Changa: The Evolution of Ayahuasca
This article is the introductory page of the Changa web site found at www.changaevolution.blogspot.com
It has been well over 53 years since Ayahuasca's (also known as cipó, caapi, hoasca, vegetal, daime, oni, yajé, natem, mama, Shori, and aya affectionately by westerners) introduction to western entheogen enthusiasts, and in that time Ayahuasca has evolved. What began as a synergistic plant combo known as Ayahuasca among specific cultures of the Amazon rain forest, has evolved to become something never seen before in the history of entheogens. Ayahuasca has transformed and become something new, radically different from what it once was. The sacred medicine that has historically provided incredible transformations in those who drink it has itself transformed. It has become Changa.
Changa is quite possibly one of the most amazing innovations in the technology of the sacred in our lifetime. The smoking blend is a combination of banisteriopsis caapi leaves (commonly known as the ayahuasca vine) and a natural extract of DMT. Ayahuasca itself is a tea of B. Caapi vine sections boiled down with perhaps other medicinal or psychoactive admixtures and a DMT, or 5meo-DMT-containing admixture plant, often Psychotria Viridis or Chacruna. Since the advent of western exploration of what has been called the ayahuasca effect or the ayahuasca complex, many new botanicals have been utilized and added to make a powerful brew that creates the ayahuasca effect. The ayahuasca effect is simply the inhibition of enzymes in the body that normally degrade ingested DMT, allowing the DMT to pass though the body altering consciousness without being destroyed by the body's enzymes.
Through the hard and potentially dangerous work of back yard shamans and amature ethnobotanists, many plants have been discovered that have the alkaloids necessary to produce the ayahausca effect. Synthesized laboratory grade chemicals have also been used to produce this effect, creating what some have called pharmahuasca, and what some purists call an abomination. Nevertheless, entheogen researchers have found that the plants and chemicals needed to produce ayahuasca are far reaching and can be found in many plants around the world.
One of the plants that has been discovered to have tryptamines suitable for creating the ayahausca effect is of the Acacia species. Acacia species that have good sums of DMT alkaloids in them are endemic to Australia, which is where Ayahuasca has "mutated" so to speak, evolving into what has been called Changa today. The production of DMT from natural sources has become quite simple, and due to the glory of kitchen chemistry quite a "green" process, no longer dependant upon ecologically harmful chemicals. According to Australian sources however, the availability of plants and chemicals needed to bring about the ayahuasca effect was slim. This was due to a ban on the importation of harmala containing plants in Australia. Any dried or harvested harmala containing plants in Australia carry the same offense as possession of heroin; magically however, live plants were legal and soon cuttings of plants and rooted plants where being bought sold and traded for personal consumption. This was a stark contrast to elsewhere on the globe where B. Caapi was easily bought and sold from online vendors in dry large quantities just ready for the brewing. Harmala containing plants thus being illegal, harvested and dried provided an interesting challenge to Australians, who like many entheogen enthusiasts found in their travels to South America the mind blowing and healing ayahuasca tea. For those that discovered the amazing medicine and spiritual path of ayahuasca, these people began to see how the vine interweaves with their authentic needs for meaning, health and well being. For some working with ayahausca became a necessity, but not an easily accessible one.
Before the ban of these dried plants and their live importation as well as the chemicals harmine, harmaline and tetrahydroharmine in Australia, some of the plants had made it over the sea and were being grown discretely by private parties with a vested interest in these plants of power. Sadly though, there was not enough Caapi vine to go around for all who needed this medicine, and seeing how DMT was easily available, some thing had to be done... necessity, so they say, is the mother of invention.
The story of Changa's discovery is clouded and a bit mysterious due to the legal ramifications of Changain Oz. Australians had been trying to keep this under their hats for some time. So the story goes... Someone in Australia discovered that if one infused the leaves of B. Caapi with DMT naturaly extracted from Acacia trees, that it could be smoked to form a totally new and undiscovered way of creating the ayahuasca effect. People had been taking Harmala alkaloids from Syrian Rue and B. Caapi with their DMT sessions in various forms for a very long time, but this was different... This was dramatically different.
Eventually Changa became known in other parts of the world, and its herbal blends started to adapt to the plants available locally or legally through botanical vendors. Now that the word is out, entheogenic explorers and back yard shamans are developing ways of relating to this sacred medicine. What is being formed is completely unique to its own dynamic of being smoked, but still very much influenced from what has been learned from Vegetalismo and Curenderismo practices in South America. A new form of shamanry is being practiced and learned from practicing with these plant teachers. A new entheogenic healing modality, new rituals, new ways of relating to ceremonial structure and the role of the healer as well are beginning to shift and transform -- each adapting to the authentic needs of those working with this medicine.
