Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

Magic, Mysticism & the Molecule

Micah Hanks, the young Fortean researcher in charge of The Grailen Report, has just informed us his new book is now available; and if you are the kind of person interested in the links between shamanic trips, magick practices, & modern mysteries like ghosts & UFOs, then THIS is a book you definitely won’t want to miss.

Since this is such an exciting time, I look forward to seeing where the road ahead will lead! Below are just a few of the topics featured in the book:

  • What role did the infamous magician Aleister Crowley play in the history of modern Ufology? Furthermore, did he somehow manage to contact and interact with an alien “gray” during one of his magical rituals?
  • Out of 80,000 plants that were available, how did native tribes in the Amazon jungles discover the right mix of ingredients that allow DMT, the psychoactive ingredient in their ritual ayahuasca brew, to become active; a feat anthropologist Jeremy Narby says stood a one in six-million chance of discovery?
  • Do Tibetan mystics possess the strange ability to create “tulpas,” literal thought-forms that manifest physically from their thoughts alone? Even stranger, could a sixteenth century Jewish mystic have done the same thing in creating a “golem” in medieval Prague?
  • Did famed scholar of the macabre, H.P. Lovecraft, somehow predict that the human pineal gland could act as a gateway between unseen worlds? If so, did the research of famous inventor Nikola Tesla not only prove Lovecraft’s own predictions, but illustrate ways we can literally contact creatures From Beyond?
  • Do mirrors act as portals to other realms? According to Dr. Raymond Moody, the spirits of deceased loved ones can actually communicate through reflective surfaces… is this a psychological “trick” of the mind, or something else?
  • How are sleep paralysis, UFO abductions, out of body travel, psychedelic visions and near death experiences all interconnected? Could they all be much more similar than we’ve previously imagined?

The book will be available on Amazon shortly, but you can already purchase it directly from Micah, by following this link.

Micah seems like the kind of investigator who’s not afraid to look at the world of Esoterica with a holistic approach, daring to cross the interdisciplinary boundaries to see what sense we can make of such phenomena, instead of sticking with prestablished theories and dismissing evidence that might challenge long-held preconceptions.

I’m sure that Magic, Mysticism & the Molecule will rattle quite a few cages within the Fortean world.

  1. Who’s looking?
    I still don’t buy that argument about the statistical unlikeliness of combining two plants out of thousands to get a psychoactive effect.

    There might be many hundreds of so-far untested plant combinations that have psychoactive effects, but after you find the first, I guess your motivation to look for more drops off somewhat!

    1. Very odd
      We’ll all have to wait until we read Micah’s argument, of course.

      One thing we do know: if finding such combinations were so easy, then big pharmaceutical companies would be churning out new drugs faster and faster.

      On a side note, there was this news Greg linked to a few days ago, about a slug that was found to have genes of an algae —meaning the creature was part animal, part plant.

      The though occurred to me: is it possible that somewhere in our distant past the genes of our species combined with the genes of an entheogenic plant? Is that the reason why we humans can “tune in” so easily to other realms through the use of power plants?

      Is that why ancient cultures could find the proper ingredients for shamanic trips in the regions they inhabited? because they “recognize” them as ‘kin’?

      Wild speculations, I know 🙂

      1. Plant Qualities
        I have wondered if ancient man had an ability to recognize the characteristics of plants or if there were perhaps a system of knowledge from a previous civilization that served such a purpose.

        The knowledge of the properties of these plants and the chemicals in them cannot be the result of simply random experimentation. Can there be tells in the appearance, odor, or some other feature of a plant that give away its makeup?

        I wonder if any study has been done regarding what shamans do when confronted with new flora? Maybe we are missing something.

        1. specialization
          Knowing plants is the career of many people in hunter gatherer societies. Of course they know all kinds of details about it – they don’t do anything else all day. They learn this stuff as kids and young adults, from professionals.

