We have the opportunity to keep from mis-labeling something so why not take it? The broad concensus is that Ayahuasca vine creates a notably different experience from Rue. These are all teas or brews but only one should be called Ayahuasca and that is the one that contains Ayahuasca. We control the flow of language. The more specific our language the more efficiently we can communicate with each other.

Obviously this thread could be re-named Easy Oral DMT Recipe.

I understand what you mean but just for the record I'm not religious in any way .Nor do I believe in spirits or ghosts.
However, there is a female "Something" in that vine.
I can not tell you what it/she is . Its hard to comprehend for myself.

If you've tried vine and have not met her, then that's just not fair i suppose.
Or maybe i am worthy

Maybe this is a broad concensus among some ayahuasca traditionalists. It is claimed similarly that different varieties of B. Caapi create a notably different experience. Do we need to clear up the mass confusion there too?

Rhetorics aside, I think that the similarities between caapi and rue are much more striking than the differences between the two. To blatantly ignore that basic truth and to instead keep reiterating that "rue isn't caapi" is IMHO snobbish and borders on obscurantism.

Most people are not part of the ayahuasca jet-set and do not know of the details and subtleties that some experts may be aware of. Yet these unwashed masses apparently want a simple label for the experience that is common with both caapi and rue. It so happens that the word "ayahuasca" has become that label. Trying to halt or reverse that after the fact is like trying to control the flow of the wind. Good luck with that.


I can see that you read my previous argument about "tea" and Camellia Sinensis, because you introduce the term "brew" into the discussion. But you do continue to use this rhetorical backflip: complaining about the generalization of the term "ayahuasca" while doing the same with the term "tea". This is the sort of logic I would normally associate with the likes of Jehova's Witnesses. Should I soon be expecting Ayahuasca's Witnesses at my door too?


How about using a term "traditional ayahuasca" for traditional caapi-based brews?


Obviously the title of this thread points out that in actual fact the word "ayahuasca" is already commonly used as a generic label for oral dmt.

To be honest I was shooting a hyperbole from the hip and I am glad that you can take it like that.


Just a few years ago, some people would have insisted that I hadn't had a genuine vision if it didn't involve jaguars and snakes. Now it seems that I must meet "her" to be counted in.

I never cared much then and I still do not care much now. My experiences are ineffable enough for me personally. Why should I care about other peoples' measure of that?

I don't care about Ayahuasca Religion, Ayahuasca Dogma, Ayahuasca Canon nor Ayahuasca Priesthood. I find it as ridiculous as any other religion. At least there are no people being burned at the stake or beheaded in the name of the Holy Vine (yet).


Perhaps you meant to say "I am worthier than thou"?

I've always found etymology a fascinating subject, even though I feel debates about it merely amount to mental masturbation, but hey what's wrong with that? If one were to look up the word ayahuasca in various dictionaries you get something like this.

noun


1.

a woody South American vine, Banisteriopsis caapi, of the malpighia family, having bark that is the source of harmine, a hallucinogenic alkaloid used by Amazon Indians.

Now lets look at the definition of the word tea


tea


[tee]

Spell Syllables

Examples
Word Origin




noun


1.

the dried and prepared leaves of a shrub, Camellia sinensis, from which a somewhat bitter, aromatic beverage is prepared by infusion in hot water.


2.

the shrub itself, extensively cultivated in China, Japan, India, etc., and having fragrant white flowers.
Compare tea family.


3.

the beverage so prepared, served hot or iced.


4.

any kind of leaves, flowers, etc., so used, or any plant yielding them.


5.

any of various infusions prepared from the leaves, flowers, etc., of other plants, and used as beverages or medicines.


The various definitions of the word tea reflects just how many people across the world adopted different definitions of the word, not so with the word Ayahuasca. Untill the standard is something different than this this I don't think we can make an etymological claim that the word ayahuasca deserves broader definitions. But.... Pitubo will be ultimately correct, 50-100 years from now the word will change. Just now now .

Hey, there's something I can agree upon!

I have my doubts about the 50-100 years though. See my argument about the thread title already.

Anyway, if we can agree on the inevitable, why not anticipate as well and try to manage the confusion about terms early on? Why fill a sizable part of the period between "now" and "when everybody finally agrees pitubo was right all along" with bickering and anger when we already know the outcome?

Please do understand my intentions: I have never wanted to deny or diminish any particular and distinguishing positive characteristics of the different varieties of the banisteriopsis caapi vines, nor of the classical ayahuasca traditions as they have been practiced in the amazon basin for generations.

But neither do I feel it to be right to disqualify the qualities of the rue plant or the practices that modern individuals may originate. Especially not when done so on grounds that are almost exclusively sentimental.

I believe that caapi and rue share much more than divides them and that using the name "ayahuasca" for what unites them should be meant as an honoring of the classical Ayahuasca tradition, not a sacrilege.

I dont think saying "Ayahuasca is just oral DMT" makes much sense, and this is a big reason why I dont think Rue should be called Ayahuasca. Many tribes and modern people drink just Ayahuasca vine without any DMT at all. Trying to over simplify everything and pretend its all the same makes things more confusing in my experience....

I also dont see people calling all psilocybin mushrooms cubensis - that would be silly right? They all have the same active ingredients though! So why keep these mushrooms under their own names, or why create a new name like psilocybin mushrooms for them, but not do the same for Ayahuasca? Maybe Maoi tea would be a good one..... Seems much more accurate to me and less confusing....

I meet so many people that tell me you add the DMT containing vine of Ayahuasca to an MAOI because people really get confused with Ayahuasca.... Everyone calls everything Ayahuasca regardless of what plants are in it and people just seem to simplify things too much until they have no idea what they are talking about.... Imagine if someone reads that you need 100 grams of Ayahuasca and then they read another guide saying Syrian Rue and Mimosa are the ingredients for Ayahuasca - easy for some people to get real confused and get themselves in trouble there..... And I have actually had people start describing things they mixed up this way....

And I would also say.... Rue and Ayahuasca seem to have some very notable differences in experience and they both have really different personalities as teachers. I think it makes sense to recognize and honor those differences.

"Hyperbole" nice word. So you was mucking about and I was Mr serious . Now I feel like a muppet

I have no rite to comment on this thread in some respects.

I've never drank Ayahuasca . I've only just started to dabble in Pharma.
However, I'm a self proclaimed expert in Changa .

I like my stuff Harmala heavy and for the first year or more it was all rue.
Beautiful God code and really visual effects.

Then I tried Caapi Harmalas . I can never go back to rue now and the visuals are few and far between.

I also now see vaping DMT as a bit wreck less , like there is no one in charge.
Where as with the Vine ,she is in charge.