• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Thoughts on conscience, entities, ufos plus AYAHUASCA

I think whatever brings us more fully into the moment, into the here-and-now, with people and the world around us, is to be lauded. If anything creates separation, engenders focus and fascination on what is not here-and-now, then we must be cautious. Oddly enough , that could be said of the internet. :confused:
 
Poltergeist wrote: "If I may ask, did the "psychic nurse" say anything if the DMT state and the times when she is seeing or intuiting the "other side" are similar? Or is this something totally different?"

I think that's a very good question and join Poltergeist in asking if you would ask the surgical nurse about this and let us know what she says. I look forward to hearing more about what you see and learn through the ayahuasca. :)
 
Oh dear. From the old TV commercial--What's a mother to do? For every person out there preaching the brain frying evils of entheogens is at least one other person/experiencer capable of making a seemingly sane and rational case in favor of personal growth and insights gained thereby. No simple answers here, IMO.

I'm going to throw a WAG that most pure, untainted hallucinogens do little physical damage to the brain. I'm going to throw another WAG that a big percentage of what would be psychonauts come into illegally is not true LSD, DMT or whatever. Recall that Albert Hoffman, creator of and multiple "tripper" with LSD at Sandoz, passed away at the ripe old age of 102.

There is always risk. Even cannabis may trigger schizophrenia in certain pre-disposed individuals. Severe alcoholics may die from sudden withdrawal. As far as damaging bodily organs, ethanol does an adequate job of this, despite the fact that western culture has a long standing rapport with it.
 
Oh dear. From the old TV commercial--What's a mother to do? For every person out there preaching the brain frying evils of entheogens is at least one other person/experiencer capable of making a seemingly sane and rational case in favor of personal growth and insights gained thereby. No simple answers here, IMO.

I'm going to throw a WAG that most pure, untainted hallucinogens do little physical damage to the brain. I'm going to throw another WAG that a big percentage of what would be psychonauts come into illegally is not true LSD, DMT or whatever. Recall that Albert Hoffman, creator of and multiple "tripper" with LSD at Sandoz, passed away at the ripe old age of 102.

There is always risk. Even cannabis may trigger schizophrenia in certain pre-disposed individuals. Severe alcoholics may die from sudden withdrawal. As far as damaging bodily organs, ethanol does an adequate job of this, despite the fact that western culture has a long standing rapport with it.

Sure, and all the more reason not to do any of it, including alcohol. If I could have the several hundred million brain cells back that the cumulative effect of alcohol consumption has had on me just from social drinking in the past, I'd have consumed much less. I'm not saying I regret having a beer after work for many years, or maybe a few too many on the rare occasion, but seriously, if I could do it over, I'd have ordered cranberry and soda the whole way along, and I have in fact been doing for at least 20 years now. Last time I had a drink of alcohol was on New Years Eve. Gibson's Finest and Canada Dry ginger ale on ice with a twist of lime.
 
ditto Randal, last time i was effected by 'drink' was 17yrs ago aged 39, unlike you though randal, i treat the odd bottle/tin of beer as just another refreshing cold drink, and will drink it happily when offered one, as for trippey drug's, tried them both mushrooms and tab, like ufocurious, i was always aware in my mind i had taken them, apart from the dukebox [wurlitzer luminous type] acting strangely at one point during the acid-tab, i have nothing to report.

I can say at the time 'tabs' were plentiful and cheap, but this is a small place, and it wasnt my 'scene' nor my 'crowd'.
 
Ahh! If only life itself were sane.

We are given the message in childhood that clean living ensures a clear and stable mind. We then proceed to discover the hard way through illness, accident, aging or just plain living, that things are not so simple. The human condition is never consistently clear and stable. There is no universal formula for navigating one's path through this persistent illusion. There is no "free psychic lunch", with or without the use of drugs. This is where I think we give both youth and adults such over simplified advice on the subject of mind altering substances.
 
What you dont realise boomerang, is open conversations like this one, on this subject, were very taboo in normal life upto only recently, infact i was pretty gobsmacked at Chris's frankness, and wisty's.
 
If I may ask, did the "psychic nurse" say anything if the DMT state and the times when she is seeing or intuiting the "other side" are similar? Or is this something totally different?

