Due to my guidework practice and my general interest in mysticism and esoterism (because I view them as sub-subsets of philosophy (each being a subset of metaphysics)), I observe as much as I can about ceremony and ritual broadly, even if there's nothing in a particular practice that resonates or means anything to me (because it may be something that can be useful for someone else that I'm facilitating). I'm not looking for what to believe, but rather trying to have as many and as much understanding as possible. It's all just paradigms to me, and hop around amongst and between them.

Naturally, being interested in these topics and psychedelics, I come into contact with many individuals that have similar interests. I find there are many, whether born into them or choosing to adopt them that subscribe to very particular practices, philophies and traditions.

Many of these individuals hold their beliefs as absolute. This is what I want to talk about.

On many occassions, I'll be conversing about a tradition or practice or some permutation of such topics, which usually excites people, showing what I understand and that I understand them and have respect for these topics. However, as soon as the door opens in some way that allows me to share what I really think, the conversations almost always go sideways, with individuals trying to convince me otherwise (usually defaulting to "x practices says a, and that's what you should or shouldn't be doing", levying dogma at me, or simply telling me I'm wrong with regard to something that they hold true that I may not.

I always tend to giggle a little inside.

These "criticisms" seem to always be predicated on some preestablished practice, and not about something more broad, such as not being mindful or thoughtful about things, or not critically thinking enough or appropriately (except one time when I mentioned enjoying a little DMT while I'm on mushrooms, to which I was met with a response akin to "not knowing what I'm doing/thinking," to which I grinned and stated I've been doing this a while).

I have yet to come across a practice that is absolute in its specifications in working with entheogens. To say otherwise is synonymous to saying some religion is better than another. These are unverifiable ideals, hence why the concept of faith is so intertwined with them (though faith can be seen to play a role in any positivist system).

It's hard for me not to see these practices as philosophic rather than objective or factual, which is how many people treat them. These practices and traditions all have their axioms and methods for attempting to explain some aspect of reality, which doesn't denote that such ideas reflect reality accurately, but is an attempt to do so.

Aside from looking at philosophy as exploratory, it's also developmental; we develop systems to try to understand parts of the world and reality as well as on the whole.

Here are a few examples that I've encountered in regards to the prose in the utility of these practices.

In conversing with one individual, I alarmed them in two ways. The first was when I told them that I do pharma by myself and that I wanted to try a traditional Aya brew solo as well. They told me that I must have a guide of some kind, preferrably an ayahuascero. They seemed to have neglected that I've already been doing it alone, even if not in the most traditional manner as well as considerstions for dosing: I don't have to go extremely deep in an experience. They also seemed to think that their recommendation is the "right" way... Second, I disturbed them by stating that I clean up my diet a little only a few days before a pharma experience and that I don't observe a specific dieta. They tried telling me that I would upset plant spirits in doing it this way... I'm hard-pressed to think that a plant or even spirit of a plant ((or of anything else for that matter) would have the same sense of reason as an embodied human to decide to treat a person differently because of this. I do understand observing such a practice in the sense that it can help the overall system (such as gut, and purging, and processing), but I can't agree with any dogma pertaining to it.

To be clear, whenever I do my first ayahuasca ceremony in a traditional manner I will observe dieta as part of the entire experience.

Another example, I was talking with a friend about cacti ceremony with specific emphasis on Lakota tradition. Not only did he try to convince me that the spirit of the cactus will get upset if I don't perform certain deeds, but also tried to habe me concede to the idea that the tradition, down to specific lyrics of songs, has been unchanged for several thousand years. It got to a point where I had to tell him directly that I understand that this is what he was taught and I'm not denying that or the claim, but that I cannot agree or concede because I find no way to verify and validate such claims. The specifics are passed down orally, and the further something is in the past the harder it is to figure out anything incontrovertibly conclusive.

I understand the appeal of older practices and traditions. They seem "tried and true" due to having lasted so long (that doesn't really mean they are the "end all be all" and other factors can be at play, such as the proliferation of some religions through domination more than anything else). All the same, a practice not changing over time shows a potential lack of adaptability when change is constant and could be fueled by perpetuating bias as a result of never changing. Also, a group that has used an entheogen longer than other groups or persons isn't necessarily more authentic or "better," it simply means they got there first. Something no one can help. It just means they're more practiced.

The last example I'll share is a little more broad because I've come across the same sentiment from many people. I don't deny how awesome these experiences can be out in nature, but if I reflect candidly, my most memorable and meaningful journeys have been experienced in the confines of my room. Yet there are some who are adamant that it should be done in nature... this is preference, pure and simple.

Point is, I find that these experiences can be had in more than one "right" way, and no one has a monopoly on or the final say in how one practices and works with entheogens. And while doing so in some ways may be seen as more traditional, that doesn't mean other modalities are any less authentic in driving psychedelic experience.