      2. Hay RPJ,
        I too am a bit

        Hay RPJ,

        I too am a bit skeptical of these probability estimates in this context. After all, role back the universe 4 billion years and what was the probability that i would be sitting here typing this now. Perhaps i remain not so unconvinced that the estimate cannot be made; more that the estimate has no deep ‘meaning’.

        Perhaps the discovery of a plant concoction should be seen in the context of all possible plant concoctions. So someone stumbled across one of them – big deal, what is the context of the discovery? Penicillin is a perfect parrallel. Do the odds even matter, or are our minds playing a trick, unavoidably confusing the ‘meaning’ behind probabilities like picking random cards, with the ‘meaning’ of random discovery in the much wider ‘open-ended’ context of nature.

        Also, if anything, a probability like that speaks not to the probability of any single individual correctly mixing the correct concoction to achieve a retrospective result, but the amount of time it would take. So it might be better not to express the odds as 1/80000, but that it would take say 1000 years of tribal existence to discover it given some standard rate of human inquisitivness over X number of tribes and assuming the availability of resources over the given area. The difficulty in expressing those terms i think shows a more realistic appreciation of the odds, within the better ‘meaning’ of this type of context.

        Having said all that, lets see what the author thinks first 🙂

        …about a slug that was found to have genes of an algae —meaning the creature was part animal, part plant.

        The though occurred to me: is it possible that somewhere in our distant past the genes of our species combined with the genes of an entheogenic plant? Is that the reason why we humans can “tune in” so easily to other realms through the use of power plants?

        Part Animal, Part Plant

        In the Ancestors Tail by Richard Dawkins there is one section that caught my eye that might be relevant here. He talks about species and how the concept, though useful, is really part of our perception of life. As an example you have species called Ring Species. He lists a gekko where you have one species on one side of a mountain range and another on the other side, but if you pick one side and follow it all the way up, then back down the other side you see a continuous change in the gekkos – the two species form a ring. At no point in the unbroken chain of gekko changes would you say you have a different species, but looking at the two on either end you would.

        The point here is that just like we have an example of a Ring Species in ‘space’, all other species are examples like this in ‘time’. Without extinctions, which give us the impression of missing steps in the line (plus of course the continual change of all forms), we would see all the links in the process and we would not be able to determine the differece between species, unless we only picked the end points.

        Prior to reading that i had taken the notion of species as a given, as well as something that is written into nature, unlike what it is – just our fixed temporal and spacial perspective of life.

        Obviously most life-forms cannot breed together, but role back the clock and you will see them merge – ultimately all of them.

        It is in this sense that picking – part animal, part plant represents part of temporo-spacial viewpoint!

        Obviously part of what is relevant here is the point of evolutionary separation. We are full of ‘plant genes’, just like plants share many of our genes. This is a false view of course – they are not really ‘plant genes’ when we go back in time this far – though they are common genes. We share genetic information based on the point of separation down our various roads.

        So firstly people should always have their guard up when they see ‘plant genes’ found in animals. It could just mean ‘common genes’ from our last common anscestor.

        In this instance it is more interesting though (but only in some ways). Removing plant ‘factories’ and incorporating it into their own is very interesting and has parrallels with the inclusion of mitocondria into our own (to me). This is symbiotic, though in a way that seems quite unfair to the algae, but in a way that harks back to the Selfish Gene. I would be interested to see if the genetic material in the algae is in anyway co-evolved to fit into this picture, or whether it is all in the slug (whether they are a jigsaw, or more a tool the the slug). I would be willing to bet there is a meeting in the middle between the slugs genes and the ‘selfish’ evolution of the genes behind the photosynthetic material.

        Viruses can also assist in horizontal transfer of genetic material in complex lifeforms (i.e. not microbial) – as per New Scientists naughty title ‘Darwin was Wrong’, which so pleased the creationists even though most never read it enough to realise that it screwed them further.

