon is not obvious. Not as obvious as what seems to be the case, is less obvious than that.

Quotes in this post, are from author Evgenia Fotiou, and in an article published in 'Anthropology of Consciousness', and derived by her from her PhD dissertation. https://www.academia.edu/34450745/The_Globalization_of_Ayahuasca_Shamanism_and_the_Erasure_of_Indigenous_Shamanism

The word shaman, commonly used today to refer to practitioners called ayahuasqueros or curanderos in Amazonia, comes from the Tunguz word saman (Eliade 1964). The word entered the European vocabulary in the 18thcentury from travelers and explorers in Siberia who were mostly Dutch or German native speakers (Laufer 1917; Flaherty 1992). Even though shamans are not the only religious figures in their societies, according to Mircea Eli-ade, the shaman alone is the “great master of ecstasy” (1964). In fact, because of Eliade’s work shamanism is still closely associated with altered states of consciousness (ASCs) even though some have challenged the usefulness of terms like trance and ecstasy as analytical tools when it comes to discussing shamanism (Hamayon 1993, 199. According to Immanuel Casanowicz(1926) the Tunguz word for shaman means one who is “excited,” “moved,” or “ raised.” Mihaly Hopp al (1987) adds that another translation of the word saman is “inner heat” and it comes from the Sanskrit word saman that means song. The word has been widely discussed and contested as being inappropriate for defining such a wide spectrum of traditional healing practitioners(Kehoe 2000) to the point that most anthropologists today prefer to speak of shamanisms (Atkinson 1992), and others argue that because the use of the term has changed so much over time it is impossible to arrive at an agreed upon operational definition (Jones 2006). Most definitions are either general and universal or context specific. In indigenous languages there is a specific word assigned to healers usually related to some important aspect of that culture’s healing complex. Atkinson has brought attention to the diverse approaches and theories on shamanism and warns of generalizing theories that might lead to “unwarranted reductionism and romantic exoticizing of a homogeneous non-Western ‘other’ " (1992:309).

I want to add to the academic quagmire around the word “Shaman”, that via tripping glossalia orienting into Sanscrit language, the prefix “sha-” and “sa-, are the same in origin as the word “Cha” as used in Traditional Chinese Medicine, meaning as opposed to “Chi”. Chi being healing energy, and Cha being disease energy. Also “man” is the same prefix in origin, as in the Arabic word “Iman”, and also “Imam”, that can be used to mean having good self knowledge. Thus Shaman, is “disease-knower”, and master of the song of training inner heat to behave in the interests of planetary health.

What is sustained is that Shaman can be a good guy or a bad guy. The article from Evgenia Fotiou epitomises westernised cultural inclination to define via hierarchies, yet simultaneously find many indigenous cultures very resistant to hierarchical definitions. The point is about the fact that sustaining hierarches of reputation is incompatible with engaging in health care providence as occupation.

Fotiou's article also includes discourse around such as Michael Harner's Foundation for Shamanic Studies, for example:

He founded the Foundation for Shamanic Studies in 1979 and has been training westerners in shamanic techniques since then. This is possible because “core shamanism can be transplanted into any cultural setting as a skeleton around which a person can build his or her own spirituality”(Znamenski 2007:242), a model that fits very well with western individualism. (p157)

and;

Most popular and New Age literature presents an overly positive picture of shamanism throughout the world. In this era of western fascination with shamanism, its dark side has been covert. A result of this romanticisation of shamanism is that even when there is evidence of malevolent shamans there is a tendency to dismiss them as “pseudo shamans.” This is not only awestern phenomenon. As Marjorie Mandelstam Balzer notes in Siberia, “there is a tendency to romanticize ‘true traditional’ Sakha shamans as fully benevolent, priestly, and white”(1996:313). However, she reports that according to her consultants a shaman is not truly great unless he evokes both feelings of love and fear (1996:313). The romanticization of shamanism and similar traditions is not necessarily only an effect of Western interest in them. The focus on shamanic rivalries and competition makes indigenous peoples themselves uneasy, and it appears that they might choose to forget the negative aspects of their spiritual tradition, especially if we take into account that these traditions were demonized and suppressed for a long time (Mandelstam Balzer 1996:314).

So far my only conclusion, is that my thinking is backing up the approach DMT-Nexus already displays. But curious as I am about the pattern of opinion among you all, please contribute to this thread.

Agreed.