I'm truly happy for anyone that finds what works for them, whether it's a practice, ritual, tradition, etc. However, that doesn't mean that such a practice is necessary for others in approching similar endeavors, in this case psychedelics. It's similar to the fallacy of the individual who has a powerful and transformative psychedelic experience and then espouses how everyone needs to do psychedelics... they aren't for everyone.

One love

Being that I've never traveled towards where I'd have a shaman on hand or an ayahuascero, there was some way I had to do it if it was in my benefit to have it done. And it was. We can pretty accurately say that the one main thing that qualifies someone as a shaman or at least getting shamanistic results is to get some of the results and some of the insight and some of the answers, and ideally share them with others. There's nothing wrong with doing the work alone if it can be done that way, and yes maybe it's not the best idea for every person to do so without a guide, but the question is are some of us self-guided individuals? I think many of us are. Those people who've criticized you sound like they are making assumptions such as that you're trying to cheat the tried and true method. I don't think that is the case. Keeping in mind that many who are referred to as shamans or ayahuasceros for the traveling outsider are collecting money on the assumption that they are in connection with something we aren't. I don't think that's a fair assessment. We too can be in touch without them giving us our credentials. I don't discount the existence of real helpful beneficial shamans to have around to help guide... it's just that I don't particularly feel the need to take a shot in the dark travel and trek towards a person who will blow smoke in my hair and chant the Icaro they've found in their rhythm. We can have icaros and rhythms of our own and that too can be okay. Many people on this forum are amazing artists who claim the benefit of things like ayahuasca in their pursuit to heal, make art, benefit, and share their expressions with others. That is totally a great thing as I see it. When someone benefits, heals, makes art, and makes progress in their pursuit of something worthwhile in life without damage done to their psyches... I say that's evidence of at least partial success or momentum towards ongoing success.

If I were to travel to South America and partake with a hundred shamans then decide on my favorite shaman, I, from here, can already know what would make a particular shaman my favorite shaman. It would be an ability to interface with sometimes unseen pieces of our reality for the benefit of others. But we too can interface with, experience, and uncover more of what we're after.

If one were to find themselves a bit lost and of need of major guidance after several times going it alone, they'd know it at some point. I see no reason to tell people who've been productive with their ayahuasca use that they're doing it wrong unless they do it my way, join ayahuasca churches, or travel to Peru, etc. I see it as a positive thing when it works out functionally for anyone.

My successful ayahuasca sessions go something like prepare, meditate and ready myself, consume, meditate to potential visions and insights, maybe purge, maybe not, make art of some sort, maybe write poetry, maybe end up singing, dancing, playing my guitar, and especially having a good afterglow if I feel I've accomplished something, made progress, gotten something moreso done because I partook. Honestly the only thing that would make the experience go sideways for me at this point after doing it so many times would be if people invaded my set and setting and told me I was crazy or doing things the wrong way or that I was a criminal.

I think we all find out in due time if we are doing things in ways that are right for us.

Sure, every vein goes back to the heart.

Im gonna take a more emotional/inflammatory perspective here.

I feel like this is a common phenomenon we all face in human interaction, we dont get validated or we get met with the other persons truth while exploring our own.
I find this can be particularly damaging as a kid.

It would be nice if they just listened to our experience, its not that yours is wrong, or perhaps it its, but I just want you to listen and validate mine.

In my experience, it takes an enormous amount of energy to make this conversations work, and you have to be willing to let go of the need for the other person listening to you, at wich point its probably a good idea to make sure you understand what your desires and intentions are in such conversations.

You can always go meta and express how you feel about their responses, that might steer the conversation into something more productive and/or serve as a filter to find people that are actually willing to listen to you.

Many people confuse listening to others with trying to solve a problem for that person. It takes a certain amount of maturity and skill to be able to purely listen to somebody and engage with them without giving any advice. Having the fluidity to be able to hold different perspectives on how to do anything is also something that requires some experience and maturity. We are all at different levels of development on our path of self-discovery and trying to convince others on the absolute correctness and validity of what we have discovered so far is often one of the beginning steps on that path...the most extreme and annoying example is the "born again syndrome" or "saviour complex." I guess one possible answer is to not get annoyed and if you still want to talk about something, find somebody else and hopefully the conversation will be more balanced.

This is my opinion on your observation.

Thank you all for your responses. Funny, I didn't really intend for this to be about me.



I tend to agree. Myself, I'm pretty enigmatic and contrarian and I am very much an autodidact, so while I may paradigm hop into some tradition or practice from time to time, it always comes back to what my understanding is and my movement forward based on said understanding. Almost as if my nature stipulates a solo trek through these realms. And I also don't see it as cheating either, and if anything, it's the hard way, because I have to make my path through the jungle on my own, not following one that has already been chopped and carved out.


