Egodeath Yahoo Group – Digest 140: 2015-11-17

Site Map


Group: egodeath Message: 7171 From: egodeath Date: 17/11/2015
Subject: Re: Deciphered: Holy of Holies; adyton; No Access; veil
Group: egodeath Message: 7174 From: egodeath Date: 17/11/2015
Subject: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabulary
Group: egodeath Message: 7175 From: egodeath Date: 17/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
Group: egodeath Message: 7176 From: egodeath Date: 17/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
Group: egodeath Message: 7177 From: egodeath Date: 17/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
Group: egodeath Message: 7179 From: egodeath Date: 17/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
Group: egodeath Message: 7180 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
Group: egodeath Message: 7181 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
Group: egodeath Message: 7182 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
Group: egodeath Message: 7183 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Must factor-in censorship, Prohibition, persecution, coerced positio
Group: egodeath Message: 7184 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Re: Must factor-in censorship, Prohibition, persecution, coerced pos
Group: egodeath Message: 7185 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Re: Must factor-in censorship, Prohibition, persecution, coerced pos
Group: egodeath Message: 7186 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Re: 2015 International Drug Reform Conference, entheogen enlightenme
Group: egodeath Message: 7187 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
Group: egodeath Message: 7188 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: Must factor-in censorship, Prohibition, persecution, coerced pos
Group: egodeath Message: 7189 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
Group: egodeath Message: 7190 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
Group: egodeath Message: 7191 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
Group: egodeath Message: 7192 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
Group: egodeath Message: 7193 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: Deciphered: mirror = look back at thought-source
Group: egodeath Message: 7194 From: egodeath Date: 20/11/2015
Subject: Consistency of themes, inconsistency of positions
Group: egodeath Message: 7195 From: egodeath Date: 20/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
Group: egodeath Message: 7196 From: egodeath Date: 20/11/2015
Subject: Re: Consistency of themes, inconsistency of positions
Group: egodeath Message: 7197 From: egodeath Date: 20/11/2015
Subject: Re: Consistency of themes, inconsistency of positions
Group: egodeath Message: 7198 From: egodeath Date: 21/11/2015
Subject: Re: Matrix movie
Group: egodeath Message: 7199 From: egodeath Date: 22/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
Group: egodeath Message: 7200 From: egodeath Date: 22/11/2015
Subject: vibrational energy morphological resonance frequency takeover
Group: egodeath Message: 7201 From: egodeath Date: 22/11/2015
Subject: Re: Entheogen use constant in religion
Group: egodeath Message: 7202 From: egodeath Date: 22/11/2015
Subject: Re: Entheogen use constant in religion
Group: egodeath Message: 7203 From: egodeath Date: 22/11/2015
Subject: Re: Entheogen use constant in religion
Group: egodeath Message: 7204 From: egodeath Date: 22/11/2015
Subject: Re: Entheogen use constant in religion
Group: egodeath Message: 7205 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation
Group: egodeath Message: 7207 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Posting twice worked, to get immediate feedback
Group: egodeath Message: 7208 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation
Group: egodeath Message: 7209 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation
Group: egodeath Message: 7210 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation
Group: egodeath Message: 7211 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 7212 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Post-It Notes of highest knowledge
Group: egodeath Message: 7213 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Post-It Notes of highest knowledge
Group: egodeath Message: 7214 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Post-It Notes of highest knowledge
Group: egodeath Message: 7215 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Post-It Notes of highest knowledge
Group: egodeath Message: 7216 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Post-It Notes of highest knowledge
Group: egodeath Message: 7217 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 7218 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 7220 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 7221 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 7222 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 7223 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Fake Christianity = Fake Buddhism
Group: egodeath Message: 7224 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 7225 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism



Group: egodeath Message: 7171 From: egodeath Date: 17/11/2015
Subject: Re: Deciphered: Holy of Holies; adyton; No Access; veil
we are above all, first and foremost, control agents

all myth figures (characters) are you
you are a cybernetic steering control agent
therefore
all myth is about the transformation of cybernetic control agency

myth is about personal cybernetics cybernetic steering control agency and how it transforms in the Eternalism state which is the entheogen state of cognitive dissociation psycholytic loosening of mental construct binding

Copyright (C) 2015 Michael S. Hoffman (Egodeath.com). All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7174 From: egodeath Date: 17/11/2015
Subject: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabulary
P1 task and commission: Read aloud my writings and ensure that Siri and Cortana are able to recognize the common words (many ordinary common words fail) and specialized words (Possibilism, Eternalism, fatedness, worldline).

Thank you, I appreciate the powerful results you have achieved so far. The highest purpose and application of voice recognition is theorizing about the Egodeath theory; Transcendent Knowledge; Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism; the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence; the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture.

— — Michael Hoffman (Eta Kappa Nu (EleKtroN)), the interdisciplinary theorist of ego death
Group: egodeath Message: 7175 From: egodeath Date: 17/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
IEEE Eta Kappa Nu honor society voices our recognition of Vulcan.

Hephaestus, trapper of Hera on the throne, had to be carried on the donkey trip to heaven by Dionysus in order to release the Queen of the Gods.

— Michael, pinner down of the dragon
Group: egodeath Message: 7176 From: egodeath Date: 17/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
as I have mentioned before,
the technology causes AIDS virus in what words I choose to use
the technology causes a bias in what words I choose to use

voice recognition recognizes the utterance “visionary plants” but not infusions [I actually said “Entheogens”]:
in the engines
infusions
so if you see those words, I probably actually said “entheogens”. so it is easier to say “visionary plants”,
and I’ll Jareds which Siri recognizes
an utterance which Siri recognizes

I could post another raw voice misrecognition session followed by a cleaned up posting to show how bad and how good voice recognition currently is

Cortana wins this round if recognizes infusions [I actually said “entheogens”]

— my coal hot man the dearest of you go death
Group: egodeath Message: 7177 From: egodeath Date: 17/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
cleaning up a voice misrecognition session is very hard but it is so wonderful to speak my mind impromptu and have it — really good ideas from the frank heart impromptu — sort of captured instantly as text; captured well enough so that it is possible with much difficulty, but still possible, to take that excellent top-quality idea stream, flow, on a roll big-time, and then clean it up, which is far easier (FASTER to see text result even if garbled) than with recording the sound of my voice and then transcribing where I cannot see any text immediately.

microcassette secretary transcription playback machine technique/type of approach, is not portable.
whereas
voice recognition followed by cleanup, is maximally portable; on smart phone.

the crucial value is to immediately see some text even if it is semi garbled

I have been working on capturing fast flowing ideas, how to capture them since 1985 October, back to the future jump day 30 years in the past

Copyright (C) 2015 Michael S. Hoffman (Egodeath.com). All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7179 From: egodeath Date: 17/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
wik:
On October 26, 1985, Marty meets his scientist friend, “Doc” Brown, at a shopping mall parking lot.
Doc demonstrates the navigation system with the example date of November 5, 1955: the day he conceived the machine.

The Egodeath theory began development on Oct. 27, 1985, or give or take a couple days.

Copyright (C) 2015 Michael S. Hoffman (Egodeath.com). All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7180 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
Oct. 21, 2015, 4 weeks ago, was the back to the future jump.
Group: egodeath Message: 7181 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
In August 1955, Wasson’s mushroom trip report to Graves caused Graves to think about mushrooms in ancient religion.
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/5399

1955
Robert Graves figured out the Entheogen Theory of Greek Myth around 1952 and Greek Religion around 1955; the Entheogen Theory of Religion in Classical Antiquity.

1985
Michael Hoffman begins debugging personal control integrity across time, by 1988 formulates the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.

2015
Michael Hoffman routinizes deciphering religious myth in terms of personal control transformation dynamics in the Eternalism altered state of consciousness.

Copyright (C) 2015 Michael S. Hoffman (Egodeath.com). All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7182 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Re: Voice Recognition engineers: Teach Siri/Cortana Egodeath vocabul
I am using Apple voice recognition to read aloud the introduction summary from my main article of 2006.
http://egodeath.com/mobile.htm
It’s sometimes recognizes the word entheogen but it is highly unreliable.


The entheogen theory of religion and ego death

The entheogen theory of religion and ego death explains what is revealed in religious revelation and in enlightenment, including the nature of personal control agency.

The essence and origin of religion is the use of visionary plants to routinely trigger the intense mystic altered state, producing loose binding of cognitive associations. This loose cognitive binding then produces an experience of being controlled by frozen block universe determinism with a single, pre-existing, ever existing future.

Experiencing this model of control and time initially destabilizes self control power, and amounts to the death of the self that was conceived of as an autonomous control agent. Self-control stability is restored upon transforming one’s mental model to take into account the dependence of personal control on the hidden, separate thought source, such as necessity or a divine level that transcends necessity.

Myth describes this mystic state experiential insight and transformation. Religious initiation teaches and causes this transformation of the self considered as a control agent, through a series of visionary plant sessions, interspersed with study of perennial philosophy. Most modern era religion has been a distortion of this standard initiation system, reducing these concepts to a week interpretation that is based in the ordinary state of consciousness.

—-

The Apple voice recognition worked impressively well with mistakes on trivial common words and a terrible lack of recognizing the word into Eugen. Angrily screaming at Siri does not seem to help and insulting it’s intelligence. Steve Jobs would be ashamed of you for your poor recognition of the word in the agenda even when I pronounce it correctly eight different subtle ways.

Copyright (C) 2015 by Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7183 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Must factor-in censorship, Prohibition, persecution, coerced positio
It has now been 60 years since Robert Graves recognized that the basis of ancient Greek religious mythology was the use of entheogens.

He wrote that he self-censored and deliberately did not write any more on about the entheogen basis of Greek religious mythology because he didn’t want to jeopardize his poetry literature sales.

Now WHEN did Graves self-censor and halt his research on the entheogen basis of Greek religious mythology? Extremely emphasize that he self-censored *after prohibition*.

What really makes me angry is complacent false stories that everybody is telling, all the writers all the Prohibition-complicit authors, collaborationists with persecutors, are telling this bullsht story with a smile on their face that “the boomer generation initially chose to use entheogens and suddenly they chose to, as the euphemism goes, “hang up the phone”.

What a cute euphemism, evil euphemism.

All boomers at the same time simultaneously, what a coincidence, all chose to do spirituality without entheogens.

Complete utter rubbish of a just-so story!

The sword at their neck — my ancient history professor mocked this kind of textbook covering-over instead of covering history, a covering-over of history but a transparent rather obvious thin veneer of nonsense laid on top of what really happened, when you bother to take two seconds to actually think critically about what happened instead of complacently swallowing the load of story line fed to people by the Establishment press.

They were forced to “up the phone”, dammit, they were forced to! you have to acknowledge censorship! you have to acknowledge persecution, prohibition, censorship!

To tell a story anything like what really happened, you have to totally factor in prohibition.

What drives me crazy about these these cheerful censor-pleasing history passages is they don’t even mention, when they mention the “choice” to stop using visionary plants, they don’t even mention that this was forced by the Prohibition industry and was therefore no free choice whatsoever.

It’s a documented fact that the motivation for criminalizing visionary plants is to put leftist youth and minorities out of power. The New Jim Crow.

The boomers did not freely choose to stop using visionary plants.

It was the exact opposite of that. By no means did they freely choose to, as the stupid loaded, biased phrase goes, this sinisterly cutesy euphemism, “hang up the phone”, behind which there lies blood of persecution and imprisonment and destroyed lives by the Establishment opportunist deceitful self-serving and abusive strategy of Prohibition for Profit; persecution for profit.

They did not choose to “hang up the phone”!

They did NOT “choose” to stop using visionary plants! Their supposedly positive embracing of meditation is all a sham; it’s as much of a sham as Stan Grof’s deep breathing as a replacement for entheogens.

A shallow flimsy surface story, all this supposed enthusiasm for meditation is a sham, a cover story that serves to censor and obscure what really happened.

Obviously; stop telling this complete obviously horsesht story that the boomers “chose” not to use visionary plants!

*When* did they make this “choice”?

By coincidence, they all made this choice on October 6, 1966, the day that the stormtroopers bust down everyone’s doors.

What a *coincidence*! that the boomers freely “chose” to stop using visionary plants the day that the assault teams of God’s puppets of delusion, God’s delusion enforcement puppets, started putting everyone in jail that chose to use visionary plants and did NOT “choose” to “hang up the phone”– that obsequious phrase obviously so precious, so dear to the establishment press.