The qualities of the tea are much different than the qualities of the Changa smoking blend, as is drinking or sublingual administration of harmala alkaloids prior to smoking DMT. The tea is drunk and enzymes begin to be inhibited in the stomach, then the effect spreads throughout the body. Changa -- who's route of administration is smoking -- works very differently. The pyrolyzed smoking blend is inhaled, adsorbing into the lungs and going directly to the brain. In the brain the alkaliods inhibit enzymes directly, adding the unique effects of harmala alkaliods to the synergistic effects of the tryptamine harmala pharmacological relationship. The effects are faster, clearer headed, and more centering according to Changaleros (those who practice the way of smoke), with less to no nausea unless one is working with it to physically purge. The purge from Changa is more or less a matter of personal intention than physical reaction.
According to cosmologist Brain Swimme, the entire universe is evolving; solar systems, planets, single cell organisms, plants, animals, cultures, spiritual practices, technologies, all systems evolve and move towards a deepening of complexity -- and plant-human relational systems are no different. Could it be that the plant-human relationship of the complex plant, chemical, neurophysiological relationship we have come to know as ayahausca has evolved as well?
The Evolution of Ayahuasca
Evolution: ev·o·lu·tion
1. A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form. See Synonyms at development.
a. The process of developing.
b. Gradual development.
When people speak of ayahuasca, they are not generally speaking of the vine B. Caapi. They are generally speaking of the synergistic complex of two or more plants that has come to be known as ayahuasca. On the one hand a step in ayahuasca's evolution was its moving out of the rainforest. Researchers like Johnathan Ott helped us to see that there were many plants that brought about this "ayahuasca effect." This next step out of the jungle was called the ayahausca analog -- plants with similar chemicals being worked with to produce the "ayahausca effect," which some say is the inner voice phenomenon that seems to be particular to this entheogenic synergy.
Some researchers pointed out that this same effect could be created with lab chemicals or even some pharmaceuticals currently used as antidepressants. The next step was in working past the oral route of administration combining the smoking of tryptamines with the smoking of beta-carbolines, which have been found to be many times more potent and effective with fewer side effects smoked. This has become the next development, the next evolutionary step for the synergistic shamanic technology and "entity" we have come to know as ayahuasca. As I mentioned earlier, ayahuasca is not just the vine. Though it is the vine's name, many people when referring to ayahausca are referring to the shamanic technology that is ayahausca as well as the synergy of plants and chemicals that combine to form what some have perceived as a powerful and unique being in and of itself. This being is a unique synergistic hybridization of human and plant relationships who most view as a feminine being that can be of great help to you in healing, learning and personal growth.
Ayahuasca is ayahuasca to us because of our relationship to it and how we relate to it. The way of relating to ayahuasca has evolved, it has changed, it has developed into something new and unique in its own right. It has evolved into Changa. Here though I would like to make a note on the notion that evolution includes the value judgement "better." Many people would look at an organism and see its perfection as it is. As this organism evolved, would anyone look at what it evolved from and say "Oh this organism is so much better than what it evolved from!"? Probably not. So how would the word "better" apply here in regard to ayahuasca's transformation from tea to smoke? Honestly better is certainly a value judgement based on personal bias, however there could be debates and agreements on the notion that ayahuasca's evolution into Changa in Australia was a better option than brewing tea and running out of Caapi vine because it was in limited amounts and no new vine was allowed via importation. To the people who developed Changa, this was a "better" option. This better option also allowed them to explore both Caapi and DMT space in ways that had never really been done before, allowing for adaptation and innovation, and thus diversity. The increase in complexity as well as the increase in diversity is often looked at in science as "better," or let's say a more effective strategy for survival, growth and development.
The question remains however in terms of qualitative value judgements indicated by the statement that ayahausca has evolved. Is Changa better then ayahausca? That may be a matter of personal opinion and preference... however perhaps not, it is possible that Changa maybe the most effective and adaptive strategy for working with local and or locally grown admixture plants around the world, thus limiting the need for exportation/importation of plants from the Amazon.
Changa could possibly be, if one looks at the concept of psychointigrator plants, a way for local plants, or plants grown locally to aid in human synergistic relationships with place just as these plants have done for the peoples of the amazon. Time will tell...
We are one . . .
Artwork by the author, used by permission.