I don't ask people about their experiences. I let them volunteer them. But if they ask me, I ask back.;)
R., the nurse, spent a long time talking to me. So I felt comfortable to ask her. She said that with the Ayahuasca a myriad of experiences happen. She told of one in which a being, a preto velho, whom she used to see as a child, sat beside her and they had a long conversation. Another time, she saw her own birth as a film. During the ceremony she sometimes sees the energy flowing in the circle (we seat in chairs in a circle), and entities that are there to help.

I won't see her often because she lives in another town!
 
I think there needs to be a distinction between spiritual enlightenment and phenomenon.

I am not schooled in shamanism. I probably should do some reading on it. @Ufocurious, I think you suggested an author some time ago on another thread. Care to say again?
Tyger
I don't remember which author was that. Was it General Moacyr Uchoa, our paranormal ufologist? His books are all in portuguese.

But my answer to you is that you absolutely right when you said that the plant is just to show the way.

The objective of all involved with the Ayahuasca in the line I am in is to be able to get into the force without drinking the brew.

Another is to separate phenomenon and spiritual enlightenment. One person told me that when psychedelic shapes come in he purposely gets up, talks to people, and ask the force to help him. he does not want to get lost in what he calls Bobby's world. He says it is his brain ( I am not sure if I agree, I am with McKenna, there is more there than just our own imagination), and he is after spiritual enlightenment.

Most people avoid hallucinations in exchange to auditory learning. Some are sure is their higher self, others that the voices are entities. The trick is to know if the entities are from the light or from the lower astral. Therefore they try to live a life filled with love and respect to self and others in order to attract the good spirituality and repel the other ones.
Even people with years learning with Ayahuasca still struggle with what is higher self and what is outer entities.:eek:

On the other hand are the ones fascinated by it. Everything is the force doing, even for the little things in their lives. You guys know the type:D

Brazilian Ayahuasca sacred use is a reflexion of our culture. It has native + catholicism + kardecism spiritism + umbanda (which itself is a mix catholicism +spiritism + afro religion) influences. Like our culture is a hodge-podge of tolerance and inclusion!:)

But the goal is universal: self knowledge and cure. Everyone there is trying to become a better human being and fight the grips of the matrix.

I know a person who left the Santo Daime because she was so happy and fulfilled that she was neglecting her professional and rat race side. We are humans who need to have a balanced material and spiritual life.

Ayahuasca is above all a planta de poder and her use is sacred.

Santo Daime religion is badly view these days because they use marijuana and other drugs.
UDV is fine and correct.
The people I am connected with are from another line. It is not a religion, but a sacred way to use Ayahuasca nevertheless.

I have no religion, and never will. My creed is being forever skeptical and open minded. Even when I don't believe certain things, but if their outcome is good, I incorporate it in my life and give it the benefit of doubt as I am worse than Saint Thomas, because even seeing I don't believe it:D And I don't think it is a virtue.
 
Last edited:
I have no religion, and never will. My creed is being forever skeptical and open minded. Even when I don't believe certain things, but their outcome is good, I incorporate it in my life and give it the benefit of doubt as I am worth than Saint Thomas, because even seeing I am in doubt:D And I don't think it is a virtue.

I do notice the images of Jesus Christ - an important 'force' to invoke for protection. Divine Love. :)

Thank you for sharing, UFocurious. Sounds all good.
 
I have no religion, and never will. My creed is being forever skeptical and open minded. Even when I don't believe certain things, but if their outcome is good, I incorporate it in my life and give it the benefit of doubt..." :D

I love this sentiment.
It's not like organized religions have a lock hold on concepts such as love, good works and respect.
 
Last edited:
Hey Tyger
I did some editing on the last paragraph. The meaning is the same though.

BTW - before we drink the brew we pray and set our intentions silently. Both times I prayed for my spiritual mentors to help me become a better person.

The place is all decorates with Brazilian totems, Jesus, Saint Francis, Yemanja, and even... to my dismay, Ashtar Sheran. Ouch!
I have not asked them why Ashtar Sheran poster was there.
This is one of the esoteric sides of Ufology I have a hard time with.

However, there are people in Brazil trying to "solve" this mystery.
Right at this moment, in Sao Paulo, it is happening the Third Advanced Ufology Encounter. AJ Gevaerd is there, as is other people that I follow with attention: Wagner Borges and Pedro de Campos. I should have gone, but I missed the dates to register and it was sold out quickly.
III Encontro de Ufologia Avançada de São Paulo
TOO BAD!
 
