Then again, Jamie, you do seem to be interested in dosing with different types of vine other than the standard "Cielo", and you do mention "certain" types, and "that" vine. Some types are supposedly harder to work with and are used for different purposes than standard Ayahuasca's, if used at all. Also sometimes the sickness you speak of can be from drinking too much sediment or tannins. This happened to a few people that drank a thick Aya they brewed themselves at my retreat. They were puking and shitting on that stuff because of that. Perhaps that's called not getting the preperation right?




Isn't it true that Caapi works and introduces the trip gently and smoothly, where'as rue tends to kick in generally quite hard? Many people say so. If so, don't you think this could be something against the favor of rue. Others state that Caapi seems forgiving, and rue isn't so much?



Sounds obvious to me that people originally from Persia or with a Middle Eastern background should be using their own local plants and not those from South America doesn't it?. I have already stated this in an earlier post. In this case i don't think the rue/not Caapi argument can be used because of this.



Brasil is a very mixed race, and it wouldn't surprise me if some of those that prefer rue might have some middle eastern/Arabic background, although this is pure speculation. But in general Daime uses Caapi, so this is a small minority in a Massive Caapi drinking group, outsiders you might say.



Jamie, you keep on going on about peoples experience with the plants, i don't know about Eliyaha, but there are a hell of a lot of people out there on numerous other forums and they much prefer Caapi over rue, and not simply because they're being snotty or whatnot. They find Caapi to be a wiser, more smooth and controlled guiding experience than rue. In fact they usually say that rue can just kick in a be very rough on them. Of course these are their opinions, and you and a few of your friends here will defend your opinions, and you will say Caapi will give just as bad a time. But most people use the Cielo type Caapi which is a nice Caapi, and they don't feel the need to use harder to get obscure ones that are seldom used (for other purposes) like you might. I guess there are ways of making nice Caapi horrid. Just make a thick tannic sludge and make it super strong, and yea, you'll be vomiting and shitting to high heaven waiting for it to stop. But who's really to blame?. The Caapi or a careless Gordon Ramsey of a cook??

If you're think that ayahuasca can't give just as rough a ride as rue, you haven't drank enough.

The only reason people find rue so unforgiving is because its more potent by weight and a gram of plant matter can be the difference between an effective dose and an OD. Caapi on the other hand can require up to an extra 50g's of material to feel a noticable difference.

I don't think so. People speak about Caapi being a realtively smooth thing from start, growing intensity to whatever strength of effects it's been brewed to. Of course it's gonna be tough if it's made too strong, and especially if it contains too much sediment, but they speak of like for like potency brews in favor of Caapi. ( I think everyone knows that rue is stronger than Caapi weightwise, but they also know how much Caapi to brew for similar strength.)

Then again they say that rue does not slowly introduce and grow like Caapi does, it kinda more like "kicks in", and this can be scary for some. Also they mention that the rue seems to "kick in and out" during the experience, where'as Caapi seems to always be there with the experience..

TBH Christian, what "they say" doesn't hold much water to me as an individual as 'I' am also part of 'they' as are others on this forum.

I can confirm that not me nor anyone I've ever dosed with has experienced wavering effects from rue.

There is no side effect I've received from rue that I have not received from the vine.

I have to say I don't really understand or appreciate why you are referring to other testimony while simultaneously disregarding mine and that of others on this forum in a selective way just to support your own point of view.

There's a lack of trust here... It's quite hurtful

I'm sorry if my comments seem so, they are't meant so. I'm just trying to get to the facts.
Of course it's one thing to talk and debate, and another to try. Of course i'm gonna do that, and when i do i'll report back, but untill then, there are many, many posts on other forums that seem to back up Caapi, and they don't seem to have any agendas whatsoever. They genuinely seem to think that Caapi is the better one over rue.

I'm not saying i agree or don't Soulfood, we are all different, what works for one may not work for another as Endlessness said. Also, do you think that doing several Ayahuasca trips may have actually made doing rue trips easier than starting out with rue if you did so?..You know like when people take shrooms after dmt and say the shrooms give dmt effects. Could this also be at play do you think?

