The Encyclopedia of Psychoactive Plants:  Ethnopharmacology and Its Applications by Christian Rätsch, translated by John R. Baker.  Rochester, VT:  Park Street Press, 2005.  Biblio.; illus.; index; 942 pp.; 8.5” x 11”; $125.00 (cloth).

Reviewed by Timothy White. Reprinted from Shaman's Drum, Number 70.

Park Street Press deserves accolades for its decision to publish an English translation of Christian Rätsch’s massive 942-page ethnobotanical treatise, The Encyclopedia of Psychoactive Plants:  Ethnopharmacology and Its Applications (originally published in German by A.T. Verlag in 1998).  This encyclopedic volume offers individual monographs on more than four hundred of the world’s best-known psychoactive plants.  Some potential buyers may balk at the volume’s hefty price of $125.00, but I think that most who check out this volume will agree that it is actually a bargain.  I was very favorably impressed by Rätsch’s perceptive summaries of the available literature on each species, his sympathetic encouragement of the responsible use of sacred plants, and his inclusion of some fifteen hundred botanical photos and other illustrations.

In a foreword to the volume, the renowned Swiss pharmacologist Albert Hofmann proposes that the world—driven by a global culture of rampant materialism and egotism—is careening toward a spiritual and environmental crisis that can only be prevented if we can make a quantum shift toward unity consciousness and learn to treat everything as a manifestation of the same creative spirit.  While suggesting that “all means and all ways that help lead us to this universal spirituality are worthy of support,” Hofmann specifically proposes that “disseminating knowledge about psychoactive plants, together with the proper way to use them, represents a valuable contribution within the context of the many and growing attempts to bring about a new, holistic consciousness.” 

Rätsch shares with readers a rich storehouse of ethnobotanical and pharmacological knowledge accumulated over twenty years of studying and personally experimenting with psychoactive plants.  As much as possible, each monograph addresses a standard set of topics about the species, listing its botanical nomenclature and folk names; describing its history, distribution, cultivation methods, and physical appearance; documenting preparation methods and dosages, as well as ritual and medicinal uses; identifying its pharmacological constituents, its experiential effects, and artifacts associated with it; and finally providing a list of relevant literature.  By organizing all that data under standard topic headings, Rätsch has created an easy-to-consult reference on psychoactive plants that is likely to become an underground bible used by psychonauts and entheogenic scholars.

As an amateur shamanologist, I particularly appreciated the depth of Rätsch’s informative overviews of ethnocultural traditions associated with each plant.  For example, in a sixteen-page entry on Cannabis indica, he includes extensive descriptions explaining how C. indica has been used ritually by the jakri (shamans) of Nepal, plus short notes on its use in ancient Mesopotamia and in the modern Rastafarian religion practiced in Jamaica.  In a separate six-page entry on C. sativa, he describes five different ritual uses for that variety of hemp.  For the most part, Rätsch not only relies on reliable sources but also includes reference citations for his sources, which greatly enhances the volume’s usefulness as a reference tool.  For example, when he points out that “the earliest literary and ethnohistorical evidence for hemp is contained in shamanic texts from ancient China,” he cites not one but two specific articles on the subject by Hui-Lin Li published in the journal Economic Botany.   In another passage describing the ancient use of hemp in Greek divination rites, he states, “The Greek archaeologist Sotiris Dakaris, who has been investigating the oracle of the dead at Acheron since 1959, discovered ‘bags full of black clumps of hashish’ in Ephyra (Vanderberg 1979, 24).” 

Given my background in psychoactive shamanism, I was impressed to find Rätsch includes many intriguing tidbits of information on the shamanic, religious, and medicinal uses of both common and obscure species.  For example, I was not aware that the common California poppy (Eschscholzia californica) has been used in pediatric medicine as a mild sedative and analgesic, that California Indians chewed its fresh leaves as a sedative for toothaches, and that smoking its leaves induces a mild state of euphoria.  While I knew that the Mazatecs, Zapotecs, and Mixe of Mexico sometimes use Ipomoea violacea and other morning glory species as substitutes for psilocybin mushrooms in healing rituals, I was not aware that anthropologist Gerardo Reichel-Dolmatoff has reported that, in Colombia, the mamas (shaman-priests) of the Kogi—renowned for their entheogenic use of coca leaves—sometimes use morning glory seeds in an entheogenic drink consumed during ritual dramas. 