        As for affects of entheogenic plants resulting from horizontal transfer (rather than common anscestoral inheritance) between humans and the genes behind these plants affects on us…. interesting, but very doubtful. It might be easy to find out, but i would place money against it.

        1. Hey Daydreamer
          As always, a lot of food for thought.

          OK, so it makes sense to realize that defining ‘animal genes’ and ‘plant genes’ is a bit arbitrary. And the probability of horizontal gene transfer from entheogens might be unlikely.

          But then, we might have to assume that we DO share, as a species, some common genes with entheogenic plants. That from a biological POV, we might be distant cousins of Psylocibin mushrooms and the like 🙂

          Either that, or some hominin liked to experiment with funny plants; but then, having transfered that ability to tune in with entheogens precludes the idea that using entheogens had some form of evolutionary advantage —just like taking advantage the plentiful sugar reservoirs of fermenting fruits —i.e. alcohol.

          Bottom line is that, we need to find out how is that these cultures got so ‘lucky’. As Rick pointed out, the beauty of Ayahuasca is that it’s the perfect medium to facilitate the gastric absorption of DMT. And that is no small feat.

          PS: Then again, I’m still very curious to know what Micah has to say on the matter!

          1. It would definitely be
            It would definitely be interesting to know. I suspect there might be quite a human story to it, perhaps an adolescent teen experimenting in the forest, or an older lady making a meal, or a shaman experimenting with new things. I guess the answer is lost in time.

            I am not very experienced on this subject so forgive me if i say anything silly. One thing i have not seen mentioned here is what these plants actually smell or taste like. Also how they bare relations to other plants, eaten or used in some other way, in shape or colour.

            Plant experimentation could be a dangerous thing, but i guess our anscestors would have behaved much like any of us. I personally would lick the plant to see what it tasted like, or smelt it to see if i liked it. If i didnt get ill after a day or two and i had liked the smell or taste then perhaps i would try a bite. I am imagining here if i was dropped in some forest or jungle and had to survive on my own.

            Taste and smell are subjective so it is not hard to imagine someone thinking it was nice (so long as it has a taste or smell). To combine things we like the taste of is extremely common. I have concocted quite a few experiments from things in my kitchen, some work.. many do not 🙂 Though i do like marmite and peanut butter. Clearly though the odds of edible materials being combined is down to the affect of the ‘eye of the beholder’.

            Just out of interest i have never seen any information on artificial selection (of the type used on dogs or plants). Presumably Amazonian peoples still affected the evolution of local plants in some way through selection.

            As for common genes i would recommend a quick look at Banisteriopsis caapi is a flowering plant – an Angiosperm, which are a recent (245million-202million) evolution in the plant line. Our split between Kingdom Animalia and Kingdom Plantae is obviously far far older so our common genes will be representative of that fact. Possibility of horizontal transfer is always interesting, but again it is random with viruses chopping and changing bits of code. I honestly don’t know how much gets interchanged, but i believe it to be more in the region of strands of code, rather than whole genes, as befalls the randomness of it. So for example we may well find bits of recent reptile code in mammals, but they are fragments rather than large chunks and i guess likely coped into junk sections (through probability, but also selection) rather than areas of expression where they would probably result in defective gene function. Even still though i like the idea, but think it more likely that it is a chemical that just happens to interact in a certain way with our brains (some are bound to in a positive/negative way given the chemistry), so we choose it, rather than it choosing us so to speak.

          2. Taste
            First, I would like everyone reading this thread to note that Micah Hanks, the author of the book in question, was kind enough to drop a few lines in this thread & comment on some of the things being discussed so.

