Micromegas

It is quite a massive discussion! That's cool. Also interesting. My personal feeling is that ayahuasca use in the amazon is very ancient, but i'm sure there is great complexity about it's spread and use since Columbus. There is absolutely no reason why anyone is precluded to coming to a full comprehension of ayahuasca or any other plant medicine, although it does help to be or to have been in that plant's native environment. Probably "full comprehension" is over-reaching in every context and a bit meaningless. "Profound understanding" is a better term. Either way, the limiting factor in Australia i believe is intent and exposure. Best of luck with it, I enjoyed the latest article it's a fascinating topic.

Hi drugo, while it is true that many practitioners have altered their ceremonies to suit gringos, this is not always the case and while a huge diversity of forms exist, there are many that retain old traditions. For example, the concept of sorcery and illness that pervades the amazon region has no counterpart in australian modern culture so is absent from medicine work here, while still being retained amongst local groups in the amazon basin, who regularly conduct ceremonies away from tourists who do not reflect their cultural paradigms. That these beliefs are absent from australian ayahuasca circles is probably a very good thing for a number of reasons. Equally, icaros (and the plant dietas to obtain icaros), the use of complex admixture plants (tree doctors, toe, camalonga etc.), tobacco, virotes, the arcana, shakapas, ceremonies undertaken in complete darkness, chupa (sucking out illness and projectiles) and magical flem, are all elements of "normal" ayahuasca shamanism in the amazon that have not made their way in any real sense to australia (to my limited knowledge). I used the quotations because within indigenous areas variances do exist, i.e. between mestizo and shipibo groups, or peru vs ecuador etc. Bastardised forms of the above may exist, like hippies singing songs on guitar or music played through speakers etc. but these are a huge diversion from traditional forms of icaros, from the instrumentation to the more regular melody. I've never heard an amazon ayahuasquero say namaste, pull out a wad of white sage, or integrate eastern philosophical concepts into their work or start playing on a tibetan singing bowl! In a sense being outside of the amazon - where many of the traditional elements are retained in available plants and local culture and history - sets limits on how "authentic" work in australia can be. Let me be very clear - I do not doubt there are proficient practitioners in australia that produce quality results with the medicine, and nor am I against this occurring, but I wouldn't write off themes of tradition in the amazon too quickly, and I think it is important to drill into them to understand why australian work is different and why it may not be bringing ayahuasca to the table in all its bold and terrifying glory. While icaros are specifically designed to plumb the depths of the human psyche and untangle complex psychological and physical issues (as well as the results of sorcery), singing songs about birds and flowers with some candles and incense burning is always going to produce a "softer" experience, which is not necessarily a bad thing, but may undermine a true grasp of what ayahuasca is about. The point is, I would imagine that understanding the potential strengths and weakness of australian ayahuasca work would benefit from an investigation of traditional modalities (even on paper). I like what you are doing, and I look forward to reading more, I am just presenting my opinion because I feel archaic shamanism often gets lost in the hype surrounding ayahuasca and other sacramental plants to the detriment of a full comprehension (which I don't have myself I might add). If you feel this is inappropriate in a thread about your blog, I will remove this post at your request. Cheshire, white is the preferred colour of clothing so the ayahuasquero can see "inside" your body during the ceremony to diagnose illness (another reason to hold ceremonies in total darkness). Dark colours, especially red or black, prevent this ability. In australia, yes I do think it has more to do with notions of purity ,which reinforces my points above.

I'm with interbeing, it does look a lot like "Len". Len is a real beauty.

Fresh and well written. Pretty intriguing selection for a PhD thesis I bet it raised your supervisor's eyebrows. A topic worthy of contemplation and investigating, especially as a subset of the globalisation of ayahusaca and plant shamanism more generally. Just curious, have you been or will you go to the Amazon as research, so you can see in what way the Australian version deviates from the ritualistic "norm" or some of the varieties thereof?

Haha oh ok, maybe it is also a bit taller than i originally thought.

Hey prier my T. poco (labelled as such by SAB) does not look anything like that I thought T.poco was more like pasacana and would never flower at such a young age?? Nice flowers mind you!

Also fenris, that ceramic is Moche. Also I never say no to seeing photos of Chavin!