I also appreciated Rätsch’s level-headed, no-punches-pulled descriptions of known pharmacological and experiential effects of the plants.   For example, in his entry on Brugmansia aborea (angel’s trumpet), he states, “Extreme caution should be exercised when ingesting any species of Brugmansia.…  South American shamans urgently warn unknowledgeable people against using  these plants.  Angel’s trumpets are used for psychoactive purposes almost exclusively by experienced shamans.  Overdoses can result in states of delirium that can last for days and have after effects that persist for weeks.” 

Incidentally, I applaud Rätsch for calling attention to the irrational double-standard of governmental drug prohibitions.  For example, in his entry on Brugmansia, he states:  “It is strange that this most potent and most dangerous of all plant hallucinogens is not included on any list of illegal drugs, while such as Cannabis and Erythroxylum [coca leaves], which by comparison are almost completely harmless, are prohibited.  This is a strong indication that most current drug laws are not founded upon scientific knowledge.”  

It should be noted that many psychoactive plants listed in this volume—even some that have been used traditionally—can be extremely dangerous.  For example, Rätsch indicates that the Mayan hmenó’ob (shamans) of southern Mexico smoke cigars rolled from the leaves of Datura innoxia in order to see matters more clearly when divining with crystals, but he also cautions readers that the solanaceous plants are dangerous.  When describing the ritual uses of Erythrina americana, a tree known to the Aztecs as tzompantli (“skull frame”), Rätsch indicates that, in pre-Columbian Mexico, its narcotic seeds may have been administered to Aztec sacrificial victims before they were disemboweled and butchered.  He also cites historic records collected by Victor Reko indicating that the red seeds were sometimes consumed in colonial Mexico as an intoxicant because they produced “immoderate gaiety, then confused speech, wobbling as if drunk, and a heightened libido.”  The drawback was that, as Reko states, “The intoxicated person then fell into a deep sleep, from which they usually did not reawaken.”

My overall enthusiastic endorsement of Rätsch’s Encyclopedia of Psychoactive Plants does not mean that the volume is flawless; minor errors are almost unavoidable in works of such encyclopedic scope.   Indeed, I noticed minor technical flaws and editorial oversights in several entries, some of which I will address in this review.  Still, considering the incredible variety of psychoactive plants described in this volume, Rätsch generally does an excellent job of summarizing ethnographic and historic reports on indigenous ritual uses of most plants.  For example, in his entry on Lophophora williamsii (peyote)—my favorite entheogen—he provides a short overview of historic Aztec reports on its use, followed by informative descriptions of its use among the Huichol and Tarahumara of Mexico.  He mentions that the “peyote meetings” of the Native American Church (NAC) have been well documented, and he correctly identifies them as a “syncretic form of organized spirituality that combines elements of Indian traditions and ideas from Christianity.”  Unfortunately, Rätsch’s description of a “typical peyote meeting” contains several technical errors that made me question his familiarity with NAC rituals. 

After mentioning the half-moon altar used in many NAC peyote meetings, Rätsch states:  “Upon this altar are placed the ritual objects:  a talking stick, a gourd rattle, drums, and flutes,” and then he adds, “A large, living peyote cactus is placed between the fire and the altar.”  In fact, as NAC practitioners are apt to point out,  only a single waterdrum is used during the ceremony; an eagle-bone whistle—not a flute—is used; and a staff—not a talking stick—is passed around the circle of participants.  Moreover, the ritual objects are occasionally laid on a mat next to the moon altar, but they aren’t normally placed directly on the moon.  These imprecise terms and inaccurate ritual details aren’t catastrophic errors, but they leave an inaccurate picture of NAC rituals.   For example, I have never seen a living “Chief Peyote” cactus “placed between the fire and the altar” during a ceremony—it would get cooked by the hot coals.  In fact, in the Cheyenne, Arapaho, Kiowa, and Otoe half-moon fireplaces (rituals) that I have witnessed, the Chief Peyote is a specially prepared, dried peyote button, and it alone is placed directly on top of the moon altar.  I point out these technical errors not to embarrass Rätsch—he actually makes admirably few errors in this volume—but to show how easy it is to misinterpret observations coming from secondhand sources, which is why publishers should rely on experts to check the accuracy of texts.  Hopefully, these errors can be corrected in future editions.