            Now, Daydreamer: as to taste and smell of these brews, from what I’ve read so far (I’ve never tried entheogenics myself) the ayahuasca tea is one foul-smelling broth from Hell! Not only it’s quite disgusting when swallowed, but after 10-15 minutes you begin a horrible cycle of vomits & diarrhea that lasts HOURS —this might be one of the reasons the Brazilian government acknowledged the ayahuasca use to be for religious reasons, rather than just wanting to have a ‘good trip’— so it’s kind of difficult to think the South American cultures found the right mix of this brew when they didn’t have anything left in the fridge 😉

            The idea of trying plants to see if they are edible seems more reasonable with mushrooms. But then again, the level of toxicity of these plants is so high that the idea of having a high number of willing volunteers seems a bit far-fetched. Maybe after watching some animals eat the mushrooms, the ancient shamans looked for less direct ways to ingest them —like drinking the animal’s urine, for example.

            Peyote is said to have a bitter, astringent taste. I don’t know if trying that in the desert where there’s little water would be reasonable.

            Bottom line is: I’m aware there’s cases where humans have discovered valuable chemicals by observing animals eating unknown plants —that’s how Starbucks came to be 😉 —but with some entheogenic brews like Ayahuasca, this theory doesn’t seem to hold up. Ayahuasca suggests a careful and deliberate mix of substances that permit the slow absorption of DMT through the stomach; like a researcher once mentioned, it is a consciousness technology. So the question remains, IMO.

          3. Fair point.
            I more meant what

            Fair point.

            I more meant what the ingredients are like on their own though, not once mixed. What they taste or smell like on their own as roots, leaves, vines etc before they are mixed.

            Given the affect of the brew then it does seem like an extreme example, though i’m not sure if that precludes it being normal experimentation.

            Ancient people did have good knowledge though, even if it was often placed in contexts and language that have since been replaced. I would be interested in how common/widespread discoveries of this nature have been in the past, in herbal medicine for example, as well as drug use.

            I guess we would also need to know what the minimum knowledge would need to be to appreciate this type of affect. Its a very interesting example of a problem without a clear solution though, if it is as intractable as it appears.

          4. Raw ingredients

            What they taste or smell like on their own as roots, leaves, vines etc before they are mixed.

            Hmm. Good question. Also it’s interesting to note the unremarkable appearance of the ayahuasca vine itself. I mean, with a mushroom like Amanita Muscaria, you have a plant of such bright colors that it easily stands out, and might have prompted some curious and reckless ancient to wonder how it tasted like.

            But ayahuasca seems like something that would easily be passed by unnoticed among the lush flora of the Amazonian jungle.

            There really must be some remarkable story on how the Amazonian shamans took notice of its properties. Maybe some hunter-gatherer version of Alexander Fleming, or maybe something even more interesting.

            We are also diminishig the importance of the ingestion as part of a ritualistic experience. I mean, it’s not just a matter of swallowing the stuff; there is a whole tradition of chants and sounds and music and dances that are part of an entheogenic experience; I think dismissing those as irrelevant cultural baggage might be a grave mistake.

          5. Possibly quite like Alexander
            Possibly quite like Alexander Fleming. Many discoveries are like that. I would guess the story is lost though.

            Perhaps dismissing them would be a mistake, i guess it depends on what angle we are viewing it at any time. If we wish to appreciate the cultural significance then not thinking about that side would be silly. It is not neccesary for understanding of the chemistry or biology, though state of mind could well be an important thing for conditioning the type of experience one experiences. I would guess preexisting beliefs could be amplified etc by these types of drugs, or at least that a persons state of mind or existing beliefs can influence the context of the experience.

            I would be interested in how the shaman and culture view whatever they consider to be non-spiritual experiences while using the drug. Presumably a person can take the drug and come out the other end feeling that they had had a good high and a good experience, but that it didn’t compare with their previous spiritual ones in some important way – enough so they would not call it spiritual. Perhaps the trip doesn’t occur in a religious/folk religious (for them) context so it is not perceived as cosmically significant. How they treat these experiences, rationalise them, could be an important window on the nature and ritual requirements of what they might consider to be the ‘real thing’.