Hi mutant, it's a good theory but in many ways it does not really hold up. True, the conquistadors did destroy huge amounts of artwork and associated ideology of the cultures they plundered. Sometimes to extirpate this religion (especially the friars that came with the conquistadors to set up missions), in other cases just in the hunt for gold or valuable items (the soldiers/generals etc.). This was usually with respect to living cultures, not those of the archaic past. In Peru this relates most explicitly to the Incas, in Mexico, quite spectacularly to the Aztecs. There are cases where archaic sites were plundered. The temple of the sun, at the Moche site in the Moche valley for example, had an entire river diverted through it in the hunt for gold. But even at that site the complementary temple, the temple of the moon, was left untouched. The Moche complex El Brujo, by comparison, was only excavated in the 1980s in any serious way at the Huaca Cao. It's complementary site, the Huaca Cortada is, again, entirely unexcavated. Similarly, in Mexico, the museum at Palenque as well as the friezes that still remain on site, contains hundreds of very large friezes and murals that were unharmed by colonization to a large degree, in which only tobacco use is explicitly represented.The site at Chavin was buried under earth until the 1920s, and after being unearthed by Tello was then half buried again in a landslide in the 1940s. Only 50 odd years ago did "El Huachumero" enter modern (western) consciousness... So rather than all the relevant art being destroyed, it may be that it has yet to be discovered and may reflect a bias by archaeologists to focus on their own themes - power and hierarchy - because of the status quo of the educational milieu in which they were raised. But my feeling is that hallucinogenic plant representations may simply be less common than other subjects. Because these sites were ancient and much of the ideology lost to time even to the inhabitants in those countries when the conquistadors arrived, the brunt of the idolatry was focused on the living cultures - aztecs and incas as stated above. My knowledge of mexican cultures is poor compared to those in Peru, so I will leave that country alone... In Peru, the actions of the conquistadors alone is nowhere near enough to explain why hallucinogenic plants do not appear more commonly on monolithic or portable art when artworks of all sorts of other subjects - including those high religious significance - are extant. Indeed, looters in Peru through the 20th century have caused far more damage to archaic sites than did the conquistadors, who undeniably crushed the cultures they found alive in the places they visited; in a stunning paradox, the capital cities of the Incas and Aztecs are less well preserved than those that came hundreds of years before, although the oral traditions of the more modern cultures have obviously been retained in some vestige, whereas there is no oral tradition of, say, the people who founded the ancient city of Caral on the Peruvian coast. But "grave robbers" have done untold damage to pre-columbian sites. Now, nor can it be that as cultures supplanted other cultures - i.e. Moche - Sican - Chimu - Inca - they selectively destroyed all artifacts representing hallucinogenic plants only. Certainly, many structures were razed, usually by the same cultures that built them, and you could make an outside case that those cultures themselves destroyed their own plant representations but even in that case, they did not dig up archaic sites, tombs etc. etc. That is, hundreds of thousands of pieces remained intact... The Moche site of Sipan is a classic example, where in the 1990s archaeologists uncovered a series of elaborate burials that fully supported scenes appearing in moche art that until that time most people considered to be only metaphors. These related to sacrifice and blood letting and hierarchical structures, and actually some intriguing plant references appear in such scenes. But still, relatively few hallucinogenic plant representations exist in most archaic cultures that nevertheless are likely to have used those plants as an important component of their societies. Instead, shamanic states are inferred - jaguars, flying shamans, transformational beings, curing sessions, deities, bulging eyes, mucous dripping from the nose, mortars, cups, snuff containers and trays etc. But not, really, much in the way of plants themselves in an explicit sense compared to other subjects such as food plants, animals, boats and rafts (fishing cultures), deities, ceremonial objects, portraits, geometrical designs, many of which are carved on the items used in plant ingestion (i.e. jaguars on mortars) etc. etc.... And so on and so on. The (modern) artwork of the Huichol in northern Mexico, and Cupisnique/Chavin buck the trend, and possibly the Nazca and Tiwanku to a much lesser degree, although opinion is very divided on the last two. The case of Moche and the deer hunting scene featuring what appears to be anadenanthera is a curious one, especially since snuffing paraphernalia does not appear in moche art... which is another subject in itself. Like I said I have a theory on the matter in its nascent stage but this is a massive subject to get into I can't really do it here and quite frankly I do not have a good enough grasp on the subject matter. So there a few options, (1) the art may have been selectively destroyed, (2) the art is yet to be discovered (3) I may be completely wrong and hallucinogenic plant representations are common enough not to pose any mystery (4) archaeologists have a bias against exposing archaic plant use or (5) there is some particular reason why representation of hallucinogenic plant use is inferred rather than explicitly botanically identified in art in the cultures that almost certainly used these plants extensively and knew a great deal about their curative and ideological potential. While I think the answer is a mixture of all I lean toward 3 or 5!! As always, I haven't covered all or even most of the relevant material and hold the right in reserve to reassess facts as I discover new information and also to entirely change my opinion if required!

Hey Alchemica, I stumbled across this article while researching loosely related topic. The abstract looks intriguing: Full article: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/aa.1967.69.1.02a00030/pdf Let me know if you have any trouble getting the full article. Disclaimer, I have not had time to read other than the above abstract but it sure looks relevant.