On the whole, I appreciate Rätsch’s thoughtful insights on the ritual use of psychedelics.  In the process of elaborating on the psychedelic principles of “dosage, set, and setting” promoted by Timothy Leary, Ralph Metzner, and others, Rästch provides some insightful guidelines for enhancing the safe use of plant sacraments.  Acknowledging that “the same substance can induce very different effects depending upon the dosage, set, and setting,” he wisely cautions psychonauts trying new substances to start with very modest dosages and gradually increase them.   Nonetheless, my editorial eye for accuracy was jarred by his comment that American Indians (not identified) recognize that different dosages of “magic mushrooms” may be needed for medicinal, aphrodisiac, and shamanic uses.  Based on my understanding that traditional Mazatecs, Mixe, and Zapotecs adamantly advocate sexual abstinence during use of sacred mushrooms, I assume that Rätsch’s statement about magic mushrooms being used as aphrodisiacs derives not from indigenous Native American practices but from modern Western applications.

I must add a qualification to Rätsch’s generalization that “the shamanic dosage catapults consciousness into an entirely different reality that is flooded with cosmic visions and enables a person to peer into worlds that are beyond the normal experience of space and time.”  I have found that Westerners are often disappointed to discover that—in contrast to their expectations—indigenous shamans rarely take megadoses in order to blast off into visionary states.  While shamans may occasionally take substantial dosages of an entheogen during training sessions, most commonly take fairly modest dosages during shamanic healings.  For example, one of Rätsch’s cited references states that Mixe shamans usually take as few as six pair of the small atka:t mushrooms (P. hoogshagenii) or a single pair of the larger ko:ng mushrooms (P. caerulescens)—a fairly conservative dose compared to the six pairs of P. caerulescens that the American ethnomycologist R. Gordon Wasson reportedly took during his famous mushroom velada (ceremony) with the Mazatec shamaness Maria Sabina.  In fact, as Rätsch himself acknowledges, taking a substantial dose of a psychoactive doesn’t automatically produce a shamanic state of consciousness—it requires appropriate intention and external conditions. 

In his introduction, Rätsch offers insights into the role of set and setting in shamanic ceremonies, but he makes a loaded assumption that begs for clarification.  He states:  “The shamanic use of psychoactive plants follows a specific basic pattern, whereby it is relatively unimportant which substance is being used.”  This observation may be true of certain neoshamanic circle rituals that have grown popular in Europe and North America, but I contend that most indigenous rituals are married to specific substances.  As Rätsch indicates, indigenous mushroom shamans may use different species of psilocybin mushrooms interchangeably in their ceremonies, and some Zapotec shamans may even use Ipomoea violacea (morning glory) seeds as a seasonal substitute for mushrooms when those are not available.  However, as Rätsch suggests, Ipomoea extracts tend to produce a quieter, more meditative, less visual experience than do most psilocybin mushrooms.  Significantly, Zapotec shamans engage less in chanting and active shamanic interventions when they use Ipomoea; instead, they give the drink to the patient and allow him or her to heal by resting and dreaming.  In short, the ritual is adapted to the substance used.

Rätsch’s contention that it is relatively unimportant which substance is used may be true of neoshamanic “psychedelic rituals of knowledge,” because they tend to use only the most generic, cross-cultural steps and patterns.  In contrast, I suggest that indigenous traditions are often framed by cultural beliefs and ritual settings that have been specifically tailored and tuned to enhance the signature patterns of the entheogens used.  For example, psilocybin mushrooms encourage poetic improvisational chanting and flowing visual images—patterns honored in Mazatec mushroom veladas—whereas peyote lends itself to fast-paced musical rhythms and elicits precise, geometric visual patterns—motifs prevalent in both Huichol and North American peyote rituals.  These rituals are, in turn, significantly different from the almost meditational kava kava (Piper methysticum) rituals of the South Pacific and the volatile Amanita muscaria (fly agaric) rituals of Siberia. 