That evil phrase, that stupid expression, it is evil cuteness, it hides, it covers over the viciousness, it draws attention away from the extreme LACK of choice, the extreme exact opposite of choice, by drawing your attention instead to this cute phrase.

The cuteness of this phrase, it’s an evil machination.

Remember for every Tool who lets themselves be prostituted by the establishment, for every Tool who is permitted to publish their advocacy of meditation and entheogen diminishment, remember there are 10,000 other people who are voiceless and who are censored and prohibiting from expressing their opposite and genuinely, sincerely held in their heart of hearts position, not their demagogue-coerced, false consciousness pseudo-belief, which is

What the meditation advocates are expressing is a pseudo-believe that they have been compelled by force to hold; it’s not their genuine inner heart-of-hearts belief.

It’s a self-deluded belief; they believe that they think meditation is better than visionary plants, but they don’t actually believe that in their heart of hearts.

They have been coerced and tricked into thinking that that’s what they believe.

If you publish your supposed view that meditation is authentic and better than visionary plants, you are a Tool of the delusion-enforcement Establishment, and a hypocrite because you don’t in your heart of hearts actually believe what you’re claiming to believe, in what you’re complicitly working to advocate, as a collaborator, which is the Pro Prohibition position.

Meditation advocacy is Prohibition advocacy. Telling the truth would be better.

You are complicit with persecutors. And in your meditation advocacy, you have the blood of Prohibition persecution on your hands. Meditate on that, you tool.

Real people, actual people, individual humans, not the establishment corporation, hold an authentic position, that is censored by the establishment press: visionary plants are the source of religion and are effective, unlike meditation, which might be good in some way but it ain’t religious experiencing, not by a *long* shot, and to pretend that meditation doesn’t come from its superior, which is visionary plants, is to endorse fraud.

It’s the opposite; meditation is a recent artificial substitute, a phony substitute; meditation been foisted off on people by the forces of the establishment.

You “believe” meditation is effective because you been forced to “believe” that by the hypnotic power of the establishment censors, backed up by the strong arm Prohibition-for-Profit.

The establishment press churning out all these pro meditation New Age books, it’s sinister: New Age eastern meditation is a wing of the prohibitionist fascist delusion enforcement puppets.

The obsequious sinister phrase “hang up the phone” and the strong arm forced censorship that drives that has produced Ken Wilber, who opened his very first book by censoring the word “nitrous oxide” out of the great William James, who was not a bullshtter, who was not a complicit tool of what the establishment forced him to say.

But Ken Wilber got into print in Sham Hollow Press by taking, accepting, swallowing, endorsing, and advocating the party line of entheogen diminishment and editing-out, which is Prohibition with a sugar coating.

And thus we ended up with Ken Wilber, a great mind, writing rubbish that is completely devoid of any consciousness of the truth, which is Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism.

Except years later he put a little Band-Aid on his diagram saying “also: altered states”. FAIL.

The Prohibition-complicit establishment press, armed, started persecuting and censoring and jailing people.

Those many boomers who chose to not hang up the phone — two seconds of thought makes it obvious that it’s a bullsht story that “the boomers chose to stop using visionary plants” — were violently silenced, censored, eliminated, shut out.

What choice did they have?!

They had no choice in the matter at all, so stop kowtowing to the establishment censors’ press of lies and falsehoods and covering-over history.

Stop appeasing the Establishment press by pretending to go along with their vicious make-believe that the boomers “chose” to stop using visionary plants — choice my *ss.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/6450
Group: egodeath Message: 7184 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Re: Must factor-in censorship, Prohibition, persecution, coerced pos
Meditation — The official religion of the delusion enforcement automatons.


http://stopthedrugwar.org
Group: egodeath Message: 7185 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Re: Must factor-in censorship, Prohibition, persecution, coerced pos
Group: egodeath Message: 7186 From: egodeath Date: 18/11/2015
Subject: Re: 2015 International Drug Reform Conference, entheogen enlightenme
The conference starts today
http://www.reformconference.org
Group: egodeath Message: 7187 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
the Eternalism state of consciousness
the Possibilism state of consciousness

Acros/keyboard shortcuts:
esc
psc

Like all placebo ersatz substitute pseudo-religion techniques that strive to replace entheogens, meditation serves to prevent the Eternalism state of consciousness and retards the mind in the Possibilism state of consciousness.

Meditation prevents mental model transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism.

Meditators have bad character and rely on a recent artifical invention.

Witness the bad fruit produced by meditation: drug prohibition and persecution.

Meditators are just looking for a shortcut.

Fortunately the Press is committed to entheogens, so meditation advocates have no voice to defend themselves.

Meditators are rightly attacked by militarized meditation assault squads and have their property assets forfeited.

This country must conduct a War On Meditation and use Civil Asset Forfeiture and incarceration to stop this scourge of meditation from ruining our youth.

Undesirables such as minorities and antiwar leftists use meditation. They must be silenced and disenfranchised.

Twenty years in prison for the first offense if caught meditating. And their voting rights removed.

Needless to say, anyone who writes favorably about meditation, without also contradicting themselves by praising the original superiority of entheogens, will not be allowed to have their writing published. They will lose their academic position.

Any university student writing a pro-meditation thesis will be failed and not granted a degree.

Meditators have moral turpitude and are just seeking bliss. Meditation is wrong and immoral and anti-social.

Meditation addiction is a disease that we must stop by increasing the penalties for it.

We must put up border checks to stop international meditation smuggling.

Meditation dealers are trying to get people hooked. They should be given the death penalty for pedalling this poison that is corrupting our youth.

Meditators have weak character.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7188 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: Must factor-in censorship, Prohibition, persecution, coerced pos
Useful exercise
Write the familiar entheogen diminishing statements that Prohibition Press so loves like Andy Letcher, the Gnosis journal issue covering-over the entheogen foundation of Western Esotericism, and Tricycle issue covering-over the entheogen foundation of Eastern religion.

Then invert that comically extreme bias and imagine that the archons of Prohibition are instead enforcing propaganda in favor of entheogens and are sucker punching meditators instead.

Expecting a fair assessment from the Literalist OSC Possibilism establishment regarding Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism, or the meditation Establishment (Prohibitionists) fairly assessing entheogens, is like looking to the publications of the Catholic church to give a fair assessment of the merits and superiority of Gnosticism, or reading Prohibitionist propaganda to get a fair assessment of the merits of entheogens as the source of religious revelation and enlightenment.

Under the conditions of Prohibition, meditators are extremely biased.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/7187
Group: egodeath Message: 7189 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
Hephaestus’ magic hammer of interpretation forged in the fires of Vulcan’s krater of mixed wine:

Assume all religious mythology, such as:

the king drinking mixed wine, then giving himself to be betrayed, scourged, delivered over for sacrifice, and fastened helplessly to the debranched tree in order to gain new life, having seen that the cave is empty, in reconciliation with the Creator

is a comic strip describing the personal control dynamics of mental-model experiential transformation from the Possibilism state of consciousness to the Eternalism state of consciousness.

Hephaestos’ magic hammer of interpretation solves successfully all religious mythology interpretation by recognizing religious mythology as description of mental model experiential transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism; from the Possibilism state of consciousness to the Eternalism state of consciousness.

Hephaestus’ magic hammer of interpretation of all religious mythology is to read and decipher and decode it as transformation of thinking from Possibilism to Eternalism.

Hephaestus’ magic hammer of interpretation is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7190 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
Hephaestus’ magic hammer of interpretation: when you see any pre-modern writing, ask “How is this like transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism?

When you see any religious mythology or any pre-modern writing or pre-modern art, or hear a Classical Rock Muse with lyrical poetry accompanied on lightning kithara, ask “How is this like transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism?”

Acro: acronym/iPhone keyboard shortcut:

Acro:
Hephaestus’ magic hammer of interpretation
hmhi

Acro:
transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
tpe

Huge breakthrough in idea development technique: April 1987, after threw away blank books to try to be completed and finished with debugging cross-time personal control integrity, I started a new kind of notebook approach: binder filled with ruled sheets using acronyms.

This efficient idea development technique led to idea of mental constructs (MCs), mental construct processing (MCP), and led to the huge breakthrough 1/11/88, the crystalline ground of being (CGoB).

See my photo of my 1987 binder sheets at the Egodeath Yahoo group. Mixed-size all-caps, Pentel P205 engineering pencil, not incense cedar pencil alas.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7191 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
Apollo the dragon shooter is made by Eros to pursue and embrace a maiden who has been made by Eros to avoid so being embraced, and her father who created her, the river god, turns her into a nonbranching shrub.

Apply Hephaestus’ magic hammer of interpretation: how is this like transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism?

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7192 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
hmhi = tpe

Hephaestus’ magic hammer of interpretation = transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7193 From: egodeath Date: 19/11/2015
Subject: Re: Deciphered: mirror = look back at thought-source
Perseus captures attactive snake head Medusa, without being turned to Rock, by looking in a mirror: he looks at his polished shield, Greek myth shields have a Gorgon Medusa death-head depicted on them, to look back behind him at snake-shaped Medusa.

When you Orpheus look back behind you to see your maiden wife in the cave, she is turned to salt rock and pulled back into the cave, realm of nonexistent agents.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7194 From: egodeath Date: 20/11/2015
Subject: Consistency of themes, inconsistency of positions
I read the book “the immovable race: a Gnostic designation and the theme of stability in late antiquity”, by Michael A Williams, a second time.

A huge emancipation from futile presumptions: a huge takeaway for the theory of reading religious texts: religious documents are self-inconsistent.

They *are* consistently concerned with entheogen-induced transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism.

But as systems of theory and philosophy, they are pointedly freewheeling and strive to be not bound by petty chains of self-consistency.

If you expect self-consistency, you will be disappointed and failed every time.

Not just that they toggle freely between a 2-level and 3-level system, it’s WAY more freewheeling even then that.

Once you do transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism, once you have that in hand, you as liberated freewheeling writer can do ANYTHING in theory construction, with any elements, especially after 250 AD, but also in Classical antiquity as well.

Nor is there going to be found some self-consistent theory of hyper meta transrational transcendence of fatedness. Fate has 3.7 levels of [insert random gnostic bs writing here].

Is Zeus subject to the Fates? The answer is [iPhone voice transcription fails right at this point] and that’s the Truth and the last word.

So modern theorists must not waste time finding what isn’t there: consistency of theory.

What is there, in religious writings, is consistent presence of concern with the experiential phenomena of the mental transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism.

The self-consistent modern Loose Cognitive Science model, the Egodeath theory, trumps the literary riffing of nonmoderns, who are no slaves to the petty hobgoblins of self-consistency.

Thus I have extracted the signal from among the noise, the trellis out from the wild overgrowth.

What mental dynamics were nonmodern religion writers concerned with?

Do not ask “What was their consistent position?” The question has false premises.

The Catholic Church didn’t need a self-consistent theology from Augustine, but rather, a definite one that stays same from one week to the next. “Pick any inconsistent system you like, but pick one and stick with it steadily.”

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7195 From: egodeath Date: 20/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
the king drinks mixed wine at banquet, shakes and trembles in fear, prays, gives himself to be betrayed, scourged, delivered over for sacrifice, is fastened helplessly to the debranched tree, is transformed into new life, sees that the cave is empty, is reconciled with the will of the Creator, enters the kingdom of God

Hephaestus’ magic hammer of interpretation =
transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7196 From: egodeath Date: 20/11/2015
Subject: Re: Consistency of themes, inconsistency of positions
Possibilism and Eternalism are a state of consciousness, mode of cognition, not firstly an OSC-based logical systematization.

FIRST people EXPERIENCE the shift from the Possibilism state of consciousness to the the Eternalism state of consciousness, and AFTERWARDS they DESCRIBE and theorize about that experiential shift.

Sam Harris uses flimsy reasoning based in the OSC, which is the Possibilism state of consciousness, to theorize and reach a logical conclusion of a weakly conceived and abstract Eternalism model, “no-free-will”, or “determinism”.

Premodern religious writings are not built up through that approach.

They are after-the-fact descriptions of what was experienced in the ASC, which is the Eternalism state of consciousness. the Eternalism state of consciousness does utilize and bend the mind’s logical modelling and reasoning, but the Eternalism state of consciousness isn’t based on reasoning; it’s based on experiencing, which then affects reasoning.