This two are cool that I had never seen before, also cupisnique You could interpret them differently of course, maybe as flutes, rattles, staffs etc. but seems to fit the bill as a cactus. Quixote turns out yours is Nazca. San pedro turns up more in Nazca art, possibly, in fact, in one of the huge "Nazca lines" but it's up for debate.

Hanggai are cool I've seen them at WOMAD a few times, including this year actually.

The culture that produced the pottery depicting diverse sexual scenes was not Chavin but rather the Mochica. San Pedro does not appear in mochica pottery except, possibly, as representations of snails that live on the tops of some species of trichocerues, but this is conjecture by some archaeologists. Also, no textiles exist from chavin culture explicitly because chavin is a highland society and textiles preserve very poorly in that damp environment. Textiles that show chavin motifs are from Ica culture, or possibly from cultures in the Jequetepeque Valley (or were traded from chavin, but more likely produced at the coast since stone was not as easy to come by in that environment so they replicated chavin monolithic stonework in textile as cotton was prolific and grown in irrigated fields in the coastal desert with streams coming out of the andes), which was obviously influenced by chavin but 500+ kms away, which is significant in itself as it demonstrates the incredible and long lasting reach of chavin ideology. Quixote, your photo is almost certainly not of chavin origin it looks more like Huari or perhaps a coastal society but it is much more modern than chavin whatever the case and is unlikely to represent san pedro but it's a pretty acute observation you might be on to something. Chavin pottery is almost exclusively of a type called "blackware" which means it is is shiny and black like M S Smith's photo and did not contain much in the way of colour. Mochica pottery is incredible and far better preserved than chavin because it is a more recent culture and the moche were also much more prodigious in their creation of pottery, indeed of all kinds of subjects but not, notably, san pedro although they did use Huachuma as a sacrament. I have a theory on that but man I wrote so much in the other thread! Mochica did not produce monolithic stone artwork but produce some incredible works in adobe since they lived on the coastal plain where sand and clay were more prominent than stone. Mochica pottery is occasionally but not often of a blackware style. A lot of ceramics credited to Chavin is actually cupisnique culture which came just before chavin but was, again, coastal but was equally oriented around the Jaguar "cult" and may have heavily influenced the formation of the chavin ceremonial site but that is another huge topic. Cupisnique was also of a blackware style. Depictions of san pedro are very rare in ANY culture although it's use was widespread throughout the Andes. That is a pretty curious fact. Chavin monolithic stonework provides the two best classical examples but there are a few others, but not many. I know of no other chavin pottery showing san pedro and i would be very interested to know if the one you have posted M S Smith is not indeed Cupisnique in origin. Some of the chavin tenon heads have stalks of san pedro on the forehead. These also, of course, quite clearly show the effects of insufflating (?) anadenathera or possibly virola sp. I wouldn't read too much into the number of ribs but you are right it does seem clearly depicted as having four ribs. However, on the stone sculpture of "Huachumero" it is fair to say the cactus is held in profile, and may be intended to have seven or even eight ribs. This is one of my favourite topics, I have much to learn again I'm about 1/10th of where i'd like to be in understanding this so much of the above may be in error, hahaha. So I will stop now. Richard Burger's book on Chavin is where you should look for a start if you are interested. Looks like a good link hookahead i'll read it sometime. Edit: on a quick breeze through of your (excellent) article hookahead the above ^^ is more or less confirmed by Torres re: pottery and textiles. Most pottery depicting san pedro is indeed cupisnique, curious because this was a coastal society where trichocereus does not grow. The closer you get to the source, perhaps, the less you need to represent? Most pottery uncovered at the site of Chavin has been brought as offering from elsewhere, not produced on site. His analysis of the Tello obelisk is a hotly debated topic among chavin aficionados I personally agree with his view re: Burgmansia but other interpretations see the floral representations on the obelisk to be chilli fruits and the roots of achira (Canna edulis). Again, a massive topic if only I didn't also have to work at something completely unrelated for a living!