I find the term shaman very loaded nowadays, which lends itself to why it makes me uncomfortable when other people insist on calling me such. I'm honor and humbled by the compliment, and won't tell them that they should not call me that (I just explain why I don't coin myself with the term), but I am not part of any tradition wherein such a title is given to those chosen for such a role in the culture the tradition is derived from. But I agree with how you describe one very much, and if anything, I do attempt to do some of those things as well. However, as a part of my guide work practice, I try to teach people autonomy in these endeavors so that they can learn to guide and heal themselves. Sometimes we have to go it alone.



Yeah, I find many people seem to be waiting to talk... I prefer reciprocal connection and exploration, but many people just want to be heard without the capitalizing on the potential connection to be made.

And I tend to "see it coming" when conversations like these happen and some of this stuff comes up (I tend to be misunderstood when I more openly express myself or share what I'm really thinking or start getting more philosophic and detailed about things that I'm passionate about; hard to connect, hence my being here hahaha), but it's really just to connect, and sometimes it's just kind of where conversations lead.



Yep... even if there's no problem requested to be solved

And I think that you're right; sometimes people can't grasp the prose or feel compelled to respond in a certain way with certain ideas, not realizing that they may be out of place.

It's like people drank the ayahuasca-kool-aid, and now they know it all

And it doesn't really annoy me so much as just leaving me feeling a little defeated in trying to connect.

Glad I was able to get a quick response in before heading to work. Have a great day (or evening) all.

One love

When you study philosophy and you have to write a paper, you usually get a good grade if you clearly define a subject, preferably in the form of a problem or question to be answered, and then carefully work towards a solution that is well argued.

You usually don't have to argue that your solution is the only possible one.

Sometimes there is only one solution, and sometimes you'll have to prove that this is the only one available. But this is usually either in the field of logic, or when strict logic is realy required to answer a question.

On most philosophical or metaphysical issues there is not only one single solution or way of looking.
But very often there is an issue of consistency. So that means that if you've chosen a method of solving a problem or analysing a subject, you'll have to stick to that method. Unless ofcourse, if that method fails.

I think that in psychedelic practices, something simmilar may apply.
There is not one way. But if you have chosen a certain path, unless it definately leads to a dead end, it is probably best to stick to that for at least that session or sequence of sessions.

So i think that there is definately not only one way. But once you've clearly decided that for instance, you want to do an ayahuasca session in a "traditional" way, i think it is probably best to go all the way and not skip parts, or use rue instead of caapi.
Not because it's wrong, but because of the immersive aspect of the whole process.

I think you are probably more deeply immersed into the experience if you are consistent in the path you choose.

Psychedelics are powerfull tools, but there is probably a sort of "placebo" aspect in how they work as well.

Endlessness has repeatedly argued this point when he analysed different materials and found that for instance a plant that people believed to have different properties than another plant, had the same alkaloïd profile.

So endlessness argues that it is in such a case probably not the specific plant, or pill, or blotter itself, that causes these differences in felt experience, but the expectations that people have towards that particular tool.

So that probably applies to certain rituals and ceremonies as well. If you believe that a certain diet or procedure is an essential part of the process, it probably works best if you stick to that.

It's like when a doctor would give you a placebo pill. Although it is not the pill itself that does the job in such a case, the placebo effect is probably not as strong if you'd take another pill instead of the pill he gave you.

There was a period when holding your food over an open flame was standard. People considered this the right method for thousands of years. Doesn't mean a pizza oven is wrong.

I bristle at the kinds of interactions you describe, VM. Sacred herbs=sacred cows. To me it is the experience that is sacred, and it is accessible to all of us however we choose to access it. IMNSHO, being safe is the only "should" that applies.

People who proscribe the kind of absolutes you describe in these interactions (of which I've had many as well) seem to either have a narrow frame of experience or tend to be selling something- even if what they are selling is only a belief. Beliefs *should* be dismantled.

Yeah. The only thing that matters about esoteric or spiritual beliefs is if they work for you personally, and that no-one get's hurt in the process. It's silly to think that everybody else should have the exact same beliefs.

The reason something works for me or you, is often because there is something about it that appeals to you or me personally. Experiences we've had, upbringing, etc.

But cults often encourage that kind of rigidity to isolate people from their friends and families. Two close friends of me joined a cult, and they behaved exactly like this.
Almost everybody who knew them before they joined, lost contact with them. Except maybe their parents. Realy weird.

This is partly because people tend to confuse and conflate their beliefs for knowledge as well truths.

If our beliefs are supposed reflect reality, then they should be under constant scrutiny. However, many people hold beliefs out of convenience and utility more than truth about the world (evident by lack of verifiability and difficulty in obtaining certain certainty).

One love

Indeed. For some, it’s the only possible way.