The theoretical systems and reasoning of nonmodern religious writers reflects the experiential state of Eternalism, but imperfectly and generally inconsistently.

The result is typically mostly consistent.

The experiential shift from Possibilism to Eternalism is firstly experientially consistent, and secondly is more or less retained and modelled by the mind as a formally consistent model.

Possibilism Thinking is formed in a stable way that endures until shaken and collapsed upon experiencing the Eternalism state of consciousness, during which Eternalism Thinking is formed in a stable way that endures forever, non-dying.

The mind ends up with two modes of practical control thinking, not necessarily with a formally logically consistent description of either mode retained in the mind.

Two distinct mental worldmodels in which personal control functions in practice, yes, but not necessarily accompanied by a formally consistent model.

Two practical *forms* of cybernetic worldmodel of self, control, and time, yes, but one’s description of those two forms are not formally self-consistent.

The forms of the two cybernetic modes and experiential dynamics, as used practically, are consistent, but as explanations, the explanations aren’t necessarily self-consistent.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7197 From: egodeath Date: 20/11/2015
Subject: Re: Consistency of themes, inconsistency of positions
Neither the Possibilism state of consciousness nor the Eternalism state of consciousness are “based in rationality”.

Neither Possibilism nor the Eternalism state of consciousness “are rational”; they may utilize rationality to lock-in either mode in a stable sustained way; rationality can amplify the Eternalism state of consciousness and retain and model it, but the Eternalism state of consciousness is not based on rationality and doesn’t come from rationality; the Eternalism state of consciousness comes from loose cognitive binding induced by entheogens.

The Eternalism state of consciousness can take up rationality as amplifier, to a greater or lesser extent, but doesn’t firstly come from rationality.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7198 From: egodeath Date: 21/11/2015
Subject: Re: Matrix movie
I gave up on humans many years ago. They are hopelessly gullible and poor slow thinkers.

I write for machines of the future, because they understand, they are capable of understanding and not being gullible. Tthey’re capable of taking into account things like censorship and distortion and loaded discourse filled with presumptions.

The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence and transformation of the mental world model of time, self, and control from Possibilism to Eternalism are straightforward to program into the models of discovery researched in the book Conceptual Revolutions by Paul Thagard.

Precedents include:
The hymn “the body electric” in which the android undergoes ego death.
The Animatrix movie’s android trip scene.

It’s not that I am against humans and for machines, but rather, I have no confidence in humans comprehending and retaining my theory — humans are too stupid, gullible, slow, easily propagandized.

Look how someone as perceptive and well informed as Erik Davis take it uncritically as a fact, as a given, that Buddhism doesn’t come from visionary plants.

It doesn’t even occur to him (while he does mention Vajrayana shamanistic mythological folk pre-Buddhism) but it does not even occur to him to question the received establishment propaganda view, the unstated story and discourse premise, that meditation came from somewhere other than the visionary plants — just like it did not even occur to Terence MacLainna to open his eyes and try to look for indications of visionary plants throughout Christian history as the normal mainstream source of the religion.

Although he says “wow these go together well, meditation and visionary plants”, everything he has to say on the subject of Buddhism and psychedelics is destined for the rubbish heap like literalist biographies of religious founder figures; it will not stand the test of time, and is about to become quaint and antiquated, dead-end worthless, it will be more of historical interest: “here’s the confused thinking that people had during this transitional period when they started fumblingly asking badly formed questions off-base loaded with assumptions”, early scholarly groping in the dark, like the theory of Phlogiston that came from the dark ages of science, a hypothesis in science that turned out to be off base and a wrong approach corrected by later science, merely propagating the establishment party line of those imposters who stole the altered state from visionary plants and are in denial of where they got meditation from, because he starts off with this unexamined false premise spread by Sham Hollow Publications Inc.

Whereas I have complete assurance that machines will readily comprehend my theory and be able to walk through the discovery process of reconnection of assumptions in undergoing the revolution of mental worldmodel from Possibilism to Eternalism.

My approach has been to engineer an explanation, a model, that is directly amenable to being loaded into Paul Thagard’s computer model of conceptual revolution.

I do not care at all about persuading stupid people by organizing the evidence which is in no short supply.

We don’t need more evidence; we need clear thinking, a clear model.

We pile up all kinds of evidence until we have buried ourselves in it and we’re too stupid to organize it, to make sense out of it and see, because we’re asking the wrong questions with the wrong motivations and the wrong assumptions premised in the ways of the Possibilism state of consciousness.

An evidence-driven approach to science gets you nowhere. Siri is King. No I said Siri is kingtheory theory theory is King. (what Siri is is broken; get it together Apple)

Just like Davis book TechGnosis is valuable largely as a historical curiosity snapshot of the 1990s headspace which I dabbled with from 1988 until I talked with are you serious, who autographed my theory draft at Stanford.

It’s ironic because that was the point in time at which I parted ways with cyber cult because it was clearly a passing fad, very transient, like I called that magazine Mondo 1999 and indeed it hardly made it to 2000.

The general culture gave birth to my work but my work was in a reaction to Ken Wilber and existing motions of human potential and psycho cybernetics I investigated:

“What are the limits on personal Control power across time?”

That is the profound timeless classic question. And I had already answered that in 1988 January before I read anything about psychedelics or cyber cult.

I had read society of mind by Marvin Minsky, I had read Douglas Hofstadter go to leisure Bok.

So I only briefly engaged with cyber colt, and that was only after the breakthrough, the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.

Prior to the breakthrough I was reading Ken Wilber and one book by Alan Watts The way of Zen, not much else except engineering textbooks like control theory.

My work is serious, not a fad; what business do I have with these trendy people of this passing age? I just have to do my own thing and that is a challenge in itself; I have a self-contained challenge in 1993.

Tech gnosis is a snapshot of that passing fad and similarly the tricycle book zigzag zen also is a transient product that won’t last: it’s based on a false premise, that visionary plants are an imitation of meditation; but in fact, meditation of course comes from visionary plants — they’ve got everything precisely backwards!

On that backwards basis of assumptions unexamined, what value, what worth can this magazine zigzag Zen possibly have in the future except as a quaint historical snapshot of how backwards everone’s thinking was prior to the spread of the Egodeath theory.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.

Machines can be considered part of humanity.
Group: egodeath Message: 7199 From: egodeath Date: 22/11/2015
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
In this mythological comic strip based user manual, you are each of the characters: you are the invading alien god Dionysus, you are the modern rational king Pentheus, you are king Pentheus’ mother, you are the ecstatic maenads the votaries who are seduced to follow Dionysus.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7200 From: egodeath Date: 22/11/2015
Subject: vibrational energy morphological resonance frequency takeover
morphological vibrational energy frequency’s fight against you to absorb your efforts the spider shakes the web tuned to its resonant frequency the more you fight against the vibrational frequency’s of unity cybernetic frequency lock in the more you’re caused to tune into the vibrational frequency that you’re striving to avoid the more you say don’t turning into this particular frequency of Waverly vibration the more you cause the spider web trap net to vibrate at that harmonic energy frequency vibration the king pin Theos effort is to resist the morphological frequency shift to the Dionyse in eternity block which threatens to reduce the kings energy power vibrations feedback and Dionysus resonance wavelength frequency takes over as the mental heterodyne subfrequency vibrational tuner is forced to shift frequency lock in phase lock loop from the expected receiving channel into the interfering alien broadcast frequency phase lock loop the king’s drives to use his power energy to turn the dial to increase his capacitance and resonate at his expected power frequency but he finds that the very effort to move his hand to turn the capacitor plates causes the plates to walk into the Dionysus frequency instead hearing the alien signal and when he strives to two now out and ignore that signal he has to identify and wire up an antenna in the tree to spy on and pay increased attention to amplify utilizing an Audion tube that threatening alien signal in order to lock out and tune away from that signal he has to turn into the signal to set up a barrier to prevent receiving that signal and thus he succumbs to feedback phase lock loop take over King ego sets about his i’ll chemical transformation banquet to enjoy his power of choosing the receiver resonant frequency to monitor for any program signals of incomings threats to shut out those signals he must turn into those signals and monitor for signal vibrational interference frequencies and when he hears those and senses an alien intruding vibrational frequency that registers as a threat the king must walk into that threatening frequency and it brings it’s viral impulse resonator signal that takes over the kings tuning power capacitor turning tuning power forcing the king to lock into the intruding frequency vibrations King egos input energy he pushes into the resonator circuit causes the mental model to resonate at the intruding vibrational morphology which disempowers the first initial vibrational mode disempowering it and neutralizing the energy of its intended vibrational Lockin so the more the King works to increase his power of controlling his receiving unit the less actual affective power he has resulting in chaotic non-control of the energy vibrations antenna tangled in the tree branches when the initial resonance frequency is targeted but producing stable tuning control only when the intruding signal is selected by phase lock feedback loop so that viable control power only becomes possible when the eternity residence frequency is detected if the possibility controller king chooses to target the intruding frequency when the king tries to target his initial vibrational energy frequency the result is chaotic failure and loss of volitional control of the energy vibrational form that was expected and committed to so the only viable and actually practically available possibility vibrational resonance form is the return of the alien vibrational mode of resonance no vibrational program mode is an achievable possibility except the intruding alien volition control transmission frequency preset copyright 2015 ego death all rights reserved
Group: egodeath Message: 7201 From: egodeath Date: 22/11/2015
Subject: Re: Entheogen use constant in religion
I formulated the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture on October 15, 2002, as evidenced in this in-depth posting:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/1162

That assumes reliability and sort order of Find in the Egodeath Yahoo group today on iPhone.

So it can be written:
Michael Hoffman’s 2002 Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture.

The Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture was first formulated and published in 2002 by Michael Hoffman, the theorist of ego death.


The following transcribed by secretary Siri

the question and surprising Mistry is during the entire time of the psychedelic 60s the psychedelic 70s the psychedelic 80s the cyberdelic 90s, Erik Davis blindness as a thorough scholar of esotericism represents the strange mysterious inexplicable blindness of all those people tripping in all those esotericisms western religion western esotericism eastern religion rock music occultism and everything across the broad range that he writes about

witness this totally incriminating quote below

if Erik Davis of all enlightened people of all the people whose minds of supposedly been freed and loosened with psycholytics if Erik Davis can write such unthinking garbage such a profound total lapse and and an absolute lack of critical examination of assumptions as in this quote this quote demonstrates the total blindness of the entire era every last one of them in print was published was blocked from mentally asking about and questioning the premises behind this statement I quote:


“The paradoxes of a chemical sacrament — whose sacred states were instrumentally catalyzed by a commodity molecule”


Check the quote yourself at TechGnosis URL
http://techgnosis.com/the-counterculture-and-the-occult/


*AS IF* THE CHRISTIAN SACRAMENT *WASN’T*, IN THE EXACT SAME MANNER CHEMICAL, A MUSHROOM MIXED-WINE SACRED MEAL COMMODITY ROUTINELY ADMINISTERED THROUGHOUT OUR OWN WHITE GREEK ROMAN JEWISH CHRISTIAN MEDITERRANEAN ANTIQUITY AND SUBSEQUENT RELIGIOUS AND CULTURAL HISTORY

this was the strange and impossibly infinitely improbable fatally self defeating premise of the 1960s and the entire second half of the 20th century

you all totally blew it!! woe and tragedy!

why didn’t it occur to a single mind-opened hippie to direct their eyes and pen toward the question of the extent of visionary plant use in our own history was it Merli a matter of censorship of the establishment press but what about the underground press I’m not aware of anyone in some alternative press raising the explicit question

why didn’t Robert Graves 1955 discovery that Greek religious mythology comes from visionary plants mushrooms why didn’t we immediately raise the question explicitly the Michael Hoffman question to what extent were visionary plants used throughout our own religious and cultural history

two things to point out

Davis is making a completely profoundly unquestioned and unquestionable premise assumption that visionary plants are not common throughout our own religious history

for another thing this is very significant

his position his agreement with the unstated premise is implicit! it is implicit! it is *only* implicit! that is very important to note it is not an explicit position he is not permitted mentally to think and write an explicit position statement

he does not come out and explicitly state his assumption because he cannot he’s blinded to it he doesn’t know he’s making an assumption he’s he’s not capable of stating the position that’s implicit here his position is

