Experience report of first ayahuasca journey

[Pixar]

Due to the non-linearity of the experience I will not describe it has I would a story, but rather start by stating what I have seen then go on to mention the main components of the journey.

What I have observed:

A tiger (only one)
A tarantula (only one)
Swirling waters (a lot)
Insects
Aliens (one small gray men in particular* and less conventional ones**)
Blood vessel systems
Eyes (sometimes I would only see eyes peeking out of multiple dimensions)
Mouths
Humanoids with insect mouths of all sort **
Plants
Geometrical forms : e8, the world between two (has I like to call it) of infinite colors
Worm holes going through the space-time continuum
Colors colors
A woman's face (always the same multiple times) in black and white (which is very strange considering the vivid colors of all the rest)
Water flowing in life and in everything
Kaleidoscopes
Fractals

Intriguing parts of the experience:

* At one point I start seeing a typical alien (gray men) starting to emerge from my visions and replace them. I laugh, I think : so aliens really look like this? I feel him getting vexed and apologize (note that we are communicating telepathically). He understands, he then notices that I like carnivorous plants and shows me some from his planet. Suddenly, it is as if I am an insect flying through a swarm of alien looking carnivorous plants. I'm scared of being eaten, but my mind is completely lucid so I find it entertaining, like watching a horror movie. I don't remember what happens after that, like I said it's not linear so my mind probably flew away some place else.

** For a long part of the experience I was in a dark world, which would of made most people shit their pants : I was thinking just as clearly as I am right now so I was able to reason myself. It was filled with Humanoids with insect mouths of all sort, some looking like the mouths of predators (the movie) some even more gory with slime all over. It was very dream like, but very real at the same time. I remember thinking at one point: if this is were we go when we die then this must be hell (I knew I was just a visitor tough, so it didn't affect me at that moment). Funny thing is I learned way more in this world than the other pretty ones I experienced. I was among many different entities, but none would notice me unless I stared at one in particular for to long. I also managed to go back to the same world after leaving it the first time and reached towards one of the entities and pulled at its face tearing it like it was just a poster.

What was mentioned above was my first "out of body experience", although it felt more like a "inside my subconscious experience". I drank more of the brew after coming down. Layed down again and left the normal reality a second time.

Note that in the first experience I went through this path many times : First, the world of geometric shapes, colors, beauty and life. After that, the world of eyes peaking through different dimensions (it looks like they bend space around them). Note that they don't feel good or bad, only neutral. Again if I looked at one set for to long it would look back, otherwise they would just gaze at nothing. Finally comes the world of scary spirits that I mentioned already.

The second time I blasted of I only saw very pretty things such has different forms of life, water, blood vessels pumping synchronically with my breath and many more. I didn't leave this world tough, it felt like I was between the two.

What I learned:

To not describe things in absolute terms, I can explain this in more details if you want I wrote a long text on it but it's in french. This idea came from the fact that whenever I looked at something for to long or judged it (i.e thinking its pretty, ugly, etc) everything would suddenly become scary looking and visions would fly away, as if I had pissed them off. This especially with the woman I mentioned seeing already, I'd think she was the most beautiful thing I'd ever seen and she would suddenly become ugly. I deducted from that that she didn't like me judging her (even if it was good) because it limited her liberty of being whatever she wanted to be and at the same time I limited my own vision of reality by defining her. Hence, making the world, in my mind, a fixed entity while it is rather a world of infinite possibilities. Like I said, I wrote a long text on this subject mainly on why we should remove the word, in french, "être", which is equivalent to "is" in english I believe from our day to day talk, or at least be conscious of its repercussions.

To not focus on something in particular for too long, because we forget the beauty and diversity of the world. Also because it's not good for the mind.

How much the small things in life that stressed me out before are absurd.

That understanding something theoretically is a sort of understanding inferior than one that comes from feeling and experience. The last is way more profound Imo. Note that I am a very rational person and would of never said this before the experience.

 

[jbark]

What I learned:

To not describe things in absolute terms, I can explain this in more details if you want I wrote a long text on it but it's in french. This idea came from the fact that whenever I looked at something for to long or judged it (i.e thinking its pretty, ugly, etc) everything would suddenly become scary looking and visions would fly away, as if I had pissed them off. This especially with the woman I mentioned seeing already, I'd think she was the most beautiful thing I'd ever seen and she would suddenly become ugly. I deducted from that that she didn't like me judging her (even if it was good) because it limited her liberty of being whatever she wanted to be and at the same time I limited my own vision of reality by defining her. Hence, making the world, in my mind, a fixed entity while it is rather a world of infinite possibilities. Like I said, I wrote a long text on this subject mainly on why we should remove the word, in french, "être", which is equivalent to "is" in english I believe from our day to day talk, or at least be conscious of its repercussions.

To not focus on something in particular for too long, because we forget the beauty and diversity of the world. Also because it's not good for the mind.

I'd be curious to hear you elaborate on the nefarious apects of "etre"/"is". I think I know what you are getting at: that the considering of a thing as "being" in a certain state ("etre"/"is" ) encourages us to compartmentalize and ignore, facilitating a belief that we understand something simply by acknowledging its existence. Is that sort of what you mean?

How much the small things in life that stressed me out before are absurd.

The small things loom large and stress, but I love when experiences force my hand and challenge me to acknowledge that I have been concentrating on all the wrong things. One of the great values of psychedelics in my opinion.