Tweet- 5-12-10
- Chen Cho Dorge's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
Comments
No need to defend I'm not
No need to defend
I'm not on the attack
My comments; straight forward like an arrow
Not twisted, nor bent back
My motives are clean
Plain to See
You read what I said.
What I wrote;
contains no "hidden agenda"
To be honest, amigo
I'd like to commend ya
Yet, here in the Sandwich
Between two pieces of toast,
We're not here to roast,
But play host, to a consciousness
That grows and shapes
We can work together
Or play Planet of Apes
We can learn from each Other
Or recoil, feeling threatened
We can demand we are right
Or dance,
joyous,
in worlds that beckon.
-
Perhaps
it's a world
made of pure
freakin' language.
Where medicines and spirits
Transfrom all the anguish
We are all One
of this
be true
but the moebius math
mean "I" am not "You"
For Plants or People..
Whatever the case...
What's held the heart
Is written on the face.
Thank you for the poem
Thank you for the poem Morgan.
I am a big fan of pluralism...multiple truths being equally valid.
Blessings...
http://changaya.blogspot.com
Simple distinction
Dan at this point I feel
Dan at this point I feel after reading your spin doctored critique of my site that your point of view is VERY politically motivated to keep changa and ayahuasca completely seperated and distant. I really do not see any point in continueing a debate with you, as I loath debate in the first place.
This is actually just further evidence of your political motivation here, its very transparent dan...
"Changa is an evolution of the delivery system for a smoked DMT experience, not an evolution of Ayahuasca..."
It doesnt occur to you that B. Caapi leaf and vine is often the base of changa, and that the voice of that vine speaks to those that smoke it? You purposely ignore that to further your political agenda in stigmitizing DMT extracts, to further the attempts to legitimize and legalize ayahuasca as a religious sacrement. Your agruement has little to do with changa and every thing to do with your political agenda.
People smoke changa not for the dmt experience or the harmala or vine experience but for the unique syngery of the two combined.you ignore that and attempt to create a division for political reasons. instead fo seeing them as the same synergy that you see in ayahuasca TEA.
http://changaya.blogspot.com
In terms of 'spin
In terms of 'spin doctoring', you wrote this RS piece with a very well crafted, underlying conflation running through it
Your essay isn't just a delivery of information on Changa, it was the delivery of a worldview in which changa and Ayahuasca are conflated. This is no less political than wishing to preserve the meaning of an indigenous term and its traditions as distinct from western psychonautic kitchen chemistry.
You call it 'political', I call it a matter of respecting a culture and ancient traditions, and not bending language to our own agenda. Ayahuasca is a plant! And the tea made from it. There is no precedent to claim that even chacruna, or mimosa or any other tryptamine bearing plant is 'Ayahuasca'. Doubly so if they're extracted, and dito if smoked.
Ayahuasca is not an 'effect'. Each plant and tradition and preperation have their own names. They are their own entities. The identity of the individual plants and their specific teachings are there to be explored through fine-grain exploration.
Thats all the article on Aya dot com seeks to express.
Ayahuasca dot com wishes to
Ayahuasca dot com wishes to express things in a particular way that helps aid their particular political agenda... it has nothing to do with respecting any culture, or ancient traditions, it is about creating a far divide between ayahuasca, dmt and changa as possible.
"Ayahuasca is a plant! And the tea made from it. There is no precedent to claim that even chacruna, or mimosa or any other tryptamine bearing plant is 'Ayahuasca'."
No one ever said that chacruna or any other DMT continaing plant addative is ayahuasca either. That you are alluding to me doing so is a perfect example of your continual spinning of what I am saying to support your agenda.
Also Ayahuasca when DMT addmixtures are added to it AS THEY OFTEN are... is still called ayahuasca... which wold be a conflation wouldnt it?
B. Caapi leaf of vine added to an natural extract from a plant would also be a conflation of B. caapi and a DMT continaing plant wouldnt it? Combining something into one whole... one synergistic whole... the act of doing so would be conflating wouldnt it? The fact that it is called ayahuasca when it is "conflated" with a dmt contianing plant is kinda what I am getting at. I am not bending words or using language inapropriately (though my grammer and spelling are terrible) but pointing out that not only is ayahuasca a plant and a tea of that plant (B. Caapi)but it is also what is calleda tea made with the vine AS WELL as DMT contianing plants, as well as many others. My point Dan is that the "conflation" itself is what makes ayahuasca as we know it in the west primarily as a synergistic plant complex brought together by humans. In that effect I pointed out that what we know it to be is a human relationship with several plants, including the human relationship into the definition of the word as we know it today.