Well, since that is signed with at least as much doubt as my pointed point became pointless, . . .

. . . readers get a bit of the next chapter in my "incompleted" jimjam construction underway, . . .

This thinking goes along the lines of “As above, So below”, and how I got taught think a meaning is in real time of carnal body lives, of the ancient saying.

Often we (we = humans + humanoid persons) have thought of “As above so below” as in a relationship between the stars and the earth, by which health care needs can be interpreted. Another meaning is, that to know any fact, especially of one's own body, one need know what is above, and what is below, in density. Above can be like an Angel, or, can be like a whole family group. Below, can be like a worm, or, can be like an individual organ of the human body. So to know myself I need know my family and my organs. To know my organs I need know they belong in a whole human type mammal, and that they are made out of cells, and the whole organ is greater than the sum of the cells. To know my family I need know they belong to a larger society about which I know certain facts, and that societies are made out of individuals, who may be somewhat like me, but can also be different, simultaneously.

Now, about hierarchies among humanity, within any specific set and setting, “As above so below” is also relevant. Mindset relating with skill set, and setting relating with all of biodiversity as well as social environment. We can know that hyperspace entities have a hierarchy which can be very specific. We can know that the biodiversity of animal mineral and vegetable substances have a hierarchy also very specific. Yet without knowing all of the organisational structures between all entities in hyperspace (aka “dreaming” is lingo I am accustomed to), and without knowing all the biodiversity, (and knowing indigenous australian men are superb in organising mindset defined by hierarchies in the biodiversity, and it is customary that all human communication occurs within such patterns, unless patterned overtly via the stars), we can't understand how hierarchical organisational structures work among ourselves.

Which is a bleak thought about our abilities to manage human culture right now, but a positive thought for the future of the biosphere.

On a more hilarious front, the word "entity" tries to do double back flips around how it came to be that indigenous Australian organisations incorporated for the purpose of interfacing with the nation state have been calling theirselves "entities", but significantly, the entity who asserted that attempted double back flip, was failing the worth of any use value in the jimjam.

Why any word? What does it all mean? What does each and every individual word really mean?

Sanskrit has 96 words for love! Ancient Persian has 80! The English language has one. Does it feel constricting?

Expand your language. There is always more than one word for anything.

dangerous word ""


"anything"

"N.E.>thing"

I appreciate your post rivaq, and I don't think it is getting the thought it deserves based on the responses... I would ask those who responded if they even have a spiritual practice and if they don't then saying it doesn't matter what you call yourself, doesn't really come from a place of knowledge or understanding of the subject material... it's like someone who doesn't play football saying why does it matter what you label your position on the team? It matters because each position fulfills certain functions.

Witch, wizard, shaman, sorcerer, Brujo, healer and so on are all words which describe similar things, but not the exact same things.

Here is an anology: say you have the term medical professional, that tells you something about the individual, but there are also more specialized roles within the field of medicine, like say neurosurgeon...

The term neurosurgeon is more helpful because it gives more specific information.

That's why I believe this is something worth discussing.

I think it important to note that just because someone uses the spice does not mean they do it within a magical or spiritual context. I think the term psychonaught applies here very well. They use Entheogens and psychedelics to explore consciousness or in some cases just for fun.

This is different than using Entheogens as part of a real spiritual practice.

Much of our direct ties to unbroken lines of spiritual knowledge in fact no longer exist, the info either isn't there or is only available in some cases to those initiated into specific practices. This is why I believe we are due for new paradigms of spiritual/shamanic practice. an example of this is neoshamanism. It indicates that a form of shamanism is practiced but that it does not come from an unbroken line of knowledge, it is "new". And generally revolves around those practices introduced by m. Harner

I myself do not have a name for my individual practice, which combines accepted elements of "shamanism" such as plant medicine use, trance states, and traveling to upper and lower worlds, with some practices that might fit under the label witchcraft, like doing spells, protective work, divining, and ceremony. But even this type of practice could be called intuitive or eclectic witchcraft, because it doesn't come from a specific teaching per say but rather is assembled based on what feels right to the practitioner.

A huichol singing shaman is going to do much different things that an Amazonian currandero, therefore separate words are appropriate. It does matter which words we use, it matters a lot!