I'm just going to add a few final points from my end in what has turned out to be a very interesting and thorough discussion. (1) when we talk about aboriginal shamanism in this country, it is important to remember that when Europeans first settled Australia, there were at least 600 language groups on this continent. Today only around 30 languages are spoken. That's obviously a lot of knowledge that has been lost, including plant usage, so who can really say what was going on in deep antiquity. Also, that is also a great deal of divergent cultural perceptions of reality. While common themes run between many we should not necessarily lump them all together. Australia is an extremely heterogeneous environment and, believing as I do that the formation of culture is at its foundation a landscape based process, equally heterogeneous world-views emerged (although similarities, paradoxically, abound). Desert tribes, for example, often saw the Southern Cross as representing an eagle's claw, while coastal societies often viewed it as a sting-ray. Equally, the distribution of powerful psychotropic plants that *may* have allowed deep shamanic plant-based exploration is not necessarily even across the entire continent, just like psychotropic plants are heavily weighted toward the western hemisphere of our planet (the Americas). So, the potential was not necessarily the same for all groups, and yet I would say, all groups could get as equally intimately immersed in their cultural perceptions and knowledge and connection to country, with or without the aid of potent psychotropic plants. So psychotropic plants are not of themselves a necessary factor for deep connection to landscape. (2) the knowledge/certainty about whether some aboriginal cultures used psychotropic plants (in a similar vein to Ayahuasca in the Amazon rainforest, i.e. fundamental to the entire cultural paradigm and experience) will be strengthened when concoctions emerge that can be processed in a way less "sophisticated" than modern extraction of DMT from acacia sp. One that intrigues me greatly for northern Australia is Galbulimima bark which was spectacularly bio-assayed by Thelema, a member on these forums, some time back and somewhat fits the bill as per Folias' anecdotal comments above. Further to that, there may be pharmacological marriages in the Australian flora that could quite easily have been lost and not yet rediscovered involving the combination of an MOAI and an acacia species or similar that does not involve extraction with solvents and smoking as the uptake method, since smoking is not to my knowledge reported in aboriginal cultures (but please correct me if I am wrong) prior to colonization. Indeed, these concoctions may already be in use by modern psychonauts, or modern aboriginal groups using knowledge from an ancient lineage, and I have simply just not kept up with the discoveries and trends or am not within these particular circles. (3) Re: the Dreamtime, I would say that is a modernization (the phrase, that is) but the concept is definitely within most indigenous groups in Australia, which is an amazingly intriguing fact in itself, since creation stories in, say, North America are extremely diverse even in a region as compact as southern Arizona. However, extreme differences in altitudes/presence of high mountains etc. may explain this to a large degree, with North America being an even more heterogeneous landscape than Australia (due mostly to the altitude gradient of 4000-15,000feet) over a short space (i.e. the four corners region). A further difference is that North American cultures do not have a consistent cultural history anywhere near as deep as those in Australia with several cultures cycling through within even a few thousand years, i.e. Clovis, Cochise, Anasazi, Navajo, all within the same landscape, where creation stories have been constantly renewed and (metaphorically) rewritten. Again this may be due to significant changes in the landscape such as the extinction of the megafauna in relatively recent times compared to the same event in Australia, and the development of farming which of course never took off in Oz. Nevertheless, even within Australia where the concept of the “Dreamtime” may have some consistency, each group may still have a place particular to them where the first creator emerged onto the earth or lives at the current time, such as a mountaintop or river unique to that group’s “country”, so variances exist, again, based on significant landscape features in a given area which are not shared with other groups, i.e. Uluru, Mount Bruce, Cape York, Mt. Kosciusko. Finally, the "Dreamtime" as I understand it can be split into two distinct phases - a "creation phase" and a "consolidation phase" (my terms). In the "creation phase", the time when "the world was soft" (as they say