"Ayahuasca is not an 'effect'. Each plant and tradition and preperation have their own names. They are their own entities. The identity of the individual plants and their specific teachings are there to be explored through fine-grain exploration."
It is true ayahuasca is not an effect but it does have a particular effect, when ingested, as does the many plants that have chemicals in them that are the same as that of those used in making a traditional tea (and the same as a good ol fashioned changa blend). Johnathan Ott was the first to point out this "ayahuasca effect" as a means of pointing out the simularity between plants and chemicals being combined synergisticly as ayahuasca is to produce an ayahausca "like" effect. This is in no way sayign that ayahuasca is an effect but that it has a like effect to the combination of other plants and chemicals. This is fairly well known and clear, yet you continue to try to confuse my point to fit your political agenda to stigmitize DMT and its extraction. The idea of a extracted DMT being combined with the ayahuasca vine or its leaves is a dirrect threat to your political agenda of maintianing a demonized stance on the practice of extracting chemicals from plants. It also connects this heinous practice with smoking B. Caapi leaves or vine which dirrectly connects smoking DMT to ayahuasca and thus to the reaility that changa is made exaclty out of the same things ayahuasca tea is which then puts ayahuasca in the same catagory as smoking DMT in the eyes of the law. This has been a trend of thought on the ayahuasca forums moderation board for years now, and is a praticular position they preach to people that come there. All mention of extracted DMT on the ayahuasca forum is quickly deleted.
Your motives are strictly politicaly motivated Dan... As I mentioned to you on your site, I really do not wish to have this conversation with you because its not honest, its manipulative and politically based and begining to remind me of most other political debates where a politician uses these same tactics to defame the other and their point of view.
Your a brilliant and wonderful person and an amazing artist... stay out of politics.
http://changaya.blogspot.com
don't be a victim
I DO NOT HAVE ANY SOCK
I DO NOT HAVE ANY SOCK PUPPETS HERE DAN. There was an earlier mistake with a previous account that was remedied. Your critique is heavily biased and focused on politically smearing my work to support your forums agenda. I have attempted to listen to you and hone my perspective as you say, and any attempt at communication or community building is based on my being wrong and your forums political views being right. I could not see any development as a community coming from this interaction unless I change my perspective to match yours and your communitys views, which I do not hold which is exactly why I no longer moderate on the ayahuasca forum. There is a long held difference in opinions that are continuing to be played out here. I no longer participate in your community because of that difference in opinions.
I like diversity, I think nature and complexity favours diversity. We can listen to each other, respect each other difference find our own communalities with out attempting to convince the other that their particular point of view or perspective is wrong and the others is right. This may not allow us to develop as one community in which your political views and perspective are dominant, which is where I feel this has been going, but it will allow us to divide into two distinct communties with perhaps totally different and even opposing view points. There is room for this. In fact I beleive that there is a need for this! I respect your opposing view points but do not hold them as my own.
I know longer wish to debate with you, I would rather instead respect your differing opinions and find our commonalities, and ask that you do the same. if we cannot do so I do nto feel there is any need to continue this conversation.
http://changaya.blogspot.com
Some things to clarify *
Some things to quickly clarify:
* there is no anti-DMT perspective on the Ayahuasca forums, although discussion of isolates or smoking extracts is seen outside of the remit of the forums' scope, being as it is the Ayahuasca forum, and not a general plant or entheogen forum. This direction evolved through the community, it was not top-down. Everyone knows that DMT plays an important role in the psychopharmacology of Ayahuasca. But for some people it can also become a fixation which overlooks the role of Ayahuasca (the vine).
* You can call Ayahuasca dot com 'political', or you can call it 'focussed discussion'. But there are plenty of other places throughout the internet where people can discuss anything they want.
* I personally as the author of the response on Aya dot com have no anti-changa perspective. I recognise it as a valuable sacrament and respect your views on it. However, I have a response to give to your essay since you attempt to completely redefine Ayahuasca according to your own terms. It doesn't matter who penned it, I would still respond, or someone else would.
* You can decide there are two camps. But nobody in South America would recognise Changa as Ayahuasca. This is not a matter of what is good or bad, its just a matter of ethnocentrism. You haven't responded to this point, which I thought you would have, being an advocate of bioregional cosmology and language. You've just mentioned Ott who himself reveals subtle reductive and ethnocentric blind-spots when he wrote his Ayahuasca Analogues book. All great for the time it was written, but we've moved into a very different era now.