I love this sentiment.
It's not like organized religions have a lock hold on concepts such as love, good works and respect.




I have always had trouble accepting everything came from nothing in flash, non existance to existance in a flash, but it did, and that's why i personally believe in creation, not creationist creation, far far from it, evolution is self evident etc etc, however i dont believe the flash into existence was random, there is order, there is complexity, there's anything but randomness, if i had to describe my god, using a word 'nature', otherwise trying to describe the hand behind our creation gets abit to deep for me, as it is more about a force than an entity.
 
I have always had trouble accepting everything came from nothing in flash, non existance to existance in a flash, but it did, and that's why i personally believe in creation, not creationist creation, far far from it, evolution is self evident etc etc, however i dont believe the flash into existence was random, there is order, there is complexity, there's anything but randomness, if i had to describe my god, using a word 'nature', otherwise trying to describe the hand behind our creation gets abit to deep for me, as it is more about a force than an entity.

The 'flash' into existence is in keeping with the Sanskrit texts: Pralaya. The universe goes into pralaya ('sleep') and then emerges from pralaya ('sleep'). From existence into non-existence; from non-existence into existence. Ideas that are not dissonant with scientific ideas of the 'Big Bang'.
 
Ahh! If only life itself were sane.

We are given the message in childhood that clean living ensures a clear and stable mind. We then proceed to discover the hard way through illness, accident, aging or just plain living, that things are not so simple. The human condition is never consistently clear and stable. There is no universal formula for navigating one's path through this persistent illusion. There is no "free psychic lunch", with or without the use of drugs. This is where I think we give both youth and adults such over simplified advice on the subject of mind altering substances.

I've made no claim that "clean living ensures a clear and stable mind". I've made the claim that mind altering drugs don't ensure a clear and stable mind ( obviously ), that healthy brain tissue is often damaged or stressed by the use of mind altering drugs, and that the associated changes in behavior and mental acuity resulting from drug use are usually of an impaired nature. I fail to see the advantages of exposing one's self to any of these hazards and therefore my advice to avoid such substances, although simple, is also sensible and effective.

How much complexity is required in order to invalidate the concerns above? Forgive me if I were to suggest that it's no more complex than experiencing the effects of such drugs for one's self and rationalizing one's continued use based on one's desire for a repeat of the experience. Personally, I think that's as good a reason as any for granting people the right to make their own choice, but that's an entirely different concept from whether or not it's actually good for you.
 
How do you even know what objective reality is?

May I add here that I agree with ufology rather that Chris. As I've said already, I've taken huge quantities of psychedelic drugs. And I mean HUGE. If that gives me the authority to argue with Chris on an equal basis, well, fine, bring it on, Chris! Because I have exactly zero belief that any of the extraordinary things I saw under the influence of LSD (or any other drug - I wasn't especially fussy) were actually real, however real they may have seemed to me at the time. Just like Chris, I don't take illegal drugs any more. Why not? Because I got bored with them. Since I did at least have the sense to steer clear of seriously addictive substances like heroin, I always had the option of giving them all up any time I wanted to, and one day I realized I was spending too much time in smoke-filled rooms talking incoherent shite with boring people. So I walked away and never went back.

Does that make me a better person? No. I simply made a lifestyle choice. Are you a bad person if you want to take recreational drugs, legal or otherwise? No, of course not. I did it to a downright ludicrous extent because I was young and foolish and it seemed like a good idea at the time. My friends did it too, and they were basically nice people. Absolutely nobody I knew turned evil because we took drugs (though we never went anywhere near heroin, which was obviously something quite different from what we were doing, and no fun at all). So I will not be a hypocrite and say that any young folks reading this shouldn't take drugs because it's stupid. Actually, it is stupid. But no more stupid than anything else you do in the 18-25 age-bracket, and considerably less likely to kill you than some.