in the Pilbara) ancestral spirits existed in a malleable world in which their actions created landscape features that were not previously present. These beings had foibles just like modern man (as narrated through the stories) but they also had special attributes and as such the interplays of their desires, loves, hates, animosities, greed etc. were powerful enough to creature significant landmarks like hills, gullies, rivers, waterholes, springs etc. Usually at some point in the stories, these supernatural beings gave birth in some way to the first humans, this act being facilitated by their creation through their activities of "living waters", those being the above mentioned springs and rivers etc. fundamental to human survival. And then began the "consolidation phase". What was previously a wholly externalized process - ancestral beings doing battle in a malleable landscape without a human witness - became internalized within the mind/understanding of the first humans, who referred back through the landscape itself to penetrate externalized actions in a distant time. From that point landscape features became "fixed" and the "Dreamtime" relationship was now expounded in the internal connection of man with his world. As such, the same “foibles” of the ancestors related in the “dreamtime stories” became allegories internalised within cultures to demonstrate the “correct way” of relating to one's relatives, associates and other tribal groups. The externalised/internalised revolution within the dreamtime philosophy is of fundamental importance in understanding aboriginal cosmology (in my opinion) because it sets the regulations by which man lives in harmony with his actual and perceptual world. They key point being that at some point “the world was soft” and then it became (largely) “fixed” and required upkeep and maintenance by the human custodians through the working of innumerable sites within the landscape known as “increase sites” or “thalus”, sites for corroborees, and avoidance or interaction with various sacred sites that feature in the original creation myths, as well, of course, as actual or purported use of potent psychotropic plants. But the myths are more than myths; they are personally and culturally internalised structures that set boundaries for behaviour and perceptual understanding of reality that relate to a solid world of largely fixed landscape features – and each group had their own set of landscape features in which the original ancestral activities are writ large… and of course these divergent landscapes were then linked through trade (moveable items and also gene flow), story and song, which may explain the widespread concept of the "Dreamtime" across Australia. Now I could go on, but truth be told I only understand this subject about 1/10th as well as I would like. I appreciate the chance, in fact, to explore the subject here outside of my own head. As always, I understand there are innumerable additional comments and tangents here, as well as the very high possibility I have completely misinterpreted everything as I am not part of any indigenous group or have any aboriginal heritage. This will be my last comment in this particular thread because the subject is too large to cover on a forum, but I have greatly enjoyed the conversation and everyone’s unique input, it certainly got me thinking. Edit: "aboriginal shamanism" and the potential and possible use by Australian aborigines of psychotropic plants is relevant in all the above because it is one of the mediums by which the link between the "creative" and "consolidated" phase of the "Dreamtime" is fully elucidated by the peoples/cultures seeking to fully understand their place in their landscape and by extension, the reality and meaning of their existence. Shamanism and ritual is one of, if not the key, bridge(s) between man's current existence and the creation of actual (landscape) and perceptual (cultural) worlds in deep time. It is hard to understand perhaps for those of us brought up with the scientific method, but as I stated in my earlier post, our perception is merely an interpretation we make about how life came to be and the content of our current reality, of which no "correct" version exists. If there is indeed a plant medium in the Australian environment that can pierce this mystery and allow us to hook our perception to the perception of indigenous groups in the past we will go a long way in healing the rift between modern (caucasian) man and the Australian landscape, since piercing the mystery of indigenous ritual is so difficult to the uninitiated "white fella". Incidentally, sacramental plants from other countries do have the ability to give significant insight by virtue of their supreme and farsighted intelligence and long relationship with shamanic cultures elsewhere. OK I'm done!