* Your concept of Ayahuasca reverses the relationship of the plants in Ayahuasca. In traditional practice, the vine is the principal ingredient and the DMT plants are the admixtures. Chacruna itself MEANS admixutre. Changaya makes DMT (wherever it came from) the main ingredient and the Caapi the admixture.
* This is all said in the light of open communication and sharing. Since we are not our opinions, we should be able to discuss this without becoming 'intense'...
"* there is no anti-DMT
"* there is no anti-DMT perspective on the Ayahuasca forums, although discussion of isolates or smoking extracts is seen outside of the remit of the forums' scope, being as it is the Ayahuasca forum, and not a general plant or entheogen forum. This direction evolved through the community, it was not top-down. Everyone knows that DMT plays an important role in the psychopharmacology of Ayahuasca. But for some people it can also become a fixation which overlooks the role of Ayahuasca (the vine). "
"* You can call Ayahuasca dot com 'political', or you can call it 'focussed discussion'. But there are plenty of other places throughout the internet where people can discuss anything they want. "
As having been a member of the moderatorship on the ayahuasca forum I disagree that there is no politically foscused desire to not speak about DMT extractions. Isolated DMT even for the purpose of taking in capsuls cannot be discussed there either. As far as DMT being the fixation and not the vine you seem to have the fixation on both, I personally fixate on the synergy of the two combined and not DMT or the vine.
You can mask your political agenda with calling it a focused conversation if you like.
"However, I have a response to give to your essay since you attempt to completely redefine Ayahuasca according to your own terms. It doesn't matter who penned it, I would still respond, or someone else would."
I have not "redefined ayahuasca" all I have done is point out that ayahuasca is ALSO the name of the tea when dmt contianing plants are added to it. Many words have multpile meanings. ayahuasca is a plant and a tea, and a tea that has other plants added to it.
"* You can decide there are two camps. But nobody in South America would recognise Changa as Ayahuasca. This is not a matter of what is good or bad, its just a matter of ethnocentrism. You haven't responded to this point, which I thought you would have, being an advocate of bioregional cosmology and language. You've just mentioned Ott who himself reveals subtle reductive and ethnocentric blind-spots when he wrote his Ayahuasca Analogues book. All great for the time it was written, but we've moved into a very different era now. "
You are creating two camps, it was not my idea. I am also not saying that ayahuasca is changa, nor would I say that any one in SA would recognize it as such even though the vine is in many of the changa blends and is the preffered base for changa. This is why it is called changa and not ayahuasca... even though ayahuasca vine and leaf is its base... this is why I said it is an evolution of ayahuasca. You seem to think that there are some things that do not change into greater levels of complexity ie evolve. Ayahuasca in my opinion has evolved you can call this ethnocentric if you like but its happened and I am just reporting that it did. We can disagree on that if you like.
People have moved on from Otts work, and porimarily due to the ease of travel and the ease of ordering the ingredients or even a bottle of ayahuasca online these days this moving on has been due to out right ignoring some of his points and pushing them aside because they can afford to ignore them.
"You haven't responded to this point, which I thought you would have, being an advocate of bioregional cosmology and language. "
What I have always been an advocate of is discovering our own relationships instead of appropriating those of others. Changa I beleive accomplishes that. Once again I am not calling changa ayahuasca I am calling it changa, and that is not even my doing... I am just reporting that.
"* Your concept of Ayahuasca reverses the relationship of the plants in Ayahuasca. In traditional practice, the vine is the principal ingredient and the DMT plants are the admixtures. Chacruna itself MEANS admixutre. Changaya makes DMT (wherever it came from) the main ingredient and the Caapi the admixture. "
My concept of ayahuasca does not and I have pointed that out repeatedly which you convienently ignore because I do not beleive it is still your actual motive to hear me but to create a division for political purposes.
My Concept of ayahuasca is that it is yes a plant, and that yes a tea can be made of that plant, but that plants are added to that plant some of which that have DMT in them some of which do not. When Ayahuasca is brewed it often has DMT continaing plants added to it, these plants do not change its name, it is still called ayahuasca even when it has DMT in it... My concept of ayahuasca in the later case of it being B. Caapi mixed with other DMT containing plants is that it is a syngery of the two plants and multiple chemicals with another synergistic human relationship to make it possible. I am not bending or twisting or turning...