I agree with the unexamined assumption that our religion that visionary plants are not present throughout our own religious history

he cannot come out and state that assumption because it is precisely because it is an unconscious unexamined assumption he’s not able it would not occur to him to state his position on the matter precisely because it is an unexamined assumption the premise that he’s not allowed to look at and be conscious of

The simpler thing that I note in review as interesting summary and observation of biased thinking the simpler point is

you will not find books in the late 20th century asserting explicitly visionary plants are not the major part of our own religious history

slightly distinct from that is the more intriguing observation

you will not find anyone raising the question the Michael Hoffman question anywhere in late 20th century books to what extent were visionary plants used throughout our own religious history

so you find a pair of most intriguing things to note

not only did nobody assert visionary plants are common in our own religious history

but also

nobody raised the question of to what extent are visionary plants in our own history

God prevented the writers eyes from pointing in that direction from looking at that question

not only did god prevent people from asserting that visionary plants are common God also prevented people from asserting explicitly that plants are *not* common in our own history and as an umbrella encompassing those blindnesses, God prevented us from raising in the first place the question to what extent were visionary plants used in our own cultural history

even when Ruck presents the mass of evidence for the utterly commonplace and standard normalize mainstream use even then God prevented him from standing back and clearly posing the question without a pre-conceived bias so that even Ruck even at the same time as he pulls up a fleet of dump trucks dumping massive evidence for thorough use of visionary plants in our own white Greek Christian history even then he presents this information within the context of *implicit-only* assertion and very frequent overuse of the word secret

he is obsessed absolutely obsessed with the word secret

carl ruck cannot form a sentence without including the word secret in it so he is diminishing at the same time as burying us in evidence for the presence of visionary plants in western history he’s diminishing out of ever-implicit assumptions he’s adhering to the constitutionally prohibitionist propaganda establishment party line assumption and forbidden to be questioned unexamined premise presumption

this is more than merrily a party line this is goes way deeper in consciousness than a conspiratorial establishment propaganda partyline this is a blindness that God has enforced

God did not permit anyone even at the same time as he inspired them to see evidence like the fresco that decorates allegros book

god did not permit anyone to take the mental stance of standing back and asking in an basic simple unbiased neutral way the literally unthinkable Michael Hoffman question to what extent are visionary plants common in our own religious history and cultural history


In 1985 as my father pointed out to me when he gave me these books by watts and Wilbur I don’t need to read a whole library filled with books it’s more efficient to read Wilbur who covers these fields

similarly we rely on Erik Davis to think for us in sweeping coverage of esotericism and visionary plants but if Erik Davis can write this garbage this complete perfect lapse of critical thinking totally unexamined preconceptions and assumptions with no thought of examining the assumptions lying behind this if Erik Davis can write this nonsense this proves that for some strange reason everybody was mentally blocked from asking the Michael Hoffman question all during the second half of the 20th century

even though their minds were loosened and freewheeling and liberated and liberal and kaleidoscopically mixing all spirituality with visionary plants during that whole time not one of them was permitted to think and write not Walsen not Robert Graves not allegro not Pineridge not MacLainna not Ruck not Hofmann not one of them was permitted not Richard Evans shelties not one of them was mentally permitted to question the underlying assumption that our own religion does not come from visionary plants throughout history

supposedly visionary plants open the mind but the bizzarre inexplicable infinitely improbable situation is that with all those open minds, it did not occur to anyone even despite Robert Graves 1955 discovery that Greek religious mythology comes from mushrooms it didn’t occur to anyone that religious mythology has always come from visionary plants

I have not found a single instance of someone proposing now there is allegro but my Wasson article demonstrates that allegro postulated the absence of visionary plants throughout Christian history despite the clear implication of the fresco that mushrooms were present not absent in medieval French chapels

allegros position was vague and unstated just like Watsons writing is curiously roundabout and indirect

you have to deduce what Watsons or allegros asserted position is because he does not come out and state what his position is he does not commit

he makes he makes it sound as if he’s specifying and committing to a position on this matter but neither of them do

neither of them are capable of directly thinking about this question the same with ditzy bubble-headed Newage spouter Terrence MacLainna

it is evident that he is mentally blocked from being able to raise the question to what extent

this is *my* question, this is the Michael Hoffman question

he’s mentally blocked from raising my question

why was I capable and able and enabled to ask this question that was unthinkable to all those people during the supposedly kaleidoscopic late 1950s through the supposedly open-minded 1990s

not one of those writers was permitted to think the question my question the Michael Hoffman question

to what extent were visionary plants used throughout religious history

everyone of those published thinkers during these decades despite the supposedly mind opening affects the supposedly free associating open-ended kaleidoscope of idea combinations

how is it possible that none of those scrambled mines liberated and opened none of them was permitted to think the Michael Hoffman question of 2002 witches to what extent were visionary plants used throughout religious history and cultural history

don’t make unthinking assumptions here everyone continued to make everyone who is major published writer was prevented from critical thinking

they were prevented from questioning the unexamined preconception the presumption that mainstream religion doesn’t come from visionary plants

the closest that the mind was permitted to come to that questioning of that unexamined assumption was the inclusion totally out of context no commentary in all not at all in the slightest integrated with the body of his book in allegro decorating the cover

and again here we see that the artists the visual artists are miles ahead of the text heads

which is why I am trying to configure Google and Bing to default to image search because text prevents enlightenment whereas lyrics and visual arts lock onto enlightenment

why is it that people who work with text in the medium of text are incapable of locking onto the signal

so you have the bogus text in allegros book asserting that only the first Christians used the mushrooms sacrament and the enlightened graphic decoration on the cover which plainly implies the presence of the mushroom sacrament within the center of Christian cultural history with nary a connection made in the text between this contradiction this art that contradicts the statements in the text

I am the first formulator the first person who’s eyes were permitted to be directed towards this question

I am the first formulator of the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture, on October 15, 2002

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7202 From: egodeath Date: 22/11/2015
Subject: Re: Entheogen use constant in religion
Clark Heinrich is the precursor to my Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture. In 1986-87 I read scrolls in Revelation as psychedelics, around 1998 I searched mushroom Christianity in the library and subsequently found Heinrich, who misreads Allegro’s position as demonstrated in my Wasson article.
Group: egodeath Message: 7203 From: egodeath Date: 22/11/2015
Subject: Re: Entheogen use constant in religion
Entheos journal issues are a must-have for entheogen evidence.

Mark Hoffman has been sitting on unpublished information for future issues, last I heard from him.

Entheos and Strange Fruit are the precursors to the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture. In that era of scholarship is James Arthur too.

These writers approached but did not explicitly ask the key question for scientific neutral historical research, of: to what extent are entheogens in Western religious history.

Strange Fruit is organized by era and brand of Western religion. Thus it implicitly poses my question.

That is a question for retrospective meta-research:

To what extent did entheogen history scholars ask the question “To what extent were visionary plants used throughout Christian history including Mediterranean antiquity?”

— Michael Hoffman
Group: egodeath Message: 7204 From: egodeath Date: 22/11/2015
Subject: Re: Entheogen use constant in religion
Toward formally announcing my date of formulating the Maximal Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures.

The field of ahistoricity is not nearly so backwards and slow as the field of entheogen history, so I might not have as strong of a claim to be the first one to propose radical ahistoricity as proposing the maximal entheogen theory. I am the first one to simultaneously propose in an integrated way:

the radical maximal theory of Eternalism (religious revelation and religious mythology is description of the transformation of the mental model from Possibilism to Eternalism)

the Maximal Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures

the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture

As this posting develops I also discover the need for me to label a certain perspective on theory: that I am the first one to propose the maximal Eternalism cross disciplinary theory, that everything revolves around transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism.

Say, a label such as “the maximal Eternalism theory of loose cognitive transformation and revelation”.

I need to separately label my three or four maximal independent theories one maximal theory in cybernetics hiMarmany or eternal ishim
one maximal theory as far as a historicity which is a bit peripheral but still mandatory and crucial to overcome to clear the way for a proper theory of loose cognitive processing and descriptions of it historically

And maximal entheogen theory of religion history

Review the four quadrants of puzzle pieces metaphor in the Jens cybernetics hi Marmany and add a history city, then define maximal theory labels for each of those distinctly:

maximal metaphor
maximal entheogens / loosecog
maximal cybernetics / personal noncontrol
maximal heimarmene/fatedness/Eternalism
maximal ahistoricity

How few labels, how few subdivisions can I have here to establish areas of my leadership in the maximal direction: I’m the first one to formulate and propose and defend in tandem, in conjunction, maximal A, maximal B, and maximal C.

the Maximal Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures

the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture

the Maximal Eternalism theory of loose cognitive transformation and revelation and philosophy of time

= Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism


Metaphorical : the Maximal Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures

Entheogenic: the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture

Eternalism: the maximal Eternalism theory of loose cognitive transformation and revelation

Latter iPhone keyboard shortcut could be metr


It is a question for research, of how much the entheogen scholars 1965-2002 asked the question (“To what extent were visionary plants used in Mediterranean antiquity and Christian history?)

I am the first one to both explicitly pose the question and answer it committing to the premise of maximal.

I am the first one to explicitly propose the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture.

I am the first one to propose that there is sufficient evidence and argumentation available to make that case.

The ability to make that case for the maximal entheogen theory is interwoven across fields for example with ahistoricity, which is another field in which I am the first one to define the maximal position:

this is what I can label today as the maximal ahistoricity theory of religious founder figures. It is a matter of searching the ego death Yahoo group to ask:

when did I first formulate the maximal ahistoricity theory of religious founder figures — that is a good question.

I am overdue to recognize my distinctive unique contribution to this field of ahistoricity by identifying the date and the posting in which I first asserted in a discernible distinct way the maximal ahistoricity theory, and I have been criticizing Robert Price and Earl Doherty for coming out with these books only one at a time saying:

“today we say Jesus didn’t exist, three years from now it will occur to us to say that Paul didn’t exist, and then three years later Moses didn’t exist, and three years later say Old Testament is all fiction, … ”

Come on slow guys, get with the program here.

I already many years ago posted and emailed y’all pointing out that none of these guys existed; the whole category is metaphor, don’t you get it it’s a whole category.

Just like to decipher religious mythology, you have to group mythemes into categories and only then you can talk about deciphering it.

The same with religious foundher figures.

The wrong approach is to debunk them in isolation one at a time while retaining by default the assumed historicity of all the rest.

No, you have to say all together the entire class of people did not exist: Jesus, Paul, Mary, Mary, Mary, the church fathers, Buddha, Mohammed, Judas, Moses, King David, Abraham, Isaac, Balaam, Dionysus, Asclepius, Hermes Trismegistos; the whole class, the whole category of founder figures, is fundamentally essentially legendary and mythological.

Don’t confuse mythological with literal. Recognize Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism.

So I recognize formally my innovation here by defining an iPhone keyboard shortcut and phrase like the maximal ahistoricity theory of ancient religious founder figures

maff

I would have to check how much I was first; Edwin Johnson made pretty broad observations, as the most radical chronology revisionist.

— Michael Hoffman
Group: egodeath Message: 7205 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation
Here I develop the definition and justification of the Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation.

I here explore dividing my innovations in inter-disciplinary theory into three groupings, which correspond with the words in the key term Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism:


Metaphorical
maff
the Maximal Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures

Entheogenic
merc
the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture

Eternalism
memt
the Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation


I doubt that it would be a great idea to define a label a maximal theory of the four primary elements according to the 2006 article my main article and another for the relatively peripheral topic of a historicity

I don’t think it would be the greatest idea to divide things up or make a maximal theory label for each of these five items these interlocking puzzle puzzle pieces:

maximal metaphor
maximal entheogens / loosecog
maximal cybernetics / personal noncontrol
maximal heimarmene/fatedness/Eternalism
maximal ahistoricity

I have always since 1987 distinguished between the subject of entheogens versus the loose cognitive state.

Entheogens & dissociation are equivalent in that entheogens are how the loosecog state (the Eternalism state of consciousness) is induced.

Entheogens (psycholytics) & dissociation (loose cognition) are functionally the same in theorizing, though they remain distinct; for example proof of that:

Carl Ruck reveals not loose cognitive binding [LCB; LMFB: loose mental functioning binding]; he reveals visionary plants in religious mythology.

That proves that the subject of visionary plants is distinct from the subject of loose cognitive binding

The latter goes within the field of cognitive science specifically loose cognitive science
Aand for practical purposes in a way so does visionary plants go into that portion of cognitive science.