    2. Trial and error
      The thing is, if they get the wrong combination of plants, then it can cause serious illness, or even death. Once bitten, twice shy. Amazonians know what makes them sick without any benefits, and they would tell their children and their children that. It’s kind of insulting that some skeptics think they were just mindlessly eating every plant in the jungle and found benefits/combinations purely by chance — tribal people are smarter than that.

      The amazing thing is it’s a plant with an enzyme inhibitor that allows the DMT from the other plant to be digested. It’s almost as if they knew they needed to find another plant that would allow them to get the full effects of DMT.

      The odds of finding ayahuasca in the jungle really are astronomical, I don’t buy the skeptic arguments at all. There’s something deeper going on that can’t be explained by materialist science.

      RPJ and everyone, why don’t you spend a week in the jungle and eat every plant you can find, put your theory to the test that it was just chance? I’ll visit you in hospital, what flowers do you like? 😉

      1. another thing Rick
        no one has mentioned the observation of animals here. Native would have learnt a lot by observation of animals over some thousand plus years. Animals have a very powerful instinctual knowledge of plants for survival. Also a percentage of accidental dicovery and many generations of “medicine persons” accumulating massive knowledge of plants. It’s not like they had to go to work 9 to 5 so time was their own.

        1. Animal instinct
          Animals don’t combine two plants, one necessary to gain the full effects of the other. Plenty of evidence for animals eating fermented fruit and getting drunk though. 😉

            but they would of used one and maybe the other for some reason. Like I said, thousands of years here. Look at what we have done in 100 years.

  2. Ayahuasca Mention…
    “[Magic, Mysticism & the Molecule] Out of 80,000 plants that were available, how did native tribes in the Amazon jungles discover the right mix of ingredients that allow DMT, the psychoactive ingredient in their ritual ayahuasca brew, to become active; a feat anthropologist Jeremy Narby says stood a one in six-million chance of discovery?”

    Love Narby’s works, but if people think that the only reason that the brew exist is for the delivery of DMT they are sorely misguided. DMT bearing plants are indeed found in many “ayahuasca” brews, but not in all. What is found in every brew is Yage, Banisteriopsis Caapi, also known as “Ayahuasca”. DMT plants are additives, not the main ingredient.

    The whole concentration on “DMT” is wholly from a westerners perspective, and certainly not the Amazonian one.
    Yes DMT is wonderful, but the real grist of the mill comes from the Yage Vine.


    1. Echoing what Gwyllm said,
      Echoing what Gwyllm said, “ayahuasca” is Quecha for “vine of the dead/soul” and really refers to Banisteriopsis Caapi. Psychotria Viridis (“chacruna”) the most commonly used DMT-containing admixture plant is not a vine. Some cultures don’t even use that and will use Diplopterys Cabrerana, and of course there are hundreds if not thousands of other admixtures.

      I have no idea why they hold the vine in such esteem. It produces nausea in everybody, vomiting in most, defecation in less. I’ve had it alone a few times and don’t think I can identify any effect at all in the thing. So why they should stick with it, revere it, and pair it with so many other plants in making their brews, I don’t know. And I doubt they really know either; the fact that it’s used over such vast areas by tribes who’ve never met each other suggests an origin well in the mists of time.

      And a great mystery that aspiring botanists here can go and explore in the Amazonian is the great number of “types” of ayahuasca that are not botanically distinguishable. In Wade Davis’s excellent book One River we’re told that they are separated by the tones they sing whilst intoxicated on them, or some such. !

      1. Amazonian complexity
        We should bear in mind the sociocultural matrix in which ayahuasca was developed – NOT the truncated, impoverished but canny societies of today’s Amazon, but the 5000 years of South American civilization preceding the Conquest.

        I recall a brown-bag lecture at the University of Illinois years ago, where a tropical-forest geographer pointed out that the bulk of today’s Amazonian rainforest came into being during the global warming of the Holocene glacial retreat — that is, CONCURRENTLY with human settlement of the region. He claimed much of the “pristine” rainforest we see today is due to selective human transport along trade routes; trade routes that crossed the gallery forests and savannahs that became the rainforest we know.