Changa is not, IMHO, DMT with a harmala containing plant as the addative, or ayahuasca vine or leaf as the addative. But that the harmala containing plant is the base changa would not be changa with out it, it would be smoked dmt. I see that changa like ayahuasca is a complex mutualistic syngery between humans, plants and alkaliods. I beleive that it is you that is presenting my views as the oposite not I.
I want to add that the article that was posted here on reality sandwich was an introduction to the web page that works to further the ideas presented in the intro. Judging an entire book by its introduction would rarely give us the entire message.
And also for the record (again, I find my self repeating myself over and over, which I really do not have time for.) I have never called changa changaya. As I explained prevoiously this was the only address for the web site that could be used I did not nor ever have reffered to it as changaya that has been your doing. I beleive that changa can and does stand alone, but that it evolved from (as some one pointed out) ayahuasca, which I beleive is worthy and important to point out.
http://changaya.blogspot.com
Thanks for the elaboration.
Thanks for the elaboration. I appreciate your response.
Quoting you: "I have not "redefined ayahuasca" all I have done is point out that ayahuasca is ALSO the name of the tea when dmt contianing plants are added to it."
"I am not calling changa ayahuasca"
OK! But theres various passages in your essay that lead the reader to view otherwise, like :
"Ayahuasca has transformed and become something new, radically different from what it once was.... It has become Changa."
and
"Ayahuasca is ayahuasca to us because of our relationship to it and how we relate to it... It has evolved into Changa."
Can you blame anyone for being confused?
-------------
"This has become the next development, the next evolutionary step for the synergistic shamanic technology and "entity" we have come to know as ayahuasca"
So, we're going round in circles. Wouldn't it be better to say Changa has evolved out of ayahuasca research, or ethnobotanical research, or DMT research, rather than say Ayahuasca has actually evolved? In my communication with many people who have a long term relationship with Ayahuasca, none would describe the development of changa as an evolution of Ayahuasca.
Evolution carries connotations of complexification and 'betterment', following your quote in the article. For the many peoples of South America and beyond, Ayahuasca is the vine and tea, it has not 'evolved'. It remains what it is, a sacrament and medicine taken as a tea and made from their native plants. The role of its evolution is in the soul. The development of a new combination of extraction methods and routes of administration doesn't equal an evolution of Ayahuasca.
I have always been a very strong believer in your scholarly and exploratory soul and spirit! I have been a long time advocate of your work and thoughts. I offer this critique with the aim that you may hone your message. We are One.
"Quoting you: "I have not
Dorge. People who diet with
Dorge. People who diet with Ayahuasca, work with it consistently, or live within the traditions or lineages of South America do not need someone, a north American on the Internet, telling them their sacrament has ‘evolved’ into something else, become more complex or improved. Even if said person is full of the sincere wonders of their new ally and good intentions. Is this so difficult to understand ? Its a matter of cultural respect and respect to those sincere in their dedication to working with the Ayahuasca tea + chacruna (admixtures).
'Ayahuasca has evolved' carries a very different meaning from saying Changais a branch of a family tree. I and few people would have contention with the latter, as all things are related, and the power of Changa as an entheogen is not in question. But as previously mentioned, one of the big things about Changa is it reverses emphasis from a vine based potion+dmt bearing plants, to a smoked DMT preperation with optional MAOI. Its a different medicine complex!
You say you are interested in a synergistic relational dynamic not a mechanistic complex of chemicals. But the 'ayahuasca effect' is a fallacy because the vine is NOT simply an 'enzyme inhibitor' letting the DMT hit a home run. This is old-school and reductive because it is ignorant of the spiritual and phenomenological dimensions of the vine. And for that matter, underplays the difference between various beta-carboline bearing plants, and their different long-term effect.
If we are interested in synergistic relational dynamics, then I ask : then isn't a specific locating of the synergistic relationship in the specific plants and their methods of use (as well as the form, intention and paradigm which shapes that relationship) important? If we make a word too generalised it looses its specific meaning, as Wind mentions above.
Thankyou for your clarifications and bearing with me in this debate.
Dan, we are just going to
Dan, we are just going to have to agree to disagree. I really do not have time to debate with you, nor do I care too any more. I have much more important things to attend to then your arguements man. I dont mean that to be belittling, or to minimalize the importance you feel on this subject... But we are not going to share each others point of view and no amount of philosophical errosion from you is going to change my point of view on this subject nor mine yours... Diversity Dan...
I have plenty to say in response to your questions... but I really do not see the point.