But evidence for visionary plants is one thing and a theory of loose cognitive binding is something distinct from that


Another close relationship is that between metaphor and ahistoricity.

It is one thing to say to decipher religious mythology as metaphor; it is a distinct separate subject as proven by the existence of books by Robert Price and Earl Doherty that you can understand ahistoricity in some sense without understanding metaphor, how metaphor analogy refers to Entheogens revealing Eternalism.


Another distinction to weigh is: Eternalism includes self-control cybernetics and heimarmee/ fatedness.

In our weak idea so far of Eternalism, we associate it more strongly with fatedness/ time/ heimarmene than with personal noncontrol cybernetics.

This is a mistake; Eternalism should be at least as strongly associated with control breakdown and personal noncontrol cybernetics as with time and fate.

I could right now define five maximal theories, for:
metaphor
dissociation/loosecog/entheogens
cybernetics/personal noncontrol
fatedness/heimarmene
Ahistoricity

The maximal metaphor theory of religious mythology
The maximal entheogen theory of religion and culture
The maximal non-steering-power theory of cognition
The maximal fatedness theory of time, self, and control
The maximal ahistoricity theory of ancient religious founder figures

From 1988 through 2005 I could not find a good way to condense enough the theory until I asked what are just only the missing links then arrange everything in terms of those very small key subjects that are missing from writings.

First temporarily define five maximal theories then define just three to encapsulate the entirety of the Egodeath theory.

The three correspond to the most-key terms Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism:
Metaphorical encompasses ahistoricity.
Entheogenic encompasses loose cognition /dissociation.
Eternalism encompasses cybernetics and fatedness.

It seems more effective to combine everything into just three powerful maximal theories, remembered in order of the phrase Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism:

Metaphorical: the Maximal Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures; myth desribes transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism.

Entheogenic: the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture

Eternalism: the Maximal Eternalism [Maximal Noncontrol and Maximal Fatedness] Theory of time, self, control, revelation, and transformation.

The Maximal Eternalism Theory of Altered State Transformation.

[MEMT]
The Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation

Revelation, enlightenment, religious experiencing, religious mythology, mystical experiencing across all cultures — are all of these are above all and primarily one thing; all of these developmental religious psychospiritual emergency transformation processes of the hero’s journey, all are focused specifically around learning and exposing the mind to Eternalism — not just as a theory of time and fatedness, but as a theory of cybernetics, personal noncontrol, transformation of the mental model of personal control steering power.

Religious transformation against the gnostics against of the Neoplatonists is not about transcending the prison of fate that is a later elaboration and poetic arbitrary description of the release after praying after seizure

Also historically there was brand competition: later Christianity later gnosticism later Neoplatonist thought competed against each other to promise freedom from the prison of fatedness.

My simple theory rejects as an arbitrary elaboration the transcending of fate I can explain the three level system of waking to fade and then transcending fate, but it is not the most basic mathematical formula possible.

The 2-level system is mathematically superior and is certain.

Per loose cognitive science, we certainly begin with tight cognitive association binding and the Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control.

Then we certainly are exposed to loose cognitive binding, upon which we certainly learn the Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control.

After that, we are at liberty to poetically elaborate in brand competition against other systems of transcendent knowledge; we are free to make up speculative sky castles promising transcending of fate, but that is all arbitrary and is not dictated by the fundamental realities of cognitive processing that is always observed and is not arbitrary.

This is the true theory of what Cybernetics is really about: steering control power in the Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control. there are only two states of consciousness there are only two mental models dictated by cognitive dynamics everything beyond that is poetic artistic construction arbitrary manners of description.

This is what I mean by I am constructing, defining, or engineering the Maximal Eternalism theory of Mystic Altered State Transformation.

the Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation.

I now here define and redefine my shortcut acronyms isomorphically as:
merc
maff
memt

Sorting these in order of the key phrase Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism gives

the Maximal Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures
the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture
the Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation

Cybernetics is really about Eternalism, above all, which includes fatedness and a kind of non-control.

Instead of starting with confusion and complexity of make-sh*t-up Bohr QM and hyper meta transrational neoplatonism and gnosticism that has 3.7 different levels of types of fate that you escape from.

I am totally committed to defining just the Exhibit A, start here, Read Me-first theory, model, that is nothing other than the simplest possible model of tree to snake, conversion from, transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism, and stop there.

Then everyone understand may then branch out into whatever; 3.7 levels of different kinds of fatedness and different kinds of freedom, *after* we all learn this common standard simplest possible point of reference for basic rationality; this must be the most basic mathematical formula possible: simply the mental transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism.

Elaborate mind-twisting projects of saving moral culpability, being the savior of God from being the creator of evil, those kinds of freedom restoration projects come after, *after* defining the basic 2-level system:

If you are not capable of making peace with fate don’t bother going on to construct more elaborate sky castles of transcending fate will to transcend fate is to reconcile with fate

We don’t need to define a separate gnostic level above fate; we can incorporate those needs into the level that we label as ‘fate’

To reconcile with fate is to transcend fate and escape the prison of fate.

By accommodating in our mental model accommodating fate, we already transcend the prison of fate.

To make peace with the prison of fate is already to escape from the prison of fate.

We do not need, we are not forced or compelled to invent a complicated incomprehensible third level above fate.

Though these multiplication of levels is useful for describing the stages: first when we first glimpse fate, it is a prison, it is a threat, it does destabilize us and make us shake and tremble, yes, and then we have to further develop our mental model of fate to make peace with it and learn how to stand in the face of fate.

But we do not in fact have to describe this as rejecting fate or breaking out of fate — in fact such a (Gnostic and Neoolatonist and late antique Christian) demonization of fatedness and the Creator is quite likely per Ken Wilber to lead to repression, dissociation, and regression.

And it is not scientifically justifiable in the simplest possible model of cognitive science binding-state transformation of mental models.

So it is best to commit to a simplest possible 2-level system of developmental psychology multistate developmental psychology and then subdivide those two major levels into a lower level of fate and a higher level of fate.

In the lower level of fate, we initially glimpse it and are terrified and threatened and we shake and fall down and have self-control seizure.

But in the upper level of fate, actually in the further developmental stage of building our mental model of fatedness, we are as embedded in the block universe as ever but we have reconciled with that so that we can stand in the face of that fact and are no longer threatened by it.

We do not need, we are not forced to build sky castles escaping from this simple revealed mental world model.

We do not need to build complicated arbitrary escape systems with 3.7 levels of enslavement and “fate vs. Providence” and other such futile needless infinite-regress distinctions.

As Michael Williams points out in his book on instability the unshakable race, this endless multiplication of levels is not a statement about ontology and reality so much as a description of the repeated sessions of encountering gatekeepers.

You can describe this as nine levels of gate keepers or you can describe it is simply one gate, which is what I do: collapse all those sessions of scourging or suffering or burning away mortality, collapse it all into one as if into one single session, one single complete initiation.

There are only two states, two levels, as implied in the rules in Athens about not revealing the mysteries in the drama plays: there are two audiences: those who have not been initiated, and those who have been initiated.

There are sheep and goats, or two races (though Valentinian Gnosticism synthesizes three races though one of those is empty so what’s the point). See my reviews of Elaine Pagels’ first three books.

So cognitive science can only justify 2 main states and two main mental models; those aren’t for debate.

What is arbitrary is how we choose to descriptively subdivide those into stages like a series of nine loose cognitive sessions passing by nine gatekeepers that we give nine names — that’s arbitrary; it could be sliced into seven or sliced into 10.

What is not arbitrary is that there are two distinct states of cognitive binding and two distinct mental models.

The pre-moderns who map this area violate the rule of violate the scientific rule of parsimony.

Do not multiply entities beyond what is needed.

We need no fewer than two cognitive states in our model.

We need no fewer than two mental models in our model.

We do not need three levels of heaven above the fixed stars, though that might be a reasonable model of the sub stages but there really exist only two major stages according to my Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation, which is based solely and strictly within the certain and undoubted facts of cognitive dynamics in the two states of mental binding.

To try to construct a sky castle above the block universe is no longer science; it goes beyond the minimum equation necessary and everything all the model becomes arbitrary if you postulate such a level.

You just go back to the year 250 and the Middle Ages which was a giant project of freewill reconstruction project where we had to have it both ways, that God is and is not the author of evil, we do and do not have free will.

Speculating about a level above the block universe is like speculating about string theory: it goes beyond what we are forced to conjecture.

Our simple equations are sufficient and are absolutely justifiable equations.

Beyond that are conjectural and unnecessary; as Cushing asks: what would’ve happened in Physics if we had chosen the simple visualizeable route of Einstein, Bohm, and nonlocal hidden variables determinism; Eternalism?

We did not have to take the complicated unvisualizable mystifying route of the Possibilism branching multi-verse that Bohr and pop QM proferred.

We begin with the delusion of Possibilism, then we can become enlightened by the model of Eternalism that is revealed to the mind in the Eternalism state of consciousness, the loose cognitive association binding mode, which is induced by psycholytics.

1. Before the veil in the back of the mind at the wellspring of thoughts is pulled back, we have Possibilism. A temporary state that collapses when the snake is revealed.

2. After the virgin veil is torn and pulled back, then we have Eternalism.

The Eternalism state of consciousness is temporary but the Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control is permanent, leaving the mind with two mental models in in the end, regardless of the state of consciousness.

Ken Wilber emphasizes distinguishing between states and stages; I emphasize distinguishing between states of consciousness versus mental models of time, self, and control (and religious mythology).

Comparable to Ken Wilber’s stages I do discuss the transitional.

When the mind is learning and when it is transforming to develop the second, additional mental model, this includes qualifying or modifying but like Ken Wilber, I say not discarding the initial mental model.

You scourge and correct the initial mental model.

First the mind possesses only a single mental model the egoic mental model formed in the Possibilism state of consciousness, which is the tight cognitive binding State.

Then the mind learns the transcendent mental model of time, self, and control when the mind is exposed to the Eternalism state of consciousness, which is the loose cognitive binding state.

Then the mind returns to the default possible is in the state of consciousness except during banqueting, and the mature finished perfected mind after that always contains two distinct mental models: Possibilism and Eternalism, even while the mind goes between and walks in and out of the garden going back-and-forth at will between the tight cognitive binding and loose cognitive binding states, which are the Possibilism state of consciousness and the Eternalism state of consciousness.

simple. basic. end of story. End of scientific equation and efficient systematic model.

Any fewer is certainly inadequate.

Any more is arbitrary.

Mathematics dictates two level system of two *main*, definitely identifiable states, with two *main*, definitely identifiable mental models.

Everything else is arbitrary detail choices of how to subdivide those.

This is why I must define maximal:

the Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation

First and foremost and certainly, mental transformation is from Possibilism to Eternalism — *not*, necessarily, continuing on to transformation to some additional distinct level above Eternalism.

Defined correctly and suitably, Eternalism is the final stop.

We do not need to engineer some level above that and then redefine Eternalism as an incomplete stage of mental model spiritual development.

We do not need to demonize the Creator and idolize a transrational God above the creator.

That is not necessary and goes beyond the simplest scientific systematic model. And in practice leads to infinite regress, incomprehensible logic chopping (“fate vs. providence”) and multiplication needless of entities and psychological regression into naïve free will confusion just as exactly happened in 250 A.D. after the heyday of no-free-will around 150 AD.

The real winning point of my Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation is that it is instantly butt-simple to understand and model and describe. any child can understand to cognitive states and two mental models but when you introduce a third layer you’ve fallen into infinite uncontrolled regress, arbitrary, unscientific, incomprehensible, and unexplainable.

At best, a three-level system ends up fairly systematic, like Valentinian gnosticism. but for all the mess that a three-level system introduces it does not earn its complexity you have a more effective streamlined ergonomic system by sticking with what the certain facts give us the given that we scientifically model is two states and two mental models.

As soon as you add a third mental model, a spiritual level above the level of fate-imprisoned soul, or suchlike equivalent complexity, you gain huge complexity and do not gain any clarity at all; you lose clarity; it’s a backwards move, a move away from clarity of enlightenment; in other words in the words of Ken Wilber, it is a regression!

By following Alan Watts’ satori model, I have always had a far simpler system than Ken Wilber, by focusing exclusively on two ways of understanding: egoic thinking versus transcendent thinking; the egoic mental model versus the transcendent mental model.

Ken Wilber makes the mistake of following the bad judgment of other people: he constructs a complicated system (his Vedanta conception) to swallow up everybody else’s complicated systems.