That's totally normal on an old PC, it's a dead giveaway that the plant is in fact PC. The second one that you say is PC actually looks less PC than the first but it might still be PC as well and is plump and round like that coz it's well hydrated and only has five ribs and has been grown in the shade making it stay thin so it looks a bit not-PC but is still probably PC. And yes you can be plump and round and thin at the same time. How's that for politically correct?

^ lophocereus schottii monstrose some organ pipe cactus would be great in the garden. nice find. must be a great cacti climate there. wonder if there are mature specimens in Oz

Hmm, I'm really on the fence re: replying but the thread got me thinking and, by coincidence, I was researching today about indigenous groups in the Pilbara, so here we go! In many of those groups petroglyphs are considered to have been created by the creation spirits at the time "when the world was soft" and not modern (indigenous) man. That is a curious twist. I personally do not believe that indigenous Australians made great use of, for example, DMT occurring in acacias even if these plants are widely known and distributed or featured in mythology. By comparison there is scant, if any, evidence that native americans of southern arizona or northern mexico ever used the excretions of the sonoran desert toad in rituals, even if this animal was associated with fertility and the arrival of the monsoon, and also contains an extremely potent hallucinogen considerably easier to extract than DMT from acacia sp.. Those items may show up as archaeological and anthropological research progresses in the future, so I hold my opinion (as always) with reservation. But both cultures use other plants (such as tobacco) widely to illicit a variety of (milder) psychotropic effects. Basically, because the compound is there in the environment does not necessarily mean it has been exploited or even necessary to attain deep spiritual insight. The article re: dot painting was to suggest that what appears like a DMT trip is a product of exposure to western society and the infiltration of acrylic paint, although it was born out of sand "painting" or ephemeral art. It is very hard to understand other cultural paradigms from the outside, true. You have to climb inside and that is particularly hard for cultures whose mystic techniques have been obfuscated by time and interference. I thought the "first footprints" series that aired on ABC lately did a very good job and in particular the episode that featured kanulda (canulda) cave on the Nullabour Plain and the corresponding description of the ceremonies that may have been performed there, and the discussion around the gabarnmung rock shelter is also worth a look. The problem that I encounter in looking at varied cultural paradigms is realizing that how we view reality is an interpretation, even our own "scientific understanding" is a cultural interpretation (flame away if you must!), and that does not leave very much firm ground. The folks around here (the Pilbara) seem to have some deep fundamental connection that's in their blood/lineage that is very difficult to replicate for me personally, despite living and being involved with their landscape quite intimately. When I feel I am almost on the inside, I'm looking from the outside again, and everything is comparative and deconstructed. Connection with the landscape at the level of the closed cultural system is something we have lost to our detriment; because of multifaceted infiltration of outside influences into these pure collective cultural perceptions, now everything is murky and diluted - and it will be the ruin of us because it diffuses the notion of responsibility and interpolation of relationships between man/woman, culture and land. That is not to say all (or even most) indigenous cultures were full of saints, however. I understand what you are saying and i agree. However, It is in my nature to believe everyone (generally) is equally well equipped. It is our culture that is not equipped and the reason for that is complex. If you could remove cultural paradigms from a person, you could put an entirely new paradigm in its place and they would see clearly enough. (and imagine if you could remove all interpretations and apprehend directly!) The hardware is all there, what we have is a software problem. The plants are the software engineers par excellence, aside from the monster that is culture itself. As per: and We are terra nullius at the beginning but culture infiltrates everything so quickly it's hard to know it's even happened. In disparate cultures (prior to globalisation) it was landscape, flora and fauna that imprinted perceptual realities. Now that we live in a globalised world where everything has been mixed together we have opportunity and disaster simultaneously. How, indeed, do we formulate a cogent worldview under those circumstances? Indigenous peoples had a pure (and sheltered) view and understanding of their immediate homeland that went very deep, that is hard to emulate for those of us plugged to TV and internet etc. They did not necessarily need plants to unfold immense internal collective cosmologies. Nevertheless one thing the plants do allow, under certain circumstances, is for you to really climb into another culture and see it “from the inside” so to speak, so for me, the Amazonian culture (and even more so, perhaps, sacred plant using cultures of the deep past) is “easier” to penetrate than the indigenous Australian culture because there is no single visionary plant that mediates that culture directly and provides accumulated "cultural feedback" such as you might get in other plant-centered shamanic cultures. In effect I can't jump in a take a ride to reveal items quickly, so i can only piece it together slowly. It's curious. This is a really complicated discussion and I almost don’t want to be drawn into it here, but I can’t really resist either because it is of fundamental interest and importance. It’s very complex and there are many conflicting and multifaceted points that could be raised and that would require serious consideration. Whatever the case, it is an absolute blessing that indigenous artwork (of all cultures) are still extant to teach us that other perceptual options exist.