I really cant spend more time on this. So bless and be blessed.
http://changaya.blogspot.com
This morning after praying
Changa
Changa is absolutely amazing and it's a shame that some don't work with it because they're trapped in linguistic frameworks of the socio-moral-ideological kind-i'm just speaking generally here. Who cares if someone calls it "the evolution of ayahuasca". Thats just their way of looking at it. It's not directly implying that either is better than the other...(thats not how evolution works, atleast. Adaptions are only better in regards to the present conditions, environments) The very surfacing of the idea of changa is a direct result of ayahuasca itself- reaching more people in more ways in more environments.
I think they are both different and useful tools in their own ways and are of extreme benefit to those who work with them wisely. We still have mama aya to commune with, changa hasn't taken over and despiritualized ayahusca, its just another tendril of aya's thats reaching out to guide the minds of the lost monkeys in a whole new way during this pivotal point in evolution. or atleast thats my take on the whole thing :)
great
great point!
http://changaya.blogspot.com
my comment was deleted
I personally did not delete
I personally did not delete your post, I dont have the ability to do so. What did you say? Was there any spam like tags attached to it? Ive liked your previous posts on other posts, I am curious what you had to say.
http://changaya.blogspot.com
I will have to ponder that
quoting this from my post on
i agree lots of people have
i agree lots of people have placed ayahuasca on a much higher level then other entheogens... Mushrooms can be as effective as a healing force as ayahuasca or peyote or san pedro, vilca ect... yet people take mushrooms and go to the bar, get wasted, or "F***** up on them." It seems to me that the intention is gone, they see them as a tool or play thing, and that reflects on the nature of their experience, I think Ram Das called this establishing your set. I think the same principle applies with pharmahuasca honestly. People know that it is extracted and so relate to it as a chemical, something with out personality or gender. Again here I will point out that when Maria Sabina conducted a veleda with pure lab made psylocybine she commented after words that Hoffman had captured the spirit of the mushroom in the little pill. I think this is due to how SHE REALTED to it. How she related to it and how we relate to these chamicals may be the real difference.
http://changaya.blogspot.com
"second this very much
more
This talk about the signature of Caapi being the same smoked or drunk. But this is only half of a half of a question, because Changa in reality rarely contains B.caapi !
IF - and that if, you are one of the rare ones to make your changa with caapi, what is the ratio ? To equal your average Aya you'll need over 70/140mg of beta-carbolines to your 25/45mg of DMT, minimum. I know this sounds a bit crazy, but we're talking approximation here.
What is meant that the caapi is not an afterthought in Ayahuasca, and in a good strong brew its not added just enough to allow the DMT to hit home. The beta-carbolines composes the baseline of psychoactivity and can exert themselves strongly in its own right. This says nothing of the tannins and anti-oxidants that are present in the aqueous solution.
Ayahuasca is a physical and energetic medicine, La Purga, a spiritual and physical cleansing, not singly a psychedelic. So if you make your changa so that the beta-carbolines have strong emphasis, does smoke put people through the profound physicality of what Ayahuasca involves? Does it make people purge? Does it snake through the body, cleaning the intestines and the blood and lymph and colon with its bitter magic? In my own experience of smoking harmala alkaloids there is nothing, repeat nothing like the effect of drinking the stuff.
That is why, on a relative level I agree with a distinction, I agree with 'diversity'. I have felt, like many, a vision of the brew as the blood/milk/nectar of the Amazon, La Medicina, the tea, the panacea for thousands of people over hundreds of generations.
Dan
There was some confusion for
There was some confusion for a while where people were calling DMT enhanced leaf changa. The DMT nexus has been and I hope the site has been instrumental in correcting this. Changa is not enhanced leaf, meaning any combo of leaf smoking mixtures with no inclusion of any caapi or other harmala containing plants.
Most people on the nexus these days aare all on teh same page that changa is a 1:1 ratio of caapi and DMT or DMT and some other concentration of harmalas, some times it is made with rue, and some times it is made with a high concentration of passion flower, which works people say. Originally changa was made with caapi vine and leaf, and currently people are making changa with caapi leaf and vine pretty exclusively. Most people are seeing that it works with just caapi leaf, buit many are finding that if one increases the amount of vine or leaf or leaf and vine making a more contentrated leaf extract that they get much better results. This is the preffered method by most people now.
But people all over the world make their own versions and its all pretty individual to the person making it... and often up to their prefference. the standard and most popular and effective method I have seen discussed on forums is a concentrated leaf with an addition of vine or extracts there of...
"This says nothing of the tannins and anti-oxidants that are present in the aqueous solution."