        If you look at the very first explorers’ tales – that of the 1542 Orellana expedition, for example, you realize that they saw hundreds of thousands of people in contiguous towns that stretched for miles along the riverbanks. The re-discovery of the vast mound-and-causeway networks in Bolivia and Brazil demonstrates the complex natures and large populations of the extinct Amazonian societies.

        This was the world that fostered the study and development of ayahuasca, just as Sumer and China fostered development of their own complex medical lore and pharmacopaeias. Although writing was never developed in South America, the archaeology, art and architecture of the ancient Andes reveals the power of psychedelic jungle ideas and practices. Google “Chavin de Huantar” for examples of literally trippy imagery over 3000 years old!


        1. Good point
          We have this erroneous idea that the ayahuasca brew was concocted by primitive hunter-gatherers with little else to do. But now we now that the Amazonian jungle harbored complex industrious civilizations, rivalling that of the Incas & possibly the Mayas.

          The first Darklore had an article about Chavín, “Enter the Jaguar”. Fascinating stuff.

  3. As the line begins to blur
    Well, as the line begins to blur between science and mysticism, more books like this will come out. Really and truly, this process began with The Tao of Physics by Fritjof Capra, and has grown from there. There will be more to come.

    It is apparent to me that the ancients knew much more than we give them credit for. So much of what the ancients said was true has turned out to be true.

  4. Animal knowledge
    For many years the white settlers wondered at the huge amount of leaves that Buffalo had packed in around their teeth. In Africa the same was noted about elephants….especially as some sort of cavity was in the tooth. Later with better knowledge it was found that the animals were packing their sore cavities and mouth sores with willow leaves. The animals knew the pain killing properties of willow (asprin). Animals in the wild eat certain plants apparently for certain ailments. Herbalists in humans have existed for thousands of years, People, early on, learned the properties of certain plants could be put to good use or bad use, depending on the individual. Many herbalists were reguarded as witches and burned at the stake, thus the herbalist in the dark ages had to be very careful. What people do not understand they often obuse or distroy. Shaman, witch doctors and Granny women have passed down plant magic from the dim past to the present. Knowledge of herbal remedies is now frequently used by modern pharmacetical companies. Even in America, in some of the out back areas, herbalists still practice with some degree of success. Most herbal remedies are found by chance and logic by these people and over long centuries, trail and error have produced results. So how did Shamen discover the combinations of plants that they use? Hundreds, possibly thousands of years of trial and error. No, they were not visited by little green men from Alpha Centurii.

    1. Finding our way
      Greetings all,

      This is Micah A. Hanks, author of Magic, Mysticism and the Molecule. First and foremost, thanks to Red Pill Junkie for posting the featured link regarding my book, and also to all of you for the thoughtful commentary. It is much appreciated!

      Brig, you’re absolutely right when it comes to comparisons between animals using plants with curative properties for pain relief in conjunction with natives discovering a similar entheogenic combination. I must add to that the fact that Mountain Gorillas have been witnessed doing something very similar with leaves which are known to have a medicinal capacity. Could natives have used “trial and error” to develop the various recipes used in ayahuasca throughout South America? Furthermore, could it merely be a by-product that certain varieties would be psychedelic when consumed orally?

      Perhaps this is possible… but I also like Delaiah’s early observation as to whether there might be “tells in the appearance, odor, or some other feature of a plant that give away its makeup?” Could this be how certain animals are able to discover their curative properties? If not, and it is purely instinctive, what governs those instincts, and led to the present use of these sorts of plants?

      I have always prescribed to the notion that natives may have learned these things over periods spanning thousands of years, like Daydreamer notes (and by the way, the “one in six-billion chance in discovery” I note in my book was first cited by anthropologist Jeremy Narby, not me). However, as Rick points out, there are also a variety of plants that can cause illness (or even death), and merely experimenting with them might have resulted in less than thriving conditions had this practice continued.