Here's one more analogy I know will hit home. It would be like lumping all drug users together in the same exact category.. people here always get offended when dmt manufacturers are lumped in with other drug dealers. It would be like saying it doesn't matter what drug you use cause they are all the same. That comes from a place of not truly understanding. Talking but not nderstanding

thanks

I appreciate the point about users of illicit drugs, and their fairly exacting discernment of their own sub-categories. But then I have always had friends among the "junkies", who seem to appreciate my own specific form of ability in the ways of medicine.

I also believe that the area of comparison of the names of Western Medicine's experts, is appropriate. In fact there are very many comparisons that can be drawn.

Last night I went to see a new release film, called "Just One Drop" around the patterns in which homeopath's reputations have always climbed then fallen, then climb again, and fall again. If I call myself anything it might be "lay homeopath", perhaps only because the first teacher I relied upon is a "lay homeopath" (he paid a mortgage and raised six children from his income as a "lay homeopath", but I don't accept money in exchange for homeopathy, since it is too easy to be mistaken as soon as money enters the equation, while without money I am confident of being very exacting in my prescribing).

One of the points the film makes, is that the very negative report made by the Australian government about homeopathy, applies a far higher standard of expectation of the science, than is ever applied to modern Western Medical Science.

Western medical science can ill afford even one error to keep the reputation they lay claim upon. Yet I know of more than one case of a person having had the wrong organ removed during surgery, for example. When the make mistakes, their mistakes were all the more dreadful than anything erroneous happening within Complementary and Alternative Medicine, (which I don't claim to be getting done without error, but rather as just as frequently mistaken within its own paradigm as the G.P. within theirs). I learned last night, that the American Medical Association, (thus also Australian Medical Association and many similar lobby groups), formed in origin in reaction against the formation of the American Institute of Homeopaths.

I think that the many homeopaths in Brazil who are also members of the UDV, will likely agree, that apparently, without the status of a qualified Doctor of Medicine, qualified to turn us into drug dependent minions alleged to the pharmaceutical industry, we need set a higher standard in our science. Let the pharmaceutical industry find reason to support psychedelic science, and they will have inadvertently promoted homeopathy, but I doubt they will also find homeopathy to be quintessential to the needs of good sitters, even if anybody utilizing psychedelics so as to care for the health of others, will likely have begun learning homeopathy as a tool of self preservation.

I think there are definately more words for love, in the english language.

infatuation, affection, fondness, (having a) crush, warmheartedness, care, romance, passion, amourus, fondness, dearness, inclination, to hold dear, to cherish, sympathy...

Spicemeister has my vote.

We just need to petition the Oxford and Webster dictionaries now


Probably not as many as the Eskimos have for ice though.

I do think the term pschonaught is appropriate in many cases.

since the smoking of extracted dmt is a relatively new practice, it is not a part of most shamanic or occult practices. Although usage of smoked dmt may or may not have happened in several ancient cultures, we have no specific knowledge of the details of their practice, and therefore must really just invent new paradigms and techniques.

A curious fact is that almost every culture has its wise men it's shamans etc. and although there are often some variation of practices and beliefs, they also share a lot in common and share core concepts. So this stuff isn't being pulled out of their bums. They are and we're tapping into a shamanic mystical vibration of consciousness that is a real thing.

So in order for new paradigms to be authentic, they too must draw from this higher vibration. Practice without true connection to these forces is false and without substance.

I have done some heavy ceremonies in places of power, or places with a significant spirit or vibration, and had some mind blowing results having actually summoned or made contact with several real powerful spirits of nature. Now I call on these spirits in various ways in everyday life as sources of purification and protection. I received many external affirmations during and after rituals in nature.

maybe I'll make a thread of my musings, but within the scope of this thread on the topic of names:

My understanding of he purpose of the thread was that it was to discuss appropriate names for those spiritual practices some of us use which incorporates use of spice. I think this is a slight misguided subject because it sort of implies that spice use in and of itself is a shamanic/occult practice worthy of a name like many other traditions. I don't say this to knock users of spice but rather base the opinion on some of the accepted criteria for what makes a religion/paradigm/practice.

One of the main criterion for a (let's just call it a religion for simplicities sake even though spirituality and religion are 2 different things )
Is that other people follow it. If you develop a new set of practices and have great results, awesome, but it's not really a recognized practice until other people follow it and share the same beliefs and practices.

Another criterion at least in my mind is that there be some specific teachings and myths be they oral or written down. Some sort of common belief reference point. For instance the Bible unites many people as a set of stories beliefs. In some shamanic traditions these are passed down orally, and many occult and pagan groups have their own specific set of teachings and practices.