I do the opposite: I make an extremely alarmingly simple system that works perfectly well and works far better than everyone else’s system and can explain the complexities of the other complex systems and why we need to throw away their epicycle corrections and needless complexities that produce delusion and confusion not simple clarity of enlightenment.

Multiplying entities beyond that moves you and everyone further away from comprehension of Transcendent Knowledge.

Part of Valentinian gnosticism was a social move: how to permit the unenlightened Christians to have their system of moral punishment and moral reward in heaven and hell, while they themselves the gnostics had a system of two races, preset.

There is a simpler way: divide people into non-initiates and initiates.

Science must explain the gnostic systems, but not use them as a guide for good advice on an ergonomic model.

It is a failure of an ergonomic design. Science is all about an ergonomic model, streamlined, maximal explanatory power by using minimal equations.

The historical benefit of that three-level confusion and hyper complexity of “transcending fate” during the Middle Ages and during the modern era did give us political individual freedoms, not the freedom of antiquity which was based on slavery, but freedom based on a society where every person is free and every person, every gender, every race has individual human rights, as makes sense because we each have a relationship directly with the Creator, not through some artificial social hierarchy artificially inserted between a person and the Creator (controller x ).


It’s false, nonsense, to say nothing is gained during enlightenment.

What is gained during enlightenment is the transcendent mental mode (Eternalism; [EMM] the Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control) and the ability to banquet in peace, with mental control stability that is able to stand and not shake itself apart during loose cognitive binding induced by psycholytic, cyberscopic plants.


It is wrong to say that the mystic state is ineffable. It initially may be felt and experienced as ineffable.

Before the mind learns the eternal some mental model of time, self, and control, the mystic state might *seem* “ineffable”, but that is just an indication that that new state of consciousness has not yet been used by the mind to construct the natural appropriate mental model, a transformation.

During the initial sessions of loose cognitive binding, or the Eternalism state of consciousness, the mind still has the egoic (Possibilism) mental model, which is suited to the Possibilism state of consciousness, but has not yet grown, cannot yet bear, has not yet developed — the mother persecuted by the heimarmene dragon control-loss threat and scourged with correction, is still pregnant with the developing new mental model that will be added to the initial first born son; the second born son has not yet been born to replace and overthrow and augment the first mental model.

*After* we understand this kindergarten simple rational foundation of mathematical formula, *then* you can proceed to dump all kinds of dirt and mud obscuring it and complicating the mind with your projects of being the savior of God from being the creator of evil, and projects of transrational freewill restoration.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7207 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Posting twice worked, to get immediate feedback
I posted identicsl messages. The first was delayed appearing at the web view so I immediately resent it a fresh thread and a copy of the post appeared immediately giving me the feedback I needed that it went through.

Su:
Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation
Group: egodeath Message: 7208 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation
Transcription corrections because Siri does not recognize the technical terms from the philosophy of time (which also should be emphatically recognized as the philosophy of personal cybernetic self-control power), ‘Possibilism’ & ‘Eternalism’:

Then the mind returns to the default, Possibilism state of consciousness except during banqueting

Before the mind learns the Eternalism mental model

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7209 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation
I am the first theorist to define and combine and integrate:

the Maximal Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures

the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture

the Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation

These formi the Egodeath theory, which asserts as the answer to life, the universe, and everything, Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism.

The only further condensation of all this wisdom that my computations produce is the number 42, which lacks clarity.

Something I struggled with greatly in 1988 and ever after words during the 90s and beyond was what to name the theory.

It’s too big to be covered usefully by a single label so the single label I use is well I think the phrase may have been formed by cyber disciple not me:

the Egodeath theory

A search within Yahoo! Groups could confirm when I first typed the phrase versus when Cyber D first typed the phrase.

It is incorrect to ask what is the title, but I have found it useful and I must continue using a set of closer to 10 different labels, which are useful in various contexts for constructing statements and comparing my ideas to the theories of other people.

I am certainly against needless multiplication of labels for the theory; however, I must not be constrained, cannot be constrained by underutilizing such labels for aspects or portions of the theory.

I have posted how all these labels relate to each other.

This is not something wrong, it’s not a problem, it is an opportunity and a genuine need.

I have a controlled number labels for the major aspects of the theory.

it is not out of control

I have some 10 phrases and keyboard shortcut acronyms and I do try to honor my 1986 work by continuing to keep alive my terminology from that early phase which I have sometimes called phase 0 terminology from October 1985 to April 1987 when my father died and I threw out my blank books and changed to using open large ruled class note binder sheets together with acronyms in April 1987.

Prior to that point, I used my first-generation terminology such as ET vs. TT — egoic thinking vs transcendent thinking.

Most likely I used only a few acronyms before leveraging them seriously in April 1987.

If I look at my 1986 classroom notes sheets from mathematics engineering classes I do think I will find occasional use of acronym such as ET and TT.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7210 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation
Terms for use in the Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation:

the Possibilism state of consciousness
the Eternalism state of consciousness

the Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control
the Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control

transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7211 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
Shamanism is metaphorical description of mental model transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism.

The transformation is analogous to healing; it is it kind of healing.

The theme of shape-shifting comes from this mental model transformation.

The snake means your preset worldline frozen in the timeless block universe, which you experience in the the Eternalism state of consciousness which is induced by visionary plants.

Your snake-shaped worldline is given to you, preset in the near future without your ability to deviate from it.

Every control steering choice or move that you make is preset in time.

You have no arms of the sort that could steer away from that; your steering is itself preset.

Against Eliade, Wasson is correct: visionary plants is not degenerate recent, but historically normal.

Visionary plants are the way that shamans use to have visionary experiencing.

All religions now recognize shamanism as their origin.

Shamanism is based in visionary plants.

All religions are based in visionary plants.

Dionysus’ panther or jaguar is the ideal hunter.

In the intense psycholytic loose cognitive binding state, the visionary state, the Eternalism state of consciousness which is induced by visionary plants, the mind first experiences and senses the Eternalism state of consciousness

At this point, the mind only has the incompatible and state-unstable Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control, the mind then proceeds to construct the Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control.

When the mind enters the loose cognitive state, the Eternalism state of consciousness, but so far only contains the the Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control, this is an unstable phase of the Eternalism state of consciousness.


The sequence of states of consciousness and mental models during the initiation process:

1. Initially the mind is in the Possibilism state of consciousness.

2. In the Possibilism state of consciousness, the mind is led to construct the Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control.


3. The mind enters the Eternalism state of consciousness.

4. In the Eternalism state of consciousness, The mind is lead to construct the Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control and to modify its initial, Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control.


5. The mind returns to the Possibilism state of consciousness.

6. The mind retains both the Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control, now with modifications, and the Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control.


The mind needs to have, to endure with control stability in the loose cognitive state, the mind must modify the initial, Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control, and must construct a new, distinct Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control.

The mind is forced by experiencing and sensation to undergo a conceptual revolution.

The Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control is a mental model based in and following from the Eternalism state of consciousness.

The mind looks for a different new suitable stable way of thinking; the mind hunts for a way of thinking about time, self, and control, and when this way is glimpsed and found, the initial sense of self as the mind hunting for understanding dies in an experience of dying.

The original self, the self model premised on the Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control, is hunted down and torn apart by Eternalism thinking.

Visionary plants induce loose cognitive binding.

Mental constructs dissociate; the mind and control-agent mental model dis-integrate.

The hunter who is hunting for the new mental model is torn to pieces and reborn in transformed form.

One life dies, the initial hunter dies and the divine transcendent hunter is born.

— Cybershaman

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7212 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Post-It Notes of highest knowledge
I may have mentioned this before – I’m the one
who informed MAPS to consider having a website. I might upload the Post-It Note from them (her) thanking me for the suggestion. Curious trivia of a pregnant point in gnostic tech history.

I might also upload the cassette tape of my recodings as Illumination Valve, the tape album titled Escape Velocity which I suspect inspired Mark Dery’s book title Escape Velocity based on my WELL postings as Hoff in the early 1990s — my first, BBS-era, pre-Internet online postings of my 1988 Egodeath theory before the Web.

I am also wondering if Erik Davis and I read each other’s WELL postings. I have printouts of all my copious WELL postings. Not sure if these got folded into my site via my giant Word file.
My favorite Word page printout I really truly should upload: an early 1990s outline of the Theory that glows.

These are papers from the past. I’m glad I posted sufficient autobiography to show how the Theory developed, what impulses it came from, what it was like, how it came to be.

I’m glad I fifugred out and reconstructed that because I had amnesia because I’m so forward-looking. TechGnosis helps remember it for us, how we got here.

Yesterday Principia Cybernetica website was not responding, so I couldn’t check on my 1997 posting of my Core theory there.

It continues to sink in how distinctive and extreme was my cultural context growing up in radio distance of San Francisco. I had a combination of advantages including my age luck timing. I was a particular focal nexus, a combination of factors that others didn’t have.

— Michael Hoffman
Group: egodeath Message: 7213 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Post-It Notes of highest knowledge
I couldn’t be bothered to walk across the street to Stanford to the major historical entheogen conference in the early 1990s. I was too busy successfully making progress in developing the Egodeath theory.

What would those conventional thinkers have to offer me? They might dull my thinking. Leary had little to offer at my university in 1988; I’m just proud that I had the classical rock radio station play Legend of a Mind and announce his visit to the university — that’s more meaningful to me than his content.

Allen Ginsberg said hi to me at the bookstore in San Francisco around 1989 but I hastened to focus on my book research.

I basically don’t believe in such social networking as in these communal collective efforts, the hive mind.

The Egodeath theory was a product of general cultural influence on one person working alone to develop a theory, using books if anything, library research, not conferences.

— Michael Hoffman
Group: egodeath Message: 7214 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Post-It Notes of highest knowledge
Reading the books around San Francisco 1987-1994, I felt like it was detritus of an explosion that hadn’t quite succeeded.

There were a lot of resources for me to repurpose and utilize for my theory but I saw the existing book says more or less failures the previous generation had its chance to grasp things and they made amends progress but then the project had shut down and I had arrived at the venue after the event had finished and basically closed they had the experiences they did the research they wrote their books and then the era finished and then I came along

And of course I wonder if every generation feel this way but it was a real snapshot in time a distinctive feeling of following after the generation following on the heels of the boomers and that’s part of reading TechGnosis is it’s written by one of us by someone in my generation. Post Boomer post 70s even where the 70s are considered the last part of the 60s which were too big to be contained in a mere 10 year period. Although the festival had closed before I arrived on the other hand it was a big festival there was a lot of detritus there was a lot of material to be repurposed available.

All these detritus artifacts of the explosion of the 1960s it was such a big explosion it took all the way through the 70s to come back down for the debris to fall back down earth and land at my feet like a big spaceship that had taken off and blown up and fallen back down. The riches of potential here that had not been successfully piece together and do something that would fly

I would have to take up these broken religions and repair them and make something that actually flies.

By 1988 it was clear the journal of transpersonal psychology was lost its way failed to be an effective take up of the technologies.

Failed to be relevant, it was a disconnect, not an answer. and everything was crushed under censorship; you had debased versions of everything: debased rock debased Esselen debased transpersonal psychology and human potential, the magic had been censored out. like listening to mediocre cover versions of songs instead of the electric authentic real thing,

it was like Dionysus play performed by squares Ville. we were going to have to roll up our sleeves, meaning I was going to have to roll up my sleeves and put this sh*t together the right way, after the doors had been closed. JTP was a surrender, giving up, whitewashing, censoring out the entheogen basis of Esalen.

All the research had ground to a halt as far as could be seen. It was all padlocked, locked down, closed, no entry

of course there was shakedown Street of the dead and I was happy recently to come across a great 1987 Summer tour steal your face shirt.

Clearly the official culture had surrendered given up white washed everything over.

The whole project had been put away in a museum of historical interest only.

But another spark of light was the new Beatles album long-awaited Sergeant peppers came out much anticipated and so I was thrilled with the audio window of compact discs into the depths of the explosion of 1967.

There were certainly those pockets of celebration of 1967 during 1987.

I was certainly enjoying Donovan on new perfect sparkly magical compact disc and Satanic majesties request.

that was exciting in the late 80s the compact disc audio; perfection at last! 86 I had somewhere in time; I had are you experienced. in 1988 I got Diery of a mad man on cd supplementing my awesome vinyl big format.