So, guys and gals younger than me, you have my blessing to experiment with any drugs you feel attracted to that aren't hideously addictive. I can say from personal experience that if you're going to smoke anything, tobacco is vastly more addictive than marijuana, and LSD isn't addictive at all. Also, having taken about 3,000 times the recommended minimum dosage just to see what would happen, I can safely say that it's very difficult to OD on LSD. And since I only know one person whose sanity was irreversibly damaged by taking LSD because he had the bad luck to be a latent schizophrenic, it's a lot safer than Russian Roulette. And if you have the extreme bad luck to damage your brain in irretrievable ways on your first trip, you won't actually die, and you'll probably get a disability pension for the rest of your life.

So, basically, at my old fuddy-duddy time in life, taking LSD is about as sensible as jumping off the Chrysler Building wearing a parachute. It makes you, as the young folks say, "awesome", and if you're that young, maybe the risk of death is worth it. Though with LSD, you don't actually risk your life - merely your sanity.

As you will all have gathered by now, I don't think that the subjective experiences created by psychedelic drugs have anything whatsoever to do with objective reality. I should know - I've had enough of them. And you know what? I could tell you about a drug so extreme that they never even bothered to ban it, because the hallucinations it induces are so horrific that nobody who knows what it really does would take it for fun. I never took it myself, because several of my friends said "I took this stuff out of sheer ignorance based on the assumption that since it wasn't illegal, it must be pretty mild, and I nearly lost my mind!" One of them genuinely went mad enough to spend the next 6 months in a psychiatric hospital. I won't tell you what it's called because there have to be a few people on this forum stupid enough to try it, even though it would guarantee them at least 3 days in Surrealist Hell, and give them maybe a 10% chance of an absolute screaming mental breakdown. But if you want want to spend the next 72 hours seeing every object in the world bisected, including every person you know cut down the middle with their internal organs hideously pulsing, there's a legal herb that will do it, so long as you utterly ignore the instructions for safe usage. A good friend of mine told me so in terms which I have no reason at all to doubt.

Frankly, as a psychedelic experiencer, I must be up there with at least 90% of all the shamen who have ever lived. Yet for some reason, I'm still an atheist. Why? Because I take it as a rule of thumb that if I take substances which I know will cause my brain to malfunction, and immediately thereafter I experience very weird things, this isn't objective reality. Let's be honest here. If flying saucer people from another star, or another dimension, or whatever, are supposedly real, yet they only appear to you personally, and only when you take drugs that you know in advance are going to make you see things, maybe they aren't really real!

Of course, as both an atheist and a skeptic (in the true sense of the word), whatever you choose to believe, if you're doing no harm, I will defend your right to believe it - well, probably not to the death, because I'm just as much of a coward as you are. But I think I should point out that, if you take any psychedelic drugs at all, your chance of gaining massive insights into what is really going on, and being granted amazing yet rather vague psychic powers, is massively smaller than the risk of permanently damaging your sanity. Just saying.
 
How do you know that mind-altering drugs don't ensure a clear and stable mind? Have you ever taken any? If not, then I really can't see where you're coming from. The "drug" that's being discussed in this thread is ayahuasca, which according to the information I've come across can be extremely beneficial to those who partake of it. There's no solid evidence to suggest that it destroys or seriously damages human brain cells. Indigenous peoples of the Amazon have been drinking the medicine for thousands of years without serious harm. Now if you have no interest in taking part in an ayahuasca ceremony then that's your right. Nobody is forcing or asking you to. But please leave the shrill and negative statements alone. You're far more likely to damage your health drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes than drinking ayahuasca or taking magic mushrooms. And yet both alcohol and tobacco are legal all over the world. Why is that? Because it dumbs down the masses and keeps them occupied and under control, rather than asking questions about the world we live in and why we're destroying our planet for simple profit?


I've made no claim that "clean living ensures a clear and stable mind". I've made the claim that mind altering drugs don't ensure a clear and stable mind ( obviously ), that healthy brain tissue is often damaged or stressed by the use of mind altering drugs, and that the associated changes in behavior and mental acuity resulting from drug use are usually of an impaired nature. I fail to see the advantages of exposing one's self to any of these hazards and therefore my advice to avoid such substances, although simple, is also sensible and effective.

How much complexity is required in order to invalidate the concerns above? Forgive me if I were to suggest that it's no more complex than experiencing the effects of such drugs for one's self and rationalizing one's continued use based on one's desire for a repeat of the experience. Personally, I think that's as good a reason as any for granting people the right to make their own choice, but that's an entirely different concept from whether or not it's actually good for you.
 
Back
Top