..IMO it's not about caapi vs. rue to me, neither is inherently better..certainly people may have a preference, but for me they are just different..
p. harmala i have found can open kinds of states unique to it..like an oasis in the desert..
caapi is more often a lush, vibrant abundant jungle..with occasional oasis of dry stillness..

but also, the choice of tryptamine plant makes a big difference to the vibe..

rue, to me, just smells of ancient middle-eastern secrets..but seems, personally, less forgiving..but i respect it for it's strength, and perhaps 'seriousness' (like many middle east traditions)

that said, 'mama-aya' has a few forms and faces, and like jamie said can make you very sick
..strong brews (from old vines) and two week dietas with certain kinds of traditional amazonian practitioners (increasingly rare) can lead to feeling more sick than ever before in one's life..but with the demands come insights..i argue these kinds of purgative brews are more of the indigenous traditions of Ayahuasca, and a lot of modern brews (eg Santo Diame , UDV) are (due to context) weaker..

..the choice, for me, between rue or caapi also depends on the context, caapi maybe more suiting interaction between people (on moderate doses), and rue deep inner/meditative sessions..but really, it's more vibe that's the choice..
.

I wonder if this is because the "dieta" makes one simply more sensitive to the more sickly parts of the Caapi, or there's some kinda interaction going on there. I also wonder if a similar Dieta ,but using a rue based brew instead would actually be worste or not?

Of course i think it's understood that there are different types of vines for supposedly different work. The black one is supposedly quite a tough one. Old vines seem to have tougher effects to, especially wild ones. The usual "cielo" type is the most common i think.

..it's also about the kind or strength of brew, when i say 'a few faces..'

..the two shaman who introduced the McKenna brothers to Ayahuasca are an example..these were the brews that made you godawful sick, but eventually lead to profound synaesthesia, 3D lit-up moving entities in the dark etc..being in icaro-modulated spice-hyperspace for hours..D. McKenna tested a number of these super-potent deep amazon brews (from a few tribes) and found one thing in common..the DMT plant level was kept constant so that it equated to about 30mg per dose, however the beta-carboline level was three to four times the required amount for MAO inhibition..when i the good fortune of first being told about 'deep jungle ayahuasca' by T. McKenna the quoted caapi doses were like 150-300 grams ..this was their old school formula, not like the modern brews (& no brugmansia either btw) ..the amount of DMT plant was never increased to make a brew 'stronger', only the amount of vine..

drinking repeatedly on a dieta results in the brews being progressively easier to ingest, and eventually one is not nauseous..the shamans say one is now 'clean', hence light and can fly..
in my experience, after following such a program, smaller amounts of the brew go much further..

only through dietary restrictions have i been able to stomach the 'jungle-brew' strength..but i feel this kind of Ayahuasca opens up a complete level of immersion..like smoking for 4 hours but different..not in the room anymore..time dilation..

but it's all subjective of course..rue also kicks ass..
.

Very fascinating stuff indeed,nen. I have some lovely Cielo vine i bought back from Peru, and i can't wait to test it when the time comes. Refering to the brugmansia admixture, i last night read about how the Shamen sometimes add up to 3 leaves to a brew. This is supposed to help make the visions more colourful, although not really reccomended untill one had dieted with Toe to have an understanding of it apparently. What are your thoughts on this may i ask?

..i'm not an expert on western Sth. America, but if i recall right, Toe/brugmansia is predominantly added to brews in Chile and parts of Peru..it seems more associated with mountain region mestizo 'curandero' (vs brujo) traditions..
the McKennas were in search of the deep jungle pre-Spanish monolingual 'four-foot-high' type shamanic/animist origins of Ayahuasca..the 'discoverers' if you like..in these brews, there were occasionally some other medicinal admixtures to the brews, but they were usually just caapi/viridis..no Toe..
.

The vine I am referring to above is (yellow) Banisteriopsis Caapi and it was thoroughly decanted and filtered before drunk. If you really want to get into the whole thing of people using plants from their own continent, well than rue grows all over some parts of the US in the wild, as well as in places of europe and even australia from what I understand.

This is true, rue is also native to the balkan region. It has also been portrayed on few post stamps from Yugoslavia from the early nineties.

My opinion on this whole topic, after working extensivly with both rue and caapi is this..

Rue is so strong. You can eat a small teaspoon of the stuff and have it fully activate admixtures..caapi most of the time you need like 100g to get similar effects. Only rarely do you come across Bainteriopsis Caapi like I have here that is at least 4x the potency of any other caapi I have come across.

People look at rue and even 5g of rue does not look like much at all..there are recipes all around the net that say t use 5g..7g etc...that can be ALOT for most people. Then caapi..it is expensive and 50g of it can look like alot..some recipes tell people to brew only like 40g of it..

You can activate DMT even with 1g of rue at times, but you need more admixture. You can activate DMT with 40-50g of caapi as well, and usually you need more admixture. Often people either go for like 50g of of caapi in a brew to start, or they go down like 5g of rue..no wonder people get sick out of their minds with rue.