      So ultimately, although the question as to why (or how) ayahuasca came about is interesting… it remains elusive. In all likelihood, looking at it rationally there must have been some indication given (chemically, i.e. through odor, etc) at some point that caught the attention of the early shaman… but what was it?

      Finally, I must address Gwyllym’s (correct) assertion that ayahuasca is not brewed merely for delivering DMT, but because it contains the liana vine (Banisteriopsis Caapi). Here is a brief excerpt from Magic, Mysticism and the Molecule that discusses this more in-depth:

      “One of the most curious entheogenic substances, and perhaps becoming the most popular thanks to the New-Age movement today, is the powerful herbal tea ayahuasca of South American origin. Though early missionary diaries and other writings that were published included information on the brew, ayahuasca wasn’t entirely made known to the west until the 1950s, at which time it was alternatively known as “telepathine” for the strange, seemingly psychic effects professed by the shamans who drank it. For such reasons, the Catholic Church began attempting to eradicate it, calling its powers “demonic”.

      “Though ayahuasca is the popular term used today, other regional names throughout South America include “yage”, “natem” or “caapi” after the official name of its active ingredient, Banisteriopsis caapi. It is this element, taken from the vine of the Liana plant, when paired with plants which may include Psychostria viridis and Diplopterys cabrerana, that create the psychedelic effect found in ayahuasca tea. In essence, the combination provides both the active hallucinogen, dimethyltryptamine (DMT), with MAO inhibiting harmana alkaloids (the same element once called telepathine), which allow the DMT to become active before being broken down in the stomach when ingested.”

      So in essence, what Banisteriopsis Cappi actually does is provide the monoamine oxidase inhibitors that allow DMT to become active. Although it isn’t what causes the trippy effects of the ayahuasca, it is nonetheless considered the “key” ingredient, and even revered as the “plant spirit of the jungle” by some cultures.

      Again, thanks for all your kind commentary, and if you have further questions, I recommend you buy the book (although at this moment the book may be unavailable for a short period, I’m told. This should be rectified by tomorrow)! Of course, you can always contact me at also.

      Warm regards,

      Micah A. Hanks
      Author, “Magic Mysticism and the Molecule”

      1. It seems the vine is also
        It seems the vine is also used alone and in combination with other, non-DMT-containing, plants.

        Perhaps the vomit-inducing nature of the brew (without additional ingredients) was sufficient motivation to experiment with a wide variety of combinations primarily in an effort to reduce this unpleasant aspect, and various happy accidents ensued.

        1. useful unhappiness
          Induced vomiting can be quite useful, even though it is unpleasant. It is particularly useful when one is experimenting with potentially poisonous substances.

  5. Thanks for sharing very good
    Thanks for sharing very good information that will be so helpful..

    now most are prefer like Psychoactive for getting best enjoyment of life.

    1. You are welcome
      Personally I’ve never tried entheogenic substances, and I would discourage anyone of trying them ‘just for the hell of it’ and to see if they can have a good time with it. You don’t get refunds if something goes wrong with your own brain 😉

      I think these substances need to be treated with the outmost respect, and should someone feel it’s a likely avenue to gain important insights about their mind and to further advance their spiritual growth, they should do so in a controlled environment, and with the guidance and assistance of trusty & seasoned veterans.

      1. One of the best personal
        One of the best personal accounts of ayahuasca use I have ever read written by a now world famous jungle medicines healer who was kidnapped as a teeneager fom a rubber tapping crew in the Amazon, and who was indoctrinated by the tribal leader of his kidnappers in the intricate ways of the vision vine and the uncanny ESP abilities that develop from proper guidance. A true story that has to be considered by anyone interested in the subject:

        The follow up book “Rio Tigre” goes into his subsequent career as a healer sought out for his ability to handle diseases considered intractable by modern science including cancer.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal