chocobeastie said:
endlessness said:chocobeastie said:
Perhaps.. Or perhaps spirits = pharmacological action of the compounds of interest...
..i think that discussion needs a clearer thread
-
Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).
The Spirituality of Pharmacological Action, or, Drugs as Spirits
- Thread starter nen888
- Start date
..i think that discussion needs a clearer thread
Here's Ott and Glenn Shepard relaying some traditional and indigenous (as well as personal) perspectives regarding the purified/isolated compounds as the "spirit" of the plants.
That video should start at 1:24:29.
When that video switches to them speaking in english, with spanish dubbing, switch to this video to hear the rest of their commentary, which should pick up at 1:27:37.
So here are three ethnographic reports documenting "spirits" as active compounds
Also, and I'll let him tell the story in full, but endlessness had a friend who was doing ethnographic study who shared extracted DMT with one of the indigenous folks who apparently resumed a vision he had had when he was much younger and was also of the mind that the extract was legit/spirit or w/e you want to call it.
That video should start at 1:24:29.
When that video switches to them speaking in english, with spanish dubbing, switch to this video to hear the rest of their commentary, which should pick up at 1:27:37.
So here are three ethnographic reports documenting "spirits" as active compounds
Also, and I'll let him tell the story in full, but endlessness had a friend who was doing ethnographic study who shared extracted DMT with one of the indigenous folks who apparently resumed a vision he had had when he was much younger and was also of the mind that the extract was legit/spirit or w/e you want to call it.
chocobeastie said:
chocobeastie, may I ask what species of Psilocybe you consumed? I'm guessing it wasn't P. cubensis! I'd be interested to hear more about your experience of those mushrooms.
I have sampled pure synthetic psilocin fumarate on a few occasions (at 15mg and 30mg dosage) and while it was obviously similar to the bemushroomed state (the latter larger dose yielding impressive and beautiful psychedelic effects), for myself, with both experiences I noted there was a hint of sterility to the experience...obviously mushrooms are not just psilocin/psilocybin in isolation but have many other biochemical components I feel modulate the experience to some degree, and differences in these are likely what give rise to the perceived differences in experiential qualities between species. I find mushrooms (particularly when consumed fresh) to produce a fuller, richer, more voluptuous experience with more colour and sparkle. An interesting thing about the psilocin experience which caught me by surprise was the lack of colourful visions...I find Hawaiian Panaeolus cyanescens mushrooms much more colourful and light filled in comparison. Thus personally I would rather consume mushrooms than the pure lab derived compound, going on my own experience.
Regarding Maria Sabina's comments on synthetic psilocybin and the spirit of the mushroom, it is important to point out that she didn't like all mushrooms to begin with...for instance she refused to work with P. cubensis, finding them dark in nature, her favourite species to work with being P. mexicana (which are generally revered as a very clean, clear and friendly species in comparison, while also being much more potent).
I've also been fortunate enough to sample pure synthetic mescaline hcl (which was fantastic, if superficial in some respects), and while obviously in the same ball park as cactus, I also found it highly (and consistently) distinct. The inner visions/CEV's on the pure hcl were kind of jumbled and confused with eyes closed...it was strange, and very different from any of my cactus visions that yielded beautiful and intricate closed eye visuals and visions. Obviously there are more alkaloids in cactus than mescaline alone, and important to note that many of my cactus experiences were augmented by dosing with a little Syrian rue prior to reduce the effective dosage (hard to say to what extend this modulated the effect of the cactus...it has a strong effect on modulating mushroom trips, but I felt cactus was less affected, but hard to be sure).
So spirits are water soluble it seems, because ayahuasca has spirits, according to most, and aya is an acqueous extraction. But it also seems spirits are not soluble in non-polar solvents since most claim purified extracts do not have the spirit.
Are spirits soluble in alcohol?
And maybe bancopuma's post point to the idea that spirits dont like dried plant/fungus matter, only fresh.. but then often aya is made with dried plant matter... maybe some spirits like water and others not?
At what point do spirits decide to leave?
Why arent people just eating the raw cact or straight up chewing aya vine / dmt plants, maybe they are missing the best spirits ?
Are spirits soluble in alcohol?
And maybe bancopuma's post point to the idea that spirits dont like dried plant/fungus matter, only fresh.. but then often aya is made with dried plant matter... maybe some spirits like water and others not?
At what point do spirits decide to leave?
Why arent people just eating the raw cact or straight up chewing aya vine / dmt plants, maybe they are missing the best spirits ?
endlessness said:
Ha nowhere was I stating that differences in experiential quality were down to the spirits being affected...more likely I think differences in biochemistry (case in point, there is likely to be some loss of psilocin on drying mushrooms, due to it being a much more fragile molecule than psilocybin and more sensitive to oxidation, and it is likely this that gives rise to perceived differences in effect).
endlessness said:
I thought alcohol was spirits! :surprised
I also think, for the purpose of this discussion, when making comparisons, it's important to note whether you are talking about isolated compounds (extracted or synthetic), or more full spectrum extracts, as bancopuma did. I think it's generally accepted that a range of psychoactive compounds ingested together is generally expected to produce different subjective effects than ingesting a singular, isolated psychoactive compound.
bancopuma said:
This underscores an interesting point regarding Sabina's personal preferences. If she preferred a "cleaner" alkaloid profile, would it not make sense that an isolated, synthetic compound might be more in line with what she identified as the "mushroom spirits"?
I think this also points to an important issue regarding subjectively "identifying" compounds based on the experiences they facilitate; different people have different preferences and are looking for different things out of a given range of experiences. What tickles one person's fancy may turn another person off. These confounding variables are all in the mix when people play the game of "do the drugs I ingested have the right spirits in them?"
And then people like chocobeastie say there are spirits in his changa.. are those spirits from the dmt extract (in that case it goes against what some say about extracts being spiritless), or are the spirits he feels only of the caapi leaves (and in that case shouldnt he be smoking acacia leaves/bark together with caapi leaves/vine to get more spirits?) ? Also this points out to the fact that spirits can be smoked, but they dont seem transdermally absorbed since touching these plants are not enough to feel the spirits right?
And then you have maria sabina saying synthetic psilo had the spirit.. is one shaman enough or how many more do we need to get the "synthetic=spirits" stamp?
I gave pure dmt extract to some amazon shaman and he loves it and def did seem to think it was spiritual... again, how many do we need to get the stamp of approval that extracts=spiritual? We have at least one shaman and a chocobeastie here..
Didnt ott show a shaman a tlc plate with harmalas glowing under uv and the shaman said: thats the spirit!" ? I seem to remember that from his talk at aya2016. So def seems spirits have a polarity and co-elute with harmalas at the very least.
And then you have maria sabina saying synthetic psilo had the spirit.. is one shaman enough or how many more do we need to get the "synthetic=spirits" stamp?
I gave pure dmt extract to some amazon shaman and he loves it and def did seem to think it was spiritual... again, how many do we need to get the stamp of approval that extracts=spiritual? We have at least one shaman and a chocobeastie here..
Didnt ott show a shaman a tlc plate with harmalas glowing under uv and the shaman said: thats the spirit!" ? I seem to remember that from his talk at aya2016. So def seems spirits have a polarity and co-elute with harmalas at the very least.
Dude, check the videos I linked earlier in the threadendlessness said:
kerelsk
Rising Star
I know that it isn't chemistry cannon, but I have had the thought that perhaps the environment where the synthesis of the psychedelic compound happened could affect its discrete tendencies in the living body. Almost thought of as being imbued with the unique living force that created the substance.
Hence DMT or psilocin that is plant derived, and the same that was made synthetically, both purified to the highest degree, might show some discrepancies in the mind over many uses.
Likewise, perhaps if some Psilocybe or ayahuasca total extract could be quantified, and the ratio matched synthetically, there might also show some changes.
Of course any psychedelic experience is so slippery, so different each time it's taken, makes this a bit difficult to ascertain even in a subjective fashion.
I have personally felt a deep connection to the spirit of P. cubensis, and my experience with it has so far been different than that with P. galindoi. A different ratio of similar tryptamines would not seem capable of provoking such highly specific states of mind.
I do accept the possibility that this is self-suggestion melded with a certain vibration-feeling contained within cubensis' ratio of alkaloids... but I haven't gotten too stoned lately and the spirit and voice may prostest such silly nonsense. As a personal daemon, the cubensis entity is indescribably complex. The rational mind cannot keep up, and I will resign it to analyzing smaller bits of the puzzle for the time being.
Hence DMT or psilocin that is plant derived, and the same that was made synthetically, both purified to the highest degree, might show some discrepancies in the mind over many uses.
Likewise, perhaps if some Psilocybe or ayahuasca total extract could be quantified, and the ratio matched synthetically, there might also show some changes.
Of course any psychedelic experience is so slippery, so different each time it's taken, makes this a bit difficult to ascertain even in a subjective fashion.
I have personally felt a deep connection to the spirit of P. cubensis, and my experience with it has so far been different than that with P. galindoi. A different ratio of similar tryptamines would not seem capable of provoking such highly specific states of mind.
I do accept the possibility that this is self-suggestion melded with a certain vibration-feeling contained within cubensis' ratio of alkaloids... but I haven't gotten too stoned lately and the spirit and voice may prostest such silly nonsense. As a personal daemon, the cubensis entity is indescribably complex. The rational mind cannot keep up, and I will resign it to analyzing smaller bits of the puzzle for the time being.
I will, Snozz, im on the phone on the train but when i get home i will watch it.
Bancopuma, i know you weren't saying that, im just using your post to ask questions as food for thought (and having a little fun in the process), since the thread title is about spirits.
Can other minor compounds in these plants/fungus affect the experience? Possibly in some cases, possibly not in other cases. Can it be that self suggestion plays a major part in people's experience regarding these experiences ? Possibly in some cases and in others possibly not.
Can we relatively easily answer this question? Yes, with double blind tests.
Bancopuma, i know you weren't saying that, im just using your post to ask questions as food for thought (and having a little fun in the process), since the thread title is about spirits.
Can other minor compounds in these plants/fungus affect the experience? Possibly in some cases, possibly not in other cases. Can it be that self suggestion plays a major part in people's experience regarding these experiences ? Possibly in some cases and in others possibly not.
Can we relatively easily answer this question? Yes, with double blind tests.
Afaik, according to fundamental chemistry concepts, if both sources are appropriately isolated and purified, there should be no differences. A given molecule is a given molecule, regardless of origin.kerelsk said:
That said, as to whether or not there's some yet-as-unaccounted-for "spiritual" force that surrounds a molecule from one source but not the other that is indetectable to modern analytical equipment, the way to study whether it has any reliable subjective bearing would be, as endlessness has pointed out repeatedly, to run a series of controlled, double-blind tests that would allow for others to attempt to replicate the findings.
syberdelic
Rising Star
I would tend to think that (cleanly) extracted chemicals vs. synthesized chemicals would have no difference in effect.
Dirty extractions or plant/animal/fungal sources are a different story as they will often have thousands of other chemicals that have some effect on the body.
I have some experience in Ayahuasca vs. pharmahuasca. The DMT and harmine were extracted from plant sources and not synthesized. The difference that I noticed is that my GI tract was less loaded down with the task of digesting the mass of plant matter with large amounts of tannins and terpenes on pharmahuasca. It was a "cleaner" experience but otherwise indistinguishable.
I also have some experience with San Pedro vs. mescaline extracted from San Pedro. The extraction, I would call a dirty extraction since it was a dark goo. The largest difference was the ease of consumption in gel caps but I also noticed less body load and more lucidity. Otherwise it was indistinguishable.
As far as spirits being attached to atoms or molecules; This can't be proven or disproven, but is not necessary for anything but to make living sources for drugs more appealing to those who choose to believe such things.
Dirty extractions or plant/animal/fungal sources are a different story as they will often have thousands of other chemicals that have some effect on the body.
I have some experience in Ayahuasca vs. pharmahuasca. The DMT and harmine were extracted from plant sources and not synthesized. The difference that I noticed is that my GI tract was less loaded down with the task of digesting the mass of plant matter with large amounts of tannins and terpenes on pharmahuasca. It was a "cleaner" experience but otherwise indistinguishable.
I also have some experience with San Pedro vs. mescaline extracted from San Pedro. The extraction, I would call a dirty extraction since it was a dark goo. The largest difference was the ease of consumption in gel caps but I also noticed less body load and more lucidity. Otherwise it was indistinguishable.
As far as spirits being attached to atoms or molecules; This can't be proven or disproven, but is not necessary for anything but to make living sources for drugs more appealing to those who choose to believe such things.
i would like to come to this when i have more time..
i personally wouldn't see 'spirit' of something as the effects it produces..
but rather some kind of field or entanglement..
i personally wouldn't see 'spirit' of something as the effects it produces..
but rather some kind of field or entanglement..
It really comes down to cosmology in my mind. Belief is a powerful thing.
If you dwell within a worldview that fundamentally understands the concept of spirits as quaint woo, is it really any wonder a few hours of perturbed brain chemistry and some "funny ideas" is what you find within the teacher plants.
If you live in a worldview factually and unquestionably animated by spirits, of course el espíritu habita en los cristales alquímicos.
"Psyche Delos"
If you dwell within a worldview that fundamentally understands the concept of spirits as quaint woo, is it really any wonder a few hours of perturbed brain chemistry and some "funny ideas" is what you find within the teacher plants.
If you live in a worldview factually and unquestionably animated by spirits, of course el espíritu habita en los cristales alquímicos.
"Psyche Delos"
Nick Sand said:
^ molecules are like the animation, spirit the animator, is one way to look at it..
'spirit' seems to usually be indicating a more complex or wider reaching field than individual molecules, plants or animals
'spirit' seems to usually be indicating a more complex or wider reaching field than individual molecules, plants or animals
endlessness said:
At a quick glance this would be the case but in western occult drugs only act as a catalyst to what our brains are already capable of doing without them. I guess it all depends on who you talk to and their actual experience.
endlessness said:
I know you are just having fun so maybe my perspective can add to that fun of yours. There's a big difference between an actual spirit you can interact with... an intelligence separate from your own that you can feel with your own perception vs a figment of your imagination that takes life during a trip. I suspect that this will be a limiting factor of your experiment.
I doubt anyone would be able to differentiate synthetic from natural in a double blind study. It'll be intense all the same. The more important aspect is what is going on in the head of the voyager before setting sail. This is proved by the power of placebo.
endlessness said:
Got you dude! :thumb_up:
My own personal view is that the modulatory role of secondary metabolites in mushrooms is overlooked and/or downplayed. All the species I have sampled so far...Psilocybe cubensis, P. semilanceata, P. cyanescens and Panaeolus cyanescens all seem to have quite distinct characters and experiential signatures to me, and this appears to be consistent and reliable between different sessions, so suggestive it is something that transcends the effects of set and setting. As well as psilocin and psilocybin, baeocystin and norbaeocystin and a few other alkaloids are also present at proportions that vary between different species. Other secondary compounds such as phenylethylamine may also modulate the effects (the latter having being detected in high levels in some samples of P. semilanceata, see linked study below). Coupled with this, species vary in their proportions of their tryptophan derivatives, the latter forming the precursors for psilocybin.
Check out this study (linked below), focussing on Panaeolus cyanescens:
...my own feeling is that the varying proportions of secondary precursor compounds (which are going to vary between species, as stated above) like tryptophan, tryptamine and baeocystin/norbaeocystin exerts a modulating effect on the experience, and gives rise to the perceived differences in experiential qualities commonly reported. Such differences become more distinct with higher dosages.
I find that Hawaiian Panaeolus cyanescens consistntly produce a much higher order experience than P. cubensis...the experience with the former is much more colourful, and qualitatively more visual, or rather more visually detailed (i.e. I notice there is a greater density of visuals than P. cubensis). P. cubensis can have a tendency to be a bit heavy, foggy and muddy...Panaeolus cyanescens I find in contrast to produce a highly clear, lucid, crystalline state of consciousness. The anxious come that can be encountered with P. cubensis, especially at larger dosages, is for me consistently muted with Panaeolus cyanescens, and they generally seem easier on the system and the body. I'm definitely not alone in these views, and there are many threads on here, the Shroomery and other forums attesting to these experiential differences. I do think some mushroom species vary more in character than others, but for me the difference in experiential quality between P. cubensis and Panaeolus cyanescens is profound, and I would welcome a blind test. My hunch is ingesting one's mushrooms in the form of tea and not consuming the mushroom matter may mute the differences to some degree, as you're going to ingest a good portion of the psilocybin in all cases but maybe leave some of the other secondary compounds behind in the mushroom matter. Part of the issue I think is potency, with P. cubensis you need to eat more to get to the equivalent level of experiential depth compared to more potent species such as Panaeolus cyanescens, so secondary compounds may be more prone to dilute the experience to some degree, which results in the more muddy, foggy effects associated with P. cubensis at times, and they are more prone to induce lethargy, likely a result of that extra fungal matter weighing one down to some degree, as it isn't easy to digest.
For what it's worth, the Mazatec and other indigenous Mexican Psilocybe using groups...who have more direct experiential knowledge of mushroom use than anyone else...take the view that the various species do have different characters and they employ them for different purposes in different situations. Certainly, I would encourage any passionate psilonauts to experiment with a range of species, there is definitely more to the mushroom world than P. cubensis, IMO.
Beck O., Helander, A., Karlson-Stiber, C. & Stephansson, N. (1999) Presence of phenylethylamine in hallucinogenic Psilocybe mushroom: possible role in adverse reactions. Journal of Analytical Toxicology, 22, 1, 45-49.
Stijve, T. (1992) Psilocin, Psilocybin, Serotonin and Urea in Panaeolus cyanescens from various origin. PERSOONIA, 15, (1), 117-121.
Psilosopher? said:
True, but important to remember mushrooms do not just comprise psilocybin alone in isolation. Regarding any difference between pure naturally extracted psilocybin and pure synthetic lab grade psilocybin, I agree.
..i don't see any reason an extract is not going to have a 'spirit', or even a synthetic molecule..the question is what that spirit is, what it's linked with..i'm suggesting it may not be the same as the effects of the compound, but rather the associated feeling..like when we momentarily sense or recall a person, we are not necessarily visually doing that..
another interesting Maria Sabina story is that she said that after the arrival of many people seeking the mushrooms 'they' stopped talking in mazatec and switched to English..
if looking for any kind of theory to explain this, again i think of field theory..though obviously have no means of framing what that field is..but even a synthesised version of a molecule can be linked to a 'field' in this way..
the concept of plant teachers seems to work for those with that belief system, so the concept of 'spirit' is not necessarily something most people are looking for in an experience..it may be a different intuitive way of gauging an experience..definitely small changes in chemical composition of plants will or can modulate effects, but i'm not sure this is the 'spirit' some curanderos etc talk about..
despite this issue being raised a bit, i don't think the actual blind tests have been done, e.g. between 99%+ pure synthetic vs extracted compounds..
i'm postulating though that the 'spirit' connected with plants or fungi by some may not simply be confined to the make-up of that plant, and may function in a more non local way which also relates to molecules..
i lean from experience to the each source of the same thing is subtly different position, but i admit i may be biased, and would like to really see the double blind experiments one day..I don't even think people should be told there is a difference, but asked to rate any differences, particularly on a feeling rather than cognitive level..
another interesting Maria Sabina story is that she said that after the arrival of many people seeking the mushrooms 'they' stopped talking in mazatec and switched to English..
if looking for any kind of theory to explain this, again i think of field theory..though obviously have no means of framing what that field is..but even a synthesised version of a molecule can be linked to a 'field' in this way..
the concept of plant teachers seems to work for those with that belief system, so the concept of 'spirit' is not necessarily something most people are looking for in an experience..it may be a different intuitive way of gauging an experience..definitely small changes in chemical composition of plants will or can modulate effects, but i'm not sure this is the 'spirit' some curanderos etc talk about..
despite this issue being raised a bit, i don't think the actual blind tests have been done, e.g. between 99%+ pure synthetic vs extracted compounds..
i'm postulating though that the 'spirit' connected with plants or fungi by some may not simply be confined to the make-up of that plant, and may function in a more non local way which also relates to molecules..
i lean from experience to the each source of the same thing is subtly different position, but i admit i may be biased, and would like to really see the double blind experiments one day..I don't even think people should be told there is a difference, but asked to rate any differences, particularly on a feeling rather than cognitive level..