So we could make new traditions and I am in favor of doing so and I am working on my own and I have 1 person who practices with me. But I wouldn't call it anything specific yet because of a lack of official unique practices, teachings or followers. Although I have developed some unique practices, they drew from some already existing practices, the spirits didn't necessarily dictate them to me.

So for now I think the appropriate term for me and others in this boat of actively practicing shamanic or occult spirituality, but without a group or defined religion, would be either eclectic witch or intuitive witch. Eclectic in this case means drawing from several sources instead of one teaching. There is a danger here of not having real substance. If you just do things without understanding why or without real results then you are deluding yourself.

So for now until some real results or specific teachings come out in regards to the spice, I am in favor of using the term psychonaught, or eclectic or intuitive witch shaman yogi you take your pick based on what you see yourself as.

Another thing to keep in mind is that there are degrees of learning. One who is on the path but is not fully realized may be called adept, apprentice, or seer, where one who has full knowledge of the tradition may be master, shaman, or witch.

Seer has several definitions, but the one I prefer defines a seer as one who sees the truths. You may not be a shaman capable of journeying to the underworld to retrieve a soul trapped or lost, but you are awake to certain fundamental truths of the world. A shaman not only sees these truths but works with them and other powers or spirits to affect change.

So for now maybe we could all be spice seers

Post-mormon soul wizard, reporting in. I added smoking dmt as part of my spiritual practice, but that's only like 3 years. I'd like to meet someone who has danced with Dimitri, seriously, mindfully, for a couple of decades and feel them out.

I wonder what a true shaman or an ayahuascadero would describe our practice/devotions?

My vote is for spice meister

Spice Meister is good and probably closer to what I would call myself (giggle). But I think a good "name" for a westerner who has an inside line on hyperspatial healing might be some variation of Ambassador or Plenipotentiary. They imply a similar sense of working in tandem with an authority outside of oneself, be it a plant or a more spiritual aspect. For that matter Privateer or Marque-Holder have similar implied meanings. Regardless, there are an astounding number of ways to express "names" with language. I recently had a changa experience where I irresponsibly asked open hyperspace for a certain persons "name", as in true identity. Now every trip is flooded with "names" suggested by every tom, dick, and shiva in hyperspace and sorting them out is simply not an option, if ya feel me.

I had to look this up:

noun
noun: plenipotentiary; plural noun: plenipotentiaries

1.
a person, especially a diplomat, invested with the full power of independent action on behalf of their government, typically in a foreign country.
synonyms: diplomat, representative; More
ambassador, minister, emissary, chargé d'affaires, chargé, envoy, legation;
archaiclegate
"his last posting was as plenipotentiary in Paris"

adjective
adjective: plenipotentiary

1.
having full power to take independent action.

But are we capable of independent action? Are we not bound by very many social and environmental forces beyond our control? However I think an Ambassadorial approach is significantly worthy of considering.

As for my own suggestion of spice meister, I think I liked the rhyming sound moreso that the idea of commonality of mastery of a substance. Maybe just an interesting sounding name for stimulating discourse, but maybe folks may identify with nevertheless.

There are no wrong answers in terms of what names an individual identifies with. Perhaps what the discourse is about, is how to establish identification with any such name in any safety. Does the name need to be externally applied rather than approached and adopted as preferred identification sound pattern?



I liked psychonaut as soon as I heard that name, even though I don't identify so much with the title, since I don't use as much spice as those who habituate the role. My body responds different to most, and needs much less. I see more with less, and find myself at breakthrough point only too easily usually. Which doesn't leave me with much attaching me to the normal psyche of most of society, and so my decision making processes tend to be considered somewhat odd. Although more odd in the past than now, I still choose to avoid doing shit for cash, and most folks think this is odd. Money conditions the body into needing more of any substance, to find its point of no return.

I like the term spice seer. Perhaps moreso than spice meister.