However if you drink equivelent doses of caapi you can still get just as sick. Just because caapi and rue can have slightly different vibes does not mean that rue makes you sick and that caapi does not.

Many people online have never actaully taken a large enough dose of caapi to have the full effects of the stuff alone without any admixture. Harmalas are harmalas and when you take enough of them you are going to be really sick reguardless of which of the plant spirits is guiding you.

The reality is that for me, when I first took rue after working with caapi for about 2 years frequently, I could not tell them apart really. If I had not known it was rue I would have sworn it was caapi. Only on later trials did I come to notice the subtle differences between each plant. One is not better than the other. They are just different.

And yes christian I do hold personal experience in high reguard. It is why I like the gnostic tradition. A lot of dogma circulates when too much second hand information is regurgitated. You have numerous times now used others examples here to back up your claims, and then basically passed off the opinions of others who dont support your view here even though they make up at least half of the people in this thread. Everyone is going to be different. Some people like san pedro more than ayahuasca does that mean that san pedro is now better? Others like mushrooms more than LSD..does that mean LSD is now better? Some people say iboga is different from ayahuasca but both are useful, does that suddenly mean that because Iboga has more dangers that ayahuasca is better?

If you dont have any experience to base your claims on, then of course you can only go on the opinions and views of others..and when you are involved in a discussion where half the people are telling you the opposite of what you want to believe but disreguard it anyway it only serves to limit your own experience in this life. If you never bother to try something for yourself than anything you can say about it is and will forever remain has heresay.

I am not trying to attack you all I am saying is that if you want to know if a ford truck is better than a chevy, you might want to ask people who have real experience with both of them. When you have half the people saying one thing and the other half the other it seems sort of weird to base any conclusions on that alone. Might as well try it for yourself and find out.

Well then, that explains my theory then doesn't it?

You come the America's, sorry Canada, right? So then naturally you would be more in tune with plants native to your nearest vicinity, rather than Caapi, this would seem. Just like that Persian sect prefers rue which comes from their country?

no I never said anywhere I was more in tune with rue than with caapi. I never made that statement anywhere. I use caapi just as much as I use rue. I use both of them.

Phalaris grass also grows down the street..but I choose to use mimosa..

Wow, this back and forth Harmala vs Ayahuasca thing is kindof stupid...

Some people don't like harmala, some people do - that's fine! But just back-and-forth arguments of assertion isn't really helping build a good consensus or even add to our collective wealth of knowledge. It's just unhelpful.

I happen to have a GREAT relationship with harmala and I have used it 10:1 as many times as aya. I have had aya work and I've had it not, one thing I like about harmala is the ease of dosing (supposing you don't get gut-pain from raw harmala)...

but they're definitely different. I like the desert/jungle thing, I've used that metaphor in the past... it's true! I also find that harmala is more masculine...

but wasn't this thread about pharma vs. aya??

Thanks for that information, Jamie.



Do you think your previous 2 years of Caapi may have made it more difficult to distinguish the differences of using rue just a bit? I know that there is sometimes some kind of memory association going on even when psychs are changed, the experience can be still very similar.

One more thing i'd like to add. Would you say high doses of Caapi are visionary. What about rue..does rue share this ability?

As has been said- both are very very visionary at high doses. but its not like tryptamines

Thanks robots!, i look forward to some desert treks!

AluminumFoilRobots wrote: ..good point..
the difference IMO between 'pharma' (extract) vs. 'aya' (whole plants) lies in the peripheral and complete spectrum of effects, meaning not simply the visions and strength..
so, be it rue or caapi (or passionflower or autumn olive)

aya -the whole plant brew often has a slightly different onset mode (slower, more complex in stages, though can be very fast), a less linear and more diverse plateau stage, added sedative and somatic effects, an extra depth of vision, more nature/photo realities with the geometics..that the plants contain many other potentially mildly active compounds incl. tannins and flavonoids would suggest subtle differences..from an 'animist' perspective, the more of the spirit of the plant is here..

pharma -the extract experience usually, for me, follows are slightly more predictable mode of onset, and is more controllable in dosage..while it can still be a very healing experience, i usually find i quite miss the whole plant brew..but there is a certain modern convenience and control to pharma which has it's own appeal..but, like christian said way back, can be less 'grounding'..

in conclusion, i find the whole plant brew leaves me feeling more physically healed afterwards..the mental effects can be almost equivalent..

but, you know, taste can have subtle psychological effects..perhaps the difference is in the taste..
.