My most serious criticism of Rätsch’s text is that it occasionally perpetuates biased speculations based on faulty facts.  For example, in Rätsch’s monograph on the Amanita muscaria mushroom, I noticed several errors that need to be addressed.  In his overview on the history of A. muscaria, Rätsch mentions that John Allegro, “a former Jesuit who apparently had access to certain ancient writings that are preserved in the Vatican but unavailable to the public, advanced the theory that Jesus was actually a fly agaric mushroom and that the so-called original Christianity was a secret fly agaric cult.”  Rätsch fails to mention that Allegro’s book The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross relies heavily upon obscure Sumerian etymologies and creative interpretations of Biblical passages, and that his esoteric theories were not supported by specific historic evidence.  Although I am aware of circumstantial evidence hinting that some early Christians may have used A. muscaria as an entheogenic sacrament, I question the wisdom of promoting Allegro’s speculative claim that Christ—from kristos (anointed) and khresos (health-bestowing) was a secret reference to the sacred mushroom. 

Although Rätsch casually repeats Allegro’s fanciful theory, he barely acknowledges R. Gordon Wasson’s well-reasoned hypothesis that fly agaric mushrooms may have been the soma of the ancient Aryans.  In his entry on A. muscaria, Rätsch doesn’t consider any of Wasson’s claims that descriptions of the entheogenic soma reported in the Rig Veda closely match what is known about A. muscaria.  Instead, he summarily dismisses Wasson’s theory, arguing that “it is said that soma grows in the high mountains, that is, the Himalayas.  No evidence of Amanita muscaria has yet been found anywhere in the Himalayan region.”  Then, in a separate essay examining theories on the identity of soma, he reports that Terence McKenna contested Wasson’s hypothesis, and he again claims, “The fact that there are no fly agaric mushrooms in the Himalayas is especially problematic.” 

Ironically, in another book—Shamanism and Tantra in the Himalayas (Inner Traditions, 2000)—that he coauthored with Claudia Müller-Ebeling and Surendra Bahadur-Shahi, Rätsch himself provides evidence that dramatically refutes McKenna’s objections to Wasson’s hypothesis.  In that volume, Rätsch announces that his Nepalese informants have verified the presence of A. muscaria in both eastern and western Nepal, and that they claim that fly agaric has been used in Nepal as a potent shamanic inebriant.  Although I recognize that the original German edition of The Encyclopedia of Psychoactive Plants was released in 1998, two years before Shamanism and Tantra in the Himalayas was published in German, I find it curious and unfortunate that Rätsch’s momentous discovery of A. muscaria use in the Himalayas was not acknowledged in the 2005 English edition of The Encyclopedia of Psychoactive Plants. 

Rätsch’s discovery about the shamanic use of A. muscaria in Nepal also undermines his endorsement of McKenna’s theory that the legendary soma must have been Psilocybe cubensis—and not A. muscaria.  Repeating McKenna’s subjective argument, Rätsch states, “Of all of the candidates for soma that have been proposed, psilocybin mushrooms are the only psychoactive plants that produce effects like those in the fantastic descriptions of the Rig Veda.”  Based on the reports of Nepalese shamans collected by Rätsch—as well as other modern accounts of fly agaric experiences—I contend that A. muscaria can produce entheogenic effects that mirror the descriptions of soma found in the Rig Veda.  In a comprehensive encyclopedia on psychoactive plants and fungi, it may be educational to respectfully address and assess all theories as to the possible identity of soma, but it is misguided to use outdated generalizations and erroneous assumptions to endorse McKenna’s personal speculations and to summarily dismiss Wasson’s well-documented study.

Although this volume is generally well organized, I did notice one formatting weakness that I feel warrants mention and correction.  Rätsch divides his treasure trove of information on psychoactive plants into four major sections and various subsections—divisions that didn’t always make sense to this reviewer.  In the first section, titled “The Psychoactive Plants,” Rätsch offers a series of one hundred and one “major monographs” devoted to describing the world’s best-known psychoactive plants, in a subsection he calls “The Most Important Genera and Species from A to Z.”  Then, as supplements to these “major monographs,” he provides three other subsections:  one titled “Little-Studied Psychoactive Plants” (with one hundred and thirty, mostly paragraph-long entries, which he dubs “minor monographs”); another titled “Reputed Psychoactive Plants” (with thirty-one brief entries); and one titled “Psychedelic Plants That Have Not Yet Been Identified” (which includes forty-some notations).  As an amateur ethnobotanist, I found that Rätsch’s sometimes arbitrary assignment of plants into four subsections was confusing.   For example, I was disappointed to find some well-known plants—including Capsicum spp. (chili peppers) and Lobelia inflata (Indian tobacco)—listed under “Little-Studied Psychoactive Plants,” while the little-studied Phalaris spp. (canary grasses) are listed as major psychoactive plants, presumably because some strains may contain the psychedelic N,N-DMT or 5-MeO-DMT.  Combining both major and minor monographs into a unified section would have avoided this confusion and made it easier to find species.  For similar reasons, while I appreciate the technical distinction between plants and fungi, I propose that the monographs later presented in the “Psychoactive Fungi” section also could have been merged into the section on psychoactive plants, creating a single, alphabetized encyclopedia of psychoactive plants and fungi.  Of course, since Rätsch lists plant species by scientific name, it makes sense to maintain a separate subsection on legendary psychoactives that have not yet been scientifically identified. 