looks like the pachanoi that turns up in nz from time to time (common cultivar there?). it sure is a nice one.

Edited. I thought this was a more serious discussion about why Eileen is so slow to flower, because it is true she does not flower as prolifically as other brigessiis which is curious. I'm not that interested in having my contribution/photo mixed in with a whole lot of youtube clips in which I have very little interest. Not trying to be cranky the thread degenerated is all.

Interesting question. And a very serious one too. My inherent belief is that the applied use of sacramental plants can heal anything. But that may not necessarily be the outcome with every (or even most) cases. I have been in ayahuasca ceremonies with two people who were quite clearly "possessed" or suffering some kind of psychological disorder that one might classify as “schizophrenic”. One claimed he had been placed under a curse by a cult in North America when he tried to leave that group. He described his situation as a constant harangue by "voices" constantly talking in a self-deprecating way and "telling" him to do harm to himself and occasionally others. He was very obviously affected despite being, outwardly, a lovely person. In his case, ayahuasca did not assist and quite possibly exacerbated his situation (to a minor extent). During the ceremonies I had with this fellow was the only time I saw my maestro use his "anti-sorcery" icaro (which was stunning in its own right), so there was obviously something significant going on. When we used Huachuma, this was probably even more exacerbating to the situation than ayahuasca (longer duration, more cogent) during the ceremony and overall there was no change in his predicament. In the end, he turned to a love of Jesus Christ to offset the negativity of the voices. I am not sure if he ever returned to use of sacramental plants or the overall outcome of his path. I do not believe the use of ayahuasca or huachuma made his situation worse at all. In this case, there may have been too much emphasis placed on an "external curse" to allow the person to accept his own responsibility and face his own demons. It is very hard to say. Notably, however, the hearing of voices coincided with his involvement with the cult group; he did not hear voices before that point. However, he did not seem inclined to really “climb inside” the source of the voices and extirpate them. That is my opinion. The second case involved a man with an almost split personality who claimed he had made contact with a powerful spirit guide/shaman from another planet. He was perfectly reasonable to talk to (but had some incredible stories) and did not suffer from “voices”. The ayahuasca session in which that spirit guide surfaced is one I will never forget in which a colossal battle ensued that is very difficult to report here. It seemed as if the man was attempting to reconcile with that spirit, and a sort of bargaining process occurred with much gesturing which seemed to further align with crazy rain and lightning in the external environment. In the end, that person chose to consolidate his relationship with that entity and they continued to "work together" with the medicine, particularly Huachuma. That was an intriguing case because that person developed some extremely potent intuitive capacity which he did not formally possess and reported many very strange synchronistic happenings involving natural phenomenon, especially with planets/stars/comets and other phenomena in the sky such as lightning. He did not experience voices as in the first case, but more along the lines of channelling, usually upon request. Last I knew he was living in the US married to a Peruvian lady and had several children and still worked intensively with the medicines. So in those cases, there was no change in “schizophrenic” situation but these were, to me, quite clearly two separate psychological/spiritual processes not clinical schizophrenia. In my own case, following my initial self-administered experience with ayahuasca (in Korea) which was incredibly powerful, I developed an extreme fear of dying and experienced repeated "sleep paralysis" for a period of 7 months. I could not sleep without the TV on, and would wake up one or two times a week in the middle of the night with an intense ringing in my ears, unable to move and believing I was dying. In daytime hours, I was fairly psychologically stable. My case was purely a psychological, “spiritual emergency” case and I understood that the only way to resolve the issue was to drink ayahuasca in its proper setting with appropriate guidance. That turned out to be true, although I had more or less resolved the sleep paralysis issues a few months before travelling to Peru, I still had a general psychological “fear of the unknown” and deep seated fear of death, now all resolved. But in answer to your question yes, I have “attempted to work through a fragile situation of self and found positive returns?” Twice, in fact, as later, several years after travelling to Peru the first time I overcame an incredibly deep state of darkness which had lasted several months with the use of Huachuma. I cannot discuss the details of that here but suffice to say a personal event had shifted my normally buoyant emotional position to one of extreme darkness. Huachuma reset my perspective in that case. Because of your character and the way you have described your situation – and despite the two cases above – I would not advise against the use of sacramental plants but I would recommend you come to them with a very clear intent and in the correct setting in an environment with a great deal of support, and in a country where such things are legal and where the "cultural context" for the experiences is more thorough and consistent. I also would highly recommend a series of sittings with the same medicine (this is especially true of ayahuasca) in the same environment of support, where you have others around you with whom you can discuss your experiences between sessions. One alone is liable to upset the situation further without the opportunity for resolution. I would not self-administer at this point, and I certainly would not attempt what you describe by yourself (i.e. alone) unless you had a very pressing "calling" and confidence in doing so. I would also steer clear of trying to deal with this in “recreational” plant circles/pseudo ceremonies etc. I reiterate – the sacramental plants (and in this case I refer to the two which whom I am most familiar, ayahuasca and huachuma) can resolve pretty much any issue to a satisfactory level. But that will not necessarily be the case. Why? Because it is not simply the plants doing the work, we are involved as well; our personalities, environments; our karma. There are a myriad number of positive steps I have been shown that my own stubbornness has refused to implement, see what I mean? Timing is everything. The plants can and definitely will alter your physiology/chemistry. Ayahuasca in particular is a brain tonic and can fix minor to moderate imbalances very quickly. One series is usually enough. For serious chemical issues, I’m not sure. I have never experienced anything remotely similar to schizophrenia under the influences of Huachuma (mescaline, lol) in a ceremonial setting and I would entirely discredit the comparison. I don’t think this is like fixing like. The plants facilitate healing through their, ummm, multidimensional and farsighted wisdom and chemical/physiological/spiritual clearing processes. They are intelligent entities that teach, heal and guide, they don’t cause schizophrenia if approached correctly and I would not imagine they would make your situation worse. They may not “fix it” either, but you’ll know more about yourself afterward almost for sure. Until such a time as you have the time, money and confidence to go to a country where these plants are legal and you can work in an evironment that offers safety, wisdom and support, however, I would keep going as you are > reveal and revel in your weak spots. Maybe write them down. Try to understand them more fully, how they connect to your past, relationships, dreams and aspirations etc. and seek support of those who listen attentively and without judgement… none of this is to say you can't use mind altering substances in your current state for many other purposes (how could I possibly determine that) but if you want to go very deep in a clear and orderly fashion and come out the other side more complete, that is what the old rituals allow. Long story short – A series sessions in a safe, secure and supportive (legal) environment – possibly Downing half a dozen tabs of LSD in your bedroom – possibly not! Haha so true. Some things just aren’t as big a deal as we think! Schizophrenia though, probably is. I wish you all the best Alchemica always happy to talk when I’m in SA. I understand this topic is huge and differing opinions will exist. I'm old school, I know. Most opinions presented will have great validity I just can't cover all the angles on an internet forum!

azureocereus hertlingianus

Yeah first one is an opuntia. i have one similar that's varigated can't remember the species.The growth are new pads forming. second looks like a really spiny stenocereus/marginocereus marginatus