I wonder if a term defining my own specific sensibilities, is even possible. For example, yesterday, I got asked by a junkie, when I might be next navigating via Pituri (Duboisia hopwoodii), and thought it through, into a possible date. But then, without overtly answering, but just considering long and hard, how the junkie I know is likely now to hold me bound into that date, an odd coincidence occurred. I set my intention as an early morning walk up the local mountain here, at a specific date not too far away. Then this morning, I open Facebook briefly, and see a sponsored event, run by a woman I never heard of before, who is selling (early bird prices end today), a guided Shamanic walk up the same mountain the same day. I contemplated the scenario briefly, thinking, "well, if I have to bump into her, the self-proclaimed shaman, I will explain myself in all honesty, and she can choose for herself whether to follow me, include me, avoid me, or any other option she might find herself belief existing within".

Foolhardy?

I like "spice meister"!

I think the choice of what to call yourself is partly based on what other people's associations with the word are-
Shaman, for instance, implying (to me) that you have a certain mastery over the practice, which I (personally) would definitely not claim at my own level, or perhaps ever (not wanting to give expectations to have to live up to)!

Personally, I call myself an Absurdist, or perhaps a Dudeist, both fairly meaningless terms.
I think something that you yourself like the sound of is probably best.


It seems like 'shaman' only became such a popular term among 'psychonauts' in the first place because that was the word pop culture uses to refer to all varieties of 'witch doctor'-
it comes from Siberian 'medicine men' (IIRC), who really only used Amanitas (again, IIRC), one of the least known psychoactives, and generally considered a dissociative/deliriant rather than a psychedelic!
It seems that 'curandero/curandera' (the mexican healers who use mushrooms and Peyote, e.g. Don Juan in Castaneda's writings) would have been much more appropriate for our subculture, especially since it was 'curanderas' who first introduced mushrooms and salvia to our culture via R. Gordon Wasson.

Just read a neat essay contrasting Tibetan and Jungian concepts. It had this paragraph, and while reading I realised what the answer is I am seeking, and which this whole thread, and everybody's input, corresponds with:

The Power of Invocation as the Power of Immanence
We all can bring forth, through the power of invocation, the archetypal dimension into the realm of our ordinary life experience. This is amazing and wonderful power. By our being in the field of awareness of awareness, we can invoke the realm of archetypal luminous cosmological energies. We can invoke the archetypal field configurations and bring forth these archetypal complexities into our experience of ordinary life world. We are able to bring forth the energetic complexity of the luminous archetypal field configurations manifesting them both within the realm of our innermost awareness and simultaneously bringing forth the archetypal dimension into our life circumstances. By invoking the Sambogakaya dimension, the archetypal field enters and infuses Nirmanakaya dimension. The archetypal luminous forms can infuse our mind and infuse our life situations. The archetypal realm can be brought forth into the realm of our most ordinary human experience. Archetypal practice can infuse our ordinary human experience for one’s self and for others.

What I realised, is that the whole concept of "invoking", is engaged by necessity in understanding hierarchies. Yet the traditional medicine persons of various names in various cultures, which still practice Animist beliefs, are all working in a way that can seem to be defying hierarchies. The Hierarchies are present still in the Heavens, (thus psychedelics are a useful tool), and the hierarchies are present in the biodiversity. But among human beings, folks failed at sustaining the true hierarchies, by cause of jealousies etc. Many traditional "Shaman" (for want of a better word), stay in a low socio-economic category, defying their own leadership to be observed as so low in status. Yet by doing so, the risk was of a loss of access to the usual hierarchies of real control, and thus invocations don't work too well. That is, not unless we are able to assert, that the hierarchies above us, between entities existing in the sky, and the hierarchies below us, in all mother nature's various forms, are still existing, and therefore, the hierarchies between ourselves still exist also, but imperceptibly to ourselves.

Naming as an act is a form of invocation. So when we name doctors and lawyers and ask for their aid, we put them on a platform, yet because not every doctor and not every lawyer is any good, we have lowered that platform by the standards society as a whole have accepted.

I think this is something we all ought consider when identifying with any specific name.

It all relates with the concept of "As Above So Below", I posted about into another thread, can't remember which one just now, but I will go back to that idea and integrate both ideas.

I think people on this site will ,i imagine will not be to worried about the title any given person has. Having said that on a practical level a doctor is a drug dealer so context is everything.
If i encounter anyone with [shamanic] claims. I like to refer to them as a teacher or educator. Hopefully a student also. Sorry if ive gone slightly off topic i just felt that much of what we study here is outside the domain of words, never mind titles bestowed on pacticioners of said practices. PEACE AND LOVE.
P.S .I am not saying there is anything wrong with labels you have to say something, im just a cautious guy whos had time wasted by a couple of [masters] in there field.