Toward the end of the volume, Rätsch provides an interesting catch-all section devoted to describing psychoactive “products”—including ayahuasca brews, betel quids, chichas, witches’ ointments, Greek kykeons, smoking blends, and snuffs—that have been known to contain one  or more psychoactive plants.  Because the mixtures mentioned in this section are often better known than their constituent plants (listed in the “Psychoactive Plants” sections), I propose it might have been instructive to present this section as a prologue to the individual plant monographs.  After learning how various psychoactive plants have been combined in synergistic plant potions, readers might better comprehend and appreciate the individual monographs on the component plants. 

Although I am sure that Rätsch had reasons for presenting his material in the subdivisions and order he does, his approach occasionally results in misleading or incomplete information.  Let me give one example.  By now, many Shaman’s Drum readers know that the Amazonian psychoactive tea known as ayahuasca is actually an infusion usually made from two or more plants that interact synergistically.  In short, MAO inhibitors present in the mildly psychoactive ayahuasca vine (Banisteriopsis caapi) allow one to internally assimilate the psychedelic DMT alkaloids contained in the leaves of chacruna (Psychotria viridis) or other admixture plants.  While Rätsch clearly understands this synergistic process, and he eventually provides a substantial monograph on the subject in the later section “Psychoactive Products,” it would be easy for readers consulting the entries on the individual plants in the “Psychoactive Plants” section to overlook the profound entheogenic significance of these plants. 

In a curiously short monograph on Banisteriopsis caapi, Rätsch provides several very brief notes on the preparation and uses of “pure ayahuasca.”  However, he barely mentions in passing that the vine is usually prepared in combination with one or more additive plants, frequently Psychotria viridis.  Under the heading “Ritual Use,” he mentions briefly that the Desana Indians drink “pure ayahuasca” during nonshamanic community rituals, and then he adds: “For more information on ritual use, see ayahuasca.”  Unfortunately, the note doesn’t indicate that ritual uses of ayahuasca are described in an entirely different section of the book (“Psychoactive Products”), nor does it list any page numbers. 

In his even shorter entry on P. viridis, Rätsch again understates the synergistic role of Psychotria spp. in many traditional ayahuasca potions.   Under “Effects,” Rätsch notes only that “the leaves manifest typical DMT effects” when used in the preparation of traditional ayahuasca potions and modern ayahuasca analogs.  Under the heading “Ritual Use,” Rätsch doesn’t review any of its traditional uses in ayahuasca tea, and offers only one comment: “See ayahuasca.”  Once again, since he doesn’t indicate where the ritual uses of ayahuasca are described, or list any page numbers, readers are left in the dark.

Persistent readers may eventually track down the entry on ayahuasca mixtures and their ritual uses in the “Pyschoactive Products” section—as I did.  However, based on the information presented in the primary monographs on the plants, novices could easily come away with a distorted picture of ayahuasca rituals.  Considering that ayahuasca is fast becoming one of the world’s most popular entheogens, and that the term ayahuasca can refer to both the vine proper and the synergistic plant extracts, it would have been instructive to have included unambiguous explanations in situ, rather than burying them in a back section of the book.

Having voiced concerns about a few features that need clarification and correction, I want to reiterate that The Encyclopedia of Psychoactive Plants provides a treasure house of ethnobotanical and pharmacological knowledge about entheogenic plants.  If every U.S. DEA agent, judge, and congressperson could be persuaded to use this book as a reference guide, it might inspire a radical revision of our nation’s irrational and inquisitorial drug policies.  In the meantime, Rätsch has gifted the world with a Promethean resource that should help free the fires of inspired consciousness by enhancing public knowledge about shamanic and religious uses of sacred plants.

Timothy White is editor of Shaman’s Drum and a practitioner of entheogenic shamanism.

---