That understanding something theoretically is a sort of understanding inferior than one that comes from feeling and experience. The last is way more profound Imo. Note that I am a very rational person and would of never said this before the experience.

In full agreement, though the one with the greater value is the more difficult to convey to others.

Thanks for posting this, and great insights. Glad to have you aboard.

Cheers,

JBArk

 

[Pixar]

I'd be curious to hear you elaborate on the nefarious apects of "etre"/"is". I think I know what you are getting at: that the considering of a thing as "being" in a certain state ("etre"/"is") encourages us to compartmentalize and ignore, facilitating a belief that we understand something simply by acknowledging its existence. Is that sort of what you mean?

jbark

Yes, in a way. For starters, lets imagine you are arguing with a friend an he/she says: "why are you so angry?" In his mind, he has already defined your current state of being and might take for account futher judgments on you based on his idea of you being mad. It might be completely untrue that your are mad, maybe your just a passionate debater. On your side, I know from experience that a lot of people do get mad when they are labelled something they are not. My theory is people don't like others to define them, we want to define ourselves. We lose a part of our free will, which is an anoying thing. Theres also the power of suggestion that is a well know fact by psychologists. In the end so much confusion and misrepresentations of reality by stating things in absolute terms. This reasoning can be brought into many other situations...EDIT: in the end my point is that our language affects the way we think. So why use one that obviously makes us take for granted things that may be completely false has truths and that leaves a place for conflict at the sametime? Now I know how hard it is not to use these words, but I believe its important to be aware of its repercussions.


Glad you agree with the rest

 

[jbark]

In the end so much confusion and misrepresentations of reality by stating things in absolute terms. This reasoning can be brought into many other situations...EDIT: in the end my point is that our language affects the way we think. So why use one that obviously makes us take for granted things that may be completely false has truths and that leaves a place for conflict at the sametime? Now I know how hard it is not to use these words, but I believe its important to be aware of its repercussions.

Because in order to communicate we must not equivocate.

Meaning that while generalizations are exclusive and limiting, the alternative, leaving everything open to anything ends up communicating nothing.

Our language does not just affect the way we think, it IS us. (there's that word "IS"! ). And to muddy definitions (and verbs) by not employing them, or choosing to employ more open, less precise ones (and hence ones that have less information or meaning) we muddy our thoughts and muddy ourselves.

Precision is a fine instrument that ought not to be overused NOR neglected.

Cheers,

JBArk

 

[Pixar]

Yes, of course when we are in a professional environment we must not equivocate, but in a day to day chat with a friend on subjectif subjects or opinions we should say: "I believe...", "I think...", and not "this is...". That is not equivocating, but letting the other know that the statement is only an opinion. We are all under the dogma of our subjectivity in the end imo. Children often afirm things in absolute terms and end up getting labelled has liars, which in itself is false considering they might not have been conscious of it.

I didn't suggest we should be avoiding discussions tough. I'm also conscious that it's pratically imposible to remove the verb in Question from our language.. I.e only when stating my opinion on something in my own day to day life do I say "I find this..." Since my experience, especially when it has to do with taste.

 

[jbark]

on subjectif subjects or opinions we should say: "I believe...", "I think...", and not "this is...". That is not equivocating, but letting the other know that the statement is only an opinion.

Absolutely. That is the philosophy espoused, and most often practiced , here. Though I must add I think that extends to every situation, professional or not - opinions should always be unveiled and should never parade as fact, or certainty, or dogma.

What I meant was in reaction to many in my day to day life who avoid any form of generalizing out of fear of committing to something, offending someone, looking foolish or being proven wrong. And, as a result, expend many words in the avoidance of precision and end in saying nothing.

But we are getting a little off the topic of ayahuasca.

JBArk

 

[Pixar]

on subjectif subjects or opinions we should say: "I believe...", "I think...", and not "this is...". That is not equivocating, but letting the other know that the statement is only an opinion.

Absolutely. That is the philosophy espoused, and most often practiced , here. Though I must add I think that extends to every situation, professional or not - opinions should always be unveiled and should never parade as fact, or certainty, or dogma.

What I meant was in reaction to many in my day to day life who avoid any form of generalizing out of fear of committing to something, offending someone, looking foolish or being proven wrong. And, as a result, expend many words in the avoidance of precision and end in saying nothing.

But we are getting a little off the topic of ayahuasca.

JBArk

Ok I see what you meant now and agree with you. Although in a professional setting using the verb "is" gives us more credibility and also makes us look more confident in our affirmations, so it has its practical side.

We are very off the subjet of ayahuasca lol, altough it was it that made me realise all this. Have you done both ayahuasca and smoked Dmt? If so are the visuals any different IYO? Pixar has only experience with aya.

 

[jbark]

We are very off the subjet of ayahuasca lol, altough it was it that made me realise all this. Have you done both ayahuasca and smoked Dmt? If so are the visuals any different IYO? Pixar has only experience with aya.

Very different yet similar. The onset of vaped dmt is much much quicker and more intense, but the experience is overall considerably shorter. And of course the harmalas in the vine add their own distinct flavour and alter the dmt, but the visuals are drawn from the same well.

I have several dmt reports posted here (gvg diaries and some others) and an ayahuasca report entitled "AYA with AY and I" if you want to read mire of my impressions. Also a bunch of mushroom reports and one lsd trip report.

Cheers,

JBArk