How does Homeopathy work dan? Ever tried any homeopathic medicines? Ever held a feather and felt the spirit of the bird moving your hand?
"Ayahuasca is a physical and energetic medicine, La Purga, a spiritual and physical cleansing, not singly a psychedelic. So if you make your changa so that the beta-carbolines have strong emphasis, does smoke put people through the profound physicality of what Ayahuasca involves? Does it make people purge? Does it snake through the body, cleaning the intestines and the blood and lymph and colon with its bitter magic? In my own experience of smoking harmala alkaloids there is nothing, repeat nothing like the effect of drinking the stuff."
Why do you feel that people are dividing it into being one thing and not another? Why are you divideing it into one thing and not the other? Does changa put people through the strong physicaility that ayahuasca involves... yes it can... and does. But its up to you if thats what your seeking it will give you that... doesnt "damie" mean give me? Does it snake through you cleansing you healing you? yes it can and has, there are reports of this occuring... but it happens in a very different way... once again homeopathy comes to mind, spirit medicine... Aya taught me years ago that the purge is just symbolic not nessecary and that you can accomplish the same feat energeticly working with your Chi... this seems to be what is occuring with changa.
Does it make you purge.. yes it can and does, if that is what you need it to give you, if thats what you are asking for.
But again they are different... and we are not talking about ayahuasca we are talking about changa. They are different but related IMHO, as the vine and or its leaf is often in the blends or other harmala containing plants are. A unique factor that many "changaleros" report is that it moves them dirrectly to a place of knowing themslves as just clear light, it disolves their ego and gives them an emense sense of humility, it takes them dirrectly to that peak experience while quickly allowing for the healing and transformation needed along the way. people who have never known themsleves as such now know of themselves as such. People who have never heard that voice we hear from "mama ayahuasca" hear that voice... they hear it even if its made with rue or passionflower but they hear that voice... and it changes them. It changes how they relate to the world.
That is a beautiful thing... and many of these people do not go through the agony of the healing process some times involved with drinking vine... this is a differance. A really big one to some. Some see that you need to suffer through all the purging and shitting... some see that there are other ways to accomplish the same end results. i think that is a matter of personal prefference.
"That is why, on a relative level I agree with a distinction, I agree with 'diversity'. I have felt, like many, a vision of the brew as the blood/milk/nectar of the Amazon, La Medicina, the tea, the panacea for thousands of people over hundreds of generations."
Well dan... all I know is that there is vine in the smoke... vine or a plant with many similar qualities... and it heals man... it heals and transforms people and gives people what they need too. same vine in that nectar, that blood milk.
http://changaya.blogspot.com
New do on Ayahuasca premiers in LA June 17
premier in Los Angeles on June 17. Please let me know if you would
like a press pass.
TO view a clip from the film, please visit:
http://www.mwp.com/the-shaman-ayahuasca-la-film-showings-june.html
SCREENING INFO
When: June 17, 7pm and 9:15pm.
Where: The Landmark Theater – Westside Pavilion
10850 West Pico at Westwood Blvd.
Includes a talk with filmmaker Michael Wiese.
I would love a pass but its
I would love a pass but its rather short notice for me. Thank you for the offer however. Should be a interesting show.
http://changaya.blogspot.com
Changa is wrong.
I am not ruining any thing,
I am not ruining any thing, I did not discover Changa nor did I name it, I was not the first to begining extracting (which is different then synthesizing), people have been extracting and making changa for around 10 years not which is relatively new.
As far as good coming from it, I would say that from the reports that I am reading from people who have worked with it a lot of good is coming from it, people are learning and growing and healing, that sounds pretty good to me. there is one report sent into my web page of a man who smoked changa when suicidal and it gave him the healing he needed to keep on living. A good thing I would say... But you are welcome to criticise that in what ever way you wish too I suppose.
I would also say that it is not a new way of "using" DMT, but it is a new way of "working with" DMT and Harmalas together synergisticly much as it is done with ayahuasca tea. As far as branding it... well I didnt do anything but report what has been happening.
I am not revolutionary, I am reporting somthing that I feel is revolutionary though I would generally not use that word, drop the R maybe... Also I am not labeling or repackaging anything, I am reporting that, there are people who have a name for this smoking mixture or harmalas and tryptamines.
Seeming like I am evil, to me is a hilarious notion and you are welcome to see me in that light if you wish. Though I cant say I relate to your perception...some people think snakes are evil too so go figure...
http://changaya.blogspot.com
The CHANGA WEB SITE ADDRESS
sohbet