Are dot paintings traditional Aboriginal art? It is unknown to many that Aboriginal painters introduced the dot painting technique in the early 1970s, stimulated by a white school teacher. Dot paintings from Papunya have become one of the most important phenomena in Australian art. Detail of an Aboriginal dot painting. Note how the dots form shapes and areas which encode information for initiated viewers. Aboriginal dot paintings are everywhere. Walk into any Aboriginal art gallery and you’ll find them. The dot painting style is used for paintings, vases, on t-shirts, stones, fridge magnets—anything people would buy. But is dot pointing traditional Aboriginal art? You’ll be surprised to learn that dot painting on canvas emerged in central Australia in the early 1970s as a result of Aboriginal people working together with a white art school teacher, Geoffrey Bardon [1]. The Papunya Tula art movementMap: The central Aboriginal community of Papunya is located about 240 kms north-west of Alice Springs in the Northern Territory. Bardon was assigned as an art teacher for children to the Papunya community in 1971. Papunya then was an artificial community of 2,500 Aboriginal people who had been assimilated from the desert. Bardon encouraged his students to paint a mural based on traditional dreamings on the school walls [5,6]. The murals sparked tremendous interest in the community and soon many men started painting [3]. At first they used cardboard or pieces of wood, which was later replaced by canvas. Geoffrey Bardon stands in front of the mural on a school wall in Papunya, August 1971. Photo: Robert Bardon [7] In 1972 the artists established their own company, Papunya Tula Artists Pty Ltd. Their works sparked the genesis of the Western Desert art movement, now internationally recognised as “one of the most important events in Australian art history” [3]. The company is entirely owned and directed by traditional Aboriginal people, mainly from the Luritja/Pintubi language groups. In 2011 it had 49 shareholders and represented 120 artists [3]. Artists Long Jack Phillipus Tjakamarra and Ronnie Tjampitjinpa were among the founding members. Today the community is famously known as the Papunya Tula School of Painters and is home to around 150 Aboriginal artists [1]. Papunya Tula now raises money to fund a new dialysis service, for example. But it also is a social hub which contributes to the well-being of its often very senior artists. “[Painting] is not just a profession, it’s a social activity,” says Paul Sweeney, Papunya Tula Arts General Manager [8]. “The ladies get together and chat and talk about men probably and gossip I guess, and that’s what art centres are all about. It’s a hub, it’s a communal hub where people get together and do what they do and the kids and the rellies [relatives] come through and that’s a good thing because they’re all sharing in the atmosphere of the art centre and watching and learning and taking it all in.” How the dot painting style emergedBardon helped the Aboriginal artists transfer depictions of their stories from desert sand to paint on canvas. They soon realised that the sacred-secret objects they painted were being seen not only by European, but also related Aboriginal people which could be offended by them [5]. The artists decided to eliminate the sacred elements and abstracted the designs into dots [4,5] to conceal their sacred designs which they used in ceremony. During ceremonies Aboriginal people would clear and smoothe over the soil to then apply sacred designs which belonged to that particular ceremony. These designs were outlined with dancing circles and often surrounded with dots [2]. In the early years of Papunya paintings still showed clear depictions of artefacts, sand paintings and decorated ritual objects. But this style disappeared within a few years. Uninitiated people never got to see these sacred designs since the soil would be smoothed over again and painted bodies would be washed. This was not possible with paintings. Consequently Aboriginal artists abstracted the sacred designs to disguise the meanings associated with them. Some paintings are layered, and while they probably appear meaningless to non-Aborigines, the dot paintings might reveal much more to an Aboriginal person depending on their level of initiation. The first paintings to come from the Papunya Tula School of Painters weren’t made to be sold. Papunya Tula Artists manager, Paul Sweeney, explains that they “were produced by people who were displaced, and living a long way from their country. The works were visual representations of their own being. They painted sites that they belonged to and the stories that are associated with those sites. Essentially they were painting their identity onto their boards, as a visual assertion of who they were and where they were from.” [3] Read more: http://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/arts/are-dot-paintings-traditional-aboriginal-art#ixzz2wI3j7Uai

It's a fair question why i would post so many lyrics but honestly the list would be enormous if i posted all the lyrics that I enjoyed, because i am extremely eclectic...but what i realised in the process is that song lyrics are not poems and (the majority) cannot stand without the music in the way that baudelaire and seamus heany and keats or frost stand without music. The music drives the feeling toward the precise interpretation at an emotional level and it is as complicated and fascinating as any poery really, but they are different beasts more distinctly than i realised...

Unlike most of the songs nowadays Have been written up town in Tinpine Alley That's where most of the folk songs come from nowadays Now this, this is a song this one's written up there This is written somewhere down in the United States Well, the Lone Ranger and Tonto They are ridin' down the line Fixin' everybody's troubles Everybody's except mine Someone musta told 'em that I was doin' fine All you five and ten cent women With nothin' in your heads I got a real gal I'm in love Lord, and I'll love her till I'm dead Go away from my door and my window too, right now Lord, I ain't goin' down to no race track See no sports car run I don't have no sports car And I don't even care to have one I can walk anytime around the block Well, the wind keeps a blowin' me Up and down the street With my hat in my hand And my boots on my feet Watch out so you don't step on me Well, look it here buddy You want to be like me Pull out your six-shooter And rob every bank you can see Tell the judge I said it was all right, yes