Mind culture was a whitewashed simulation like Fender guitars after CBS bought them and really truly did trash the quality it it was like cardboard imitations, it wasn’t the same at all.

That opened the opportunity for Japanese companies to make true quality guitars. My Ibanez absolutely blew away the fender quality I wouldn’t touch Fender; and I got spoiled my Ibanez was so much better I couldn’t play Fenders.

By the 1980s we had this cardboard simulation of the previous magic explosion. But metallica was finding potential riding the lightning.

I felt like I had come along after the action had come and recently gone, leaving records in historically curio journals like Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, and denatured diluted Journal of Transpersonal Psychology.

The only sign of life was Reality Hacker zine; Mondo 1999.

Classic rock had come and gone; the action was in the rear view mirror and in my lone work.

But just like the massive complete difference in the spirit of rock in 1965 versus 1966 versus 1967 1968 each year was his own universe.

Similarly the more familiar I become with 1985 through 1994 I suppose it’s hard to generalize about the mood of the time which perhaps changed every year.

Ccertainly my life changed dramatically 1985, six, 7 8 9-1990 each year was quite different in developing my work and I suppose the atmosphere of the times was changing drastically year to year and it’s hard to generalize what it felt like.

1989 was my hypertext year of needing to go to the library and be able to read books and journals that are in other libraries.

So 1988 1989 were the years of sifting through the rubble learning everything to repurpose and re-integrate it pulling gold pieces reconfigured into my theory.

— Michael Hoffman
Group: egodeath Message: 7215 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Post-It Notes of highest knowledge
Transcrip fixes

There were a lot of resources for me to repurpose and utilize for my theory but I saw the existing books as more or less failures.

The previous generation had its chance to grasp things and they made immense progress but then the project had shut down.
Group: egodeath Message: 7216 From: egodeath Date: 23/11/2015
Subject: Re: Post-It Notes of highest knowledge
1988-1997 I explicitly and consciously thought of myself not building up my theory so much as struggling to communicate it.

The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence was born like Athena out of the head of Zeus opened by the magic hammer of the festivals. (I said “of Hephaestos” but Siri corrected me.)

The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence was born complete in January 1988 or written up in a fairly clear communicable way by December 1989; by then my article drafts are content-complete.

It is easy to test that assertion by comparing my 1997 summary at Principia Cybernetica compared to my August 1988 P205 engineering pencil on binder sheets Minnesota lake draft for JTP telling them the real nature of ego transcendence, against the received view of my father’s generation.

Ego transcendence is not meditation for unity consciousness giving a permanent altered state, as JTP vaguely asserts the reigning confused paradigm as of 1988.

Ego transcendence is actually about loosening cognition and switching to the block universe mental model of time, self, and control through self-control seizure and reconfiguration in the loose cognitive binding state where we experience no-free-will.

Thoughts are preset; we have no ego control power over our future; they are given and preset.

That was my January 1988 realization in the ivy-covered computer lab having read the Way of Zen some five times and having read with disagreement Ken Wilber’s early books.

Stanford entheogens conference: I could’ve participated to learn how to communicate, but I knew that they did not have information to help build up my theory, and I was not yet ready to teach to communicate it.

My purpose of massive reading, of starting to educate myself on what peolle were writing, in 1988, was not to learn content for my theory. My content was already complete.

I was reading in order to understand what inadequate understanding and off-base terms of understanding of my audience that I would have to communicate my theory to.

I was a knowledgeable alien with vastly better technology studying the primitive benighted earthlings in order to communicate my superior technology to them.

The shut down festival of the 1960s that I arrived at too late I had not finished rather it have been shut down prematurely but the light spark of Dionysus was kept a life within Rock The Dead Metal in the college Rock band network.

Not that I arrived too late at the 1960s cultural festival, but rather, the festival had closed prematurely.

We my generation were shut out our tickets were no longer valid. We were shut out.

We were forced to put on our own unauthorized makeshift underground afterparty to continue the scholarly research on Dionysus and the nature of religion.

I was an electric kitharist. I grew up listening to my mother’s near eastern and early music and collection of classical music cassettes.

She borrowed Beatles psychedelic era cassette albums for me in 1974-5, played on a mono boombox — I had constant immersion in world music because she was a soprano singer and graphic arts student and we went to Greek dance at the college every Friday where he played multiple instruments often including Les Paul 6- string (not 7-string) lightning kithara on a Music Man amplifier which I have a photo of me moving that tube power amplifier.

— Cybermonk
Group: egodeath Message: 7217 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
The sequence of cognitive states and resulting mental models transformation

First, the tight cognitive binding state produces the Possibilism experiential mental model of time, self, and control.

Then, the loose cognitive binding state produces the Eternalism experiential mental models of time, self, and control & qualified Possibilism (typically during a *series* of loose cognitive sessions).

Finally, the tight and loose cognitive binding states include the Eternalism & the qualified the Possibilism experiential mental models of time, self, and control.


Latest good definitions/labels:

Maximal Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism
=
the Maximal Metaphor Theory of Religious Mythology (new; MMRM) — includes: the Maximal Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures, & all items in religious writings/pctures are analogies describing experiential mental model transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism.
&
the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture — groups a set of extreme assertions. eg: Approaches other than entheogens prevent mental model transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism. Maximal simplicity & coherence.
&
the Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation


This concept of Maximal applies to each major area of the Egodeath theory. No weak waffling. Strong simplest position. Not striving for nuance, edge cases, apologies, exceptions; rather, the essential basic idea only. Eg the loosecog state = entheogens = Eternalism. Don’t blur, dilute, or diffuse the stark basic maximal ideas.


Though he advocates some conception of “no-free-will”, Sam Harris likely lacks the Eternalism experiential mental model of time, self, and control, he is impure and contaminated, is still in his sin, and would be unstable and seize and egodie when exposed to the intense psycholytic state.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7218 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
Maximal Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism

new term. Maximal applies throughout.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7220 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
FEAR NOT, GOING TOO FAR; FEAR: NOT GOING FAR ENOUGH!

— Cybermonk
Group: egodeath Message: 7221 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
Wussed Out Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism

Everyone’s feelings must be legitimated and validated as a correct view.

Sentimental ordinary state-based religion is every bit as legitimate as mystic experiencing.

The Holy Spirit is an idea you read about. It is not normally experienced, so we should not set the standard as actually having a dunamis overpowering experience of the holy spirit, and that would be threatening so cannot be normal true definitive religion.

Some people occasionally have mystic experiencing through plants but quite often not.

If religious experience is negative, it is not normal and not part of what religion should be.

Religion is ethical conduct of life and an emotion of peace.

Some people experience the eternity world model but the people who don’t are every bit as legitimate.

We need a theory that fully respects everybody’s experience.

Different cultures have different religious experiences and we should not oppress them by postulating a common core revelation.

People who take religious mythology literally should be fully respected and in no way is their view incorrect or inferior, it is every bit as legitimate as metaphorical interpretations.

We should have respect for what the authorities say religion is really about.

Every anthropological theory of mythology should be considered equally valid.

The unquestionable tradition of the common people have established is ordinary state religion which therefore is the definition of what religion is.

If people find emotional forced simulated ecstasy to be their norm, it is wrong to judge that; we must hold it to be fully legitimate.

We should not teach students western classical mythology, because that encourages cultural oppression.

Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism is just one idea of what religion is about. All other views are just as valid for the person or culture.

This is the useful definition of religion and a reasonable, balanced, realistic, generous definition of Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism, unplugged, tempered by moderation and sobriety.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7222 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
Example of extreme/maximal Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism to set the bar for every element of the Egodeath theory being extreme/’maximal’: to form the simplest most powerful theory, maximally coherent, without self-contradictory waffling:

Entheogen-free meditation is a sham. It prevents mental transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism. It avoids the serpent. It remains egoic. It replaces real religion.

There is no level above Eternalism/fatedness.

All religious mythology is fundamentally an analogy for Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism; transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism.

No ancient religious founder figures exist as a required identifiable individual. Paul and Church Fathers are fundamentally empty fictional authorial tokens written and revised by multiple people.

Bohr is wrong. Einstein’s iron block universe is true.

We can know highest truth: Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism.

Mythology asserts Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism. Systems that promise transcending fate are using poetic license.

Visionary plants are the only normal way people access the mystic state throughout history.

Etc.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7223 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Fake Christianity = Fake Buddhism
Ersatz phony pretenders simulate intense religious experiencing in Eastern and Western religion.

Take your pick: simulated Eastern satori experience or simulated Christian ecstatic Holy Spirit experiencing.

They are equals in fraudulence, since the real deal has always come from visionary plants.

Authentic religion has always been entheogen-induced.

Fake Buddhism, Fake Christianity, there is no difference.

We can simply condense them into “fake Buddhism/Christianity” for efficiency.

Buddhism Unplugged is the same thing as Christianity Unplugged.

Neither is true to its authentic origin and its ongoing authentic tradition.

Entheogen-free Buddhism/Christianity is a travesty, an insult to the holy spirit of bona fide dragon satori.

The best we can say is “Good simulation effort, non-Dionysus!”

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7224 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
On each key aspect of the Egodeath theory, define a spectrum of possible positions:

At the left hand extreme end of the spectrum of potential positions is the most tepid prevaricating wishy-washy flexible blurry and defocused and compromising,

At the right hand extreme end of the spectrum of potential positions is the most extreme pure single-frequency, single resonant feedback loop lock-in, extreme definitive, radical.

Then consider the set of the right hand extreme end point of each of those spectrums for each of those key aspects of theory.

Look at that as a compact mathematical peak point like a minimum or maximum, mathematically extreme compact simple lockin like approaching infinity when you combine these extreme points together.

Let the math dictate what the position is.

Define that as the mathematically maximal theory.


Key aspects of the theory include the four puzzle pieces from the main article also a historicity; what is the mathematical extreme position on each of:

Toward making a list of the key aspects of the theory consider these key phrases:
Metaphor describes entheogens revealing fatedness and noncontrol
Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism
Metaphor/Dissociation/Heimarmene/Cybernetics
the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture
the Maximal Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures
the Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation
transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism

What is the most maximal position on a potential spectrum of positions in each of the key aspects of the theory, in a book titled “5 Views on X”?:

Key aspects of the theory:

Metaphor (analogy, religious mythology, ahistoricity, personification*, fictitious authors**, meaning of heaven and hell)

Dissociation (entheogens, visionary plants, psycholytics, loose cognitive binding)

Eternalism:
…Heimarmene (fatedness, block universe, Eternalism, nonbranching possibility, worldline, Reformed theology [God author evil?])
…Cybernetics (noncontrol, control seizure, trap, feedback loop lockin, control chaos)

For each of those key aspects of the theory define the spectrum from tepid wishy-washy moderate mild positions all the way to the extreme maximal position.

Then define the maximal theory as the combination of the maximal position on the spectrum for each aspect.


*’Personification’ means the way that every character is an aspect of control agency during the process of transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism:

Every character in the story of Dionysus Bacchae

Every character in the story of the passion of Christ

Every character in the tauroctony

Every character in the villa of the mysteries comic strip

Every character in Balaam riding the donkey on the vine path to the angel of death to curse then to praise the Israelites

Every character in the diagram of the woman on the altar praying to Zeus who has the clouds extinguish her with people lighting fire to the altar

Every character including the ram in Abrahams’ sacrifice of Isaac


**’Fictitious authors’ means Paul and the church fathers and Moses as author of texts. This is an empty author name behind which anybody can write for example here I utilize the Paul fictitious author:

Dear churches of Christ in Phoenix, Tacoma, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, greetings to Bob and Timothy and Dave and Martha from your brother in Christ, this is me, Saint Paul The Apostle. The truth is, Maximal Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism.
“Guidance systems break down
A struggle to exist, to resist
A pulse of dying power in a clenching plastic fist”
Women should have their heads covered. Slaves, obey your masters. Let him be accursed who changes a word or even a single letter of this letter, I give you my word this is me Paul writing to you, signed, yours in Christ,
— Saint Paul The Apostle

‘Fictitious authors’ is a subset of ‘ahistoricity’ (of ancient religious ‘founder figures’), which is a subset of ‘metaphor’.


In the book “5 views on the historical Jesus”, Robert Price represents the extreme radical view on Jesus: ahistoricity, though I am more extreme than that the church fathers are empty authorial figures, as Robert price ought to know from Edwin Johnson’s The Pauline Epistles Studied and Explained (1894).
http://egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm

I have clearer thinking than Price and Carrier and Doherty because of my incisive saying that cuts to the true key point for defining what it means to say “Jesus didn’t exist” or “Paul didn’t exist”:

There is no single individual identifiable person on whom the Jesus figure depends; without whom the Jesus figure would not have been formed.

So it is completely moot if you point to some schmuck and say that guy was “the” real source of the Jesus figure and therefore he constitutes the historical Jesus — Rubbish! Arbitrary!

There’s either 0, 1, or many sources and saying there’s zero is the same thing as saying there’s many.

To say there’s no Jesus is the same as saying that there’s many people who were the source of the historical Jesus.

What you cannot say is it there is one a single distinctly uniquely identifiable source.

The Jesus figure is a conglomeration fundamentally.

It’s completely missing the point to point to one person you can pick out; you might as will pick out anyone.

There are thousands of people you could point to and say he’s “the” real kernel of the Jesus figure.

If *he* is, then so are these 10, 20, hundred, 200 other guys as well, by the same token.

You can have zero, or many, kernels of the historical Jesus, but what you cannot have is one single identifiable kernel, a single identifiable person without whom the Jesus figure could not have been formed and would not have been formed; that’s what we do not have.

We can have zero historical Jesuses or many but what we cannot have is one; that’s what it means to say there that “Jesus didn’t exist”, which is a vague concept when you pull it apart.

You have to define in the way I have done what it must mean to say that Jesus didn’t exist what does that mean, and what does it not mean?

The character is fundamentally and essentially a conglomeration, a construct, regardless of whether you can point to some individual or some one of 10, 20, or 100 individuals.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 7225 From: egodeath Date: 24/11/2015
Subject: Re: Shamanism is transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism
I herein add a middle layer of the STRUGGLE PERIOD with Eternalism and this way the reconciliation is equivalent to transcending fate, without any need to postulate a model of time above or after Eternalism.

Major post, and an example of how mythology beneficially shapes my core nonmythological non-metaphorical theory or at least shapes how I present it.

When you look only at the endpoints of initiation, you go from perfect naïveté to complete initiation (transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism) but that struggle in the middle has to be accounted for.

So although there are only two levels, two models of time and control, however there are three mental stages or eras in your growing up:

first the era of naïveté (developing the the freewill Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control)

then the era of STRUGGLING to switch your mental model to the Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control

and then the era of maturity where you enjoy the use of both mental models.

I said Ken Wilber had a complicated 10 level system and I have a maximally simple two-level system.

but now I need to present it as three stages to move between two mental models.

The core ego death theory needs to be three stages to move between two mental models. Prior to initiation; then the initiation series; then the perfected stage forever — that’s *three* stages that the core theory must represent as such. To move between *two* mental models.

There are only two mental models (Possibilism then Eternalism) but to get from the first to the second involves the journey, the struggle period.

You end up with two legs not just one but you negate our qualify your first leg your first mental model so you end up with two legs not just one but the first leg limps.

You become the limping king.

Before you start your journey you only have one leg, you are a child having one leg and it is a good leg for the time being.

You only have one mental model, Possibilism, and you have not yet corrected and negated and repudiated that model and have not seriously grappled with the fatal limitations and flaws, the self contradictions in that model.

I have subsumed
the Maximal Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures
as a subset of the even newer term
the Maximal Metaphor Theory of Religious Mythology

So I have, arranged in standard order of “Metaphor describes Entheogens revealing Eternalism” or “Metaphorical Entheogenic Eternalism”:

the Maximal Metaphor Theory of Religious Mythology
… the Maximal Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures
the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture
the Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation

the Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation rejects multiverse, Copenhagenism in QM, Bohr; and rejects the 3-level system of: naïve free will; then awakening to fate; and then transcending fate; rejects a level above fate because all we know from loose cognitive science, which I am the definer of, is that:

The mind begins with tight cognitive binding,
which produces the Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control.

Then the mind encounters loose cognitive binding,
which produces the Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control (including a qualified Possibilism model).

Then the mind freely moves between tight and loose binding, retaining both models.

We do not know, loose cognitive science does not report that the mind moves on after the Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control, to continue on to some model of time and control that is above and beyond Eternalism.

The philosophy of time and control offers only two positions (and I am ignoring stupid irrelevant Presentism): Possibilism vs. Eternalism.

There is not a model within the philosophy of time that is transcending of and above and beyond Eternalism.

The ancients agree as diagrammed in mythology they agree that the mind in the loose cognitive state moves from initial Possibilism to Eternalism. But not instantly.

Then later after the heyday of no free will we have clear diagrams of transcending fate such as:

Ptolemaic cosmos where the goal is to not only reach the fixed stars but punch through the sphere of the fixed stars, which definitely depicts transcending fate.

We certainly can have a clear distinct idea of transcending fate.

And we have Christ pulling the saints out of the purifying furnace of the serpent jaws of hell, which can suggest transcending fate.

Christ sets you free from the prison of sin or the prison of heimarmene.

The super transcendent superGod frees us from the fate-prison controlled by the low Creator demiurge.

It is possible to treat the above “2 states giving 2 models” sequence as the given data to be explained, the scientifically observed data that needs to be explained and organized by theory, which I have done.

This simple two-states-only, or two model only, theory successfully is capable of accounting for the mythological themes of later antiquity the theme of “transcending fate”.

The two phase model in my theory is capable of accommodating the idea, the theme of transcending fate.

The theme of transcending fate implies or amounts to a three level system:
naïve free will in tight cognition
then loose cognition giving no free will
then loose cognition giving transcending fate


My two level system which is based on observed lose cognitive science data reported by everyone accommodates the three level system which is implied by the theme of transcending fate:

tight cognition gives naïve free will thinking.

Then loose cognition gives Eternalism thinking: seizure-prison. Struggling to control in a way that is still polluted by naïve free will control power thinking.

Here we may place the series of loose cog sessions initiation sessions; Jesus being baptized, betrayed (false control-claim demonstrated), scourged, Jesus trembling in fear and apprehension after drinking the mixed wine.

Then loosecog gives Eternalism thinking: seizure release and successfully accommodating eternalism: the deliberate formal sacrifice of your childish thinking bringing reconciliation with your higher thinking (which includes higher experiencing and higher rationality to model that experiencing).

Here we may place the “final” session, a full realizationt session and subsequent peaceful banqueting sessions (the completed crucifixion on the debranched tree and the rebirth in the rock cave; and ever afterwards the wedding banquet in heaven; ability to go in and out of the gated garden of Apple) enjoying loose cog now with always the sacrifice for reconciliation in mind comprehended and affirmed sacrificing your freewill power claim to be fully rational and to be amenable conformant with the loose cog state.

All of the latter control transformation dynamics in the loose cognitive state can all be placed with in the second phase that cognitive science shows us which is the loose cognitive state with the Eternalism mental model of time, self, and control.

There is no need to literally form a realm above fate above and after Eternalism.

However here now I have identified a good way of dividing the process of transformation into three:

Tight cognition gives naïve free will Possibilism
Loose cognition gives a period of transformation into Eternalism
Loose cognition as well as tight cognition is able to sacrifice or repudiate the free will error, the Possibilism Sin, restoring stability peace and reconciliation — which is equivalent to in the three level system, transcending fate! QED

I have succeeded at fitting-in the mythological theme of “transcending fate” within the scientifically justified 2-level-only system of moving from Possibilism to Eternalism without going any further and without postulating any model of time and control beyond or after Eternalism!

Speaking as the voice of Science I can thus tell you the facts which is that there are two models of time and control.

Loose cognition switches the mind from the one gradually to the other and upon completion, further enjoyment — what has been depicted in mythology as “transcending fate” but that theme really in fact means and refers to none other than *reconciling with fate*, with the simple-to-visualize, simple-to-specify, model of time and control called Eternalism.

Eternalism is initially a threat that is incompatible with our psychological constitution, but then the thing to do is not reject fate — that’s just repression and regression.

The thing to do is to successfully accommodate fate so in a fact we have a series of two mental takes on Eternalism:

first the mind makes of Eternalism a threat, struggle, a prison

and afterwards the mind makes of Eternalism reconciliation and perfection, The kingdom of God.

After the 150 AD heyday of Eternalism/heimarmene, Everyone wanted after 250 A.D. to form a three-level system will the gnostics wanted to take her generally negative you though a negative view of fate and the created world, although Michael A Williams in his 1985 book The Unmovable Race disputes that gnostics were against the created world.

There was some dispute about whether to take a negative stance toward Eternalism/fatedness.

At first the mind is in emnity with the snake.

But then the snake on the debranched tree of Moses heals and saves from snakebite.

First the snake bites you — this is when you are struggling to accommodate in your mental model Eternalism.

And then the snake heals you when you achieve accommodation of your mental model with Eternalism.

It just now occurred to me — I deciphered a theme: that when Herakles is battling the hydra snake monster, a crab bites his heel: this refers to negating or qualifying our initial mental model, the Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control.

As I recently observed the way that these are definitely deciphered is by grouping themes into groups and asking what does the category theme mean across all of these stories.

Here we have an obsession a category of foot of injured or weakened foot 1 foot not both but one.

Deciphered:
Achilles’ heel is the need, the forced need, to qualify and negate the initial one of our two mental models of time and control: Possibilism.

Compare the firstborn son to the injured or bad leg: first the first, God-disapproved boy is born, but then he is overthrown by the second, God-approved boy.

We can specify that the injured leg is the first leg and that the good leg is the second leg, where each leg means a distinct mental model of time and control.

It is even insightful to refer to it as “a firstborn leg” which is the bad leg and “the second-born leg” which is the good leg.

So in Moses’ snake on a pole, we can see a implicit three level system which yet conforms with what science shows us which is a 2-level system ie moving from one model of time to another.

During the period of struggle we lead up to finally aborting our initial mental model, repudiating it, qualifying it.

Egoic thinking is destined to be aborted near the end of the series of struggles in loose cognition.

My radical commitment to only two levels and refusing to go to a third level has paid off; the Maximal Eternalism Theory of Mental Transformation.

In Eternalism consciousness, you struggle for awhile to transform, then you transform.

While you are struggling to transform, fate is acting as a prison.

You are a prisoner of the creator of the fate-ruled world.

When you have successfully transformed, that success is equivalent to transcending fate — but this is critical for science for a scientific theory the latter still remains with the Possibilism-to-Eternalism model.

I am not postulating some philosophy of time that’s transrational — depending on how, there’s an opportunity here to define ‘transrational’ such that when the mind is reconciled with Eternalism, you have reached a transrational state

So all these ideas of “transcending fate” to have hyper ultra super transrational, can be folded into the scientifically justified observed data of moving from an initial model NOW WITH THE THEORY REFLECTING A TRANSITIONAL PERIOD OF STRUGGLE/WRESTLING WITH/AGAINST Eternalism, a period of struggle to transform to the final model; and then finally the final model which is equivalent to the theme of transcending fate but we are not actually proposing any level beyond Eternalism. We are moving from you could say lower or preliminary Eternalism to hire and final completed Eternalism:

1. Tightcog. Possibilism.
2. Loosecog. Struggle with Eternalism.
3. Loosecog. Reconcile with Eternalism.

There I’ve just succeeded at a mathematical transform between the two level system and the three level system. There are only two models of time there are only two mental models of time in control but there are three periods regarding transformation from the first model to the second model.

First you have the first model of time then you struggle with the second model of time then you succeed at the second model of time.

We have three phases of mental activity to progress through two models of time.

That region above the fixed stars in Ptolemaic mystic ascent cosmology does not represent a model of time that is higher than Eternalism.

What it can excellently and must be scientifically taken to represent is the mind having accommodated Eternalism, as opposed to the mind initially struggling to accommodate Eternalism, which struggle is represented in the ascent through the planetary spheres and the entering of the fixed stars at which the child is sacrificed by Saturn.

When you are working up to the sacrifice and approaching it your grappling with Eternalism, wrestling all night with the angel and coming away limping, meaning that your freewill mental model is now *qualified* (restricted) so the two legs of the limping king: the sturdy lag is Eternalism, and the limping deformed weak leg is *qualified* Possibilism.

After enlightenment, we still have and rely on our deluded irrational childish Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control.

Hera threw Hephaestus out of heaven because of his deformity (his now qualified Possibilism thinking).

In retaliation he engineered a throne which trapped her and all the gods were in dire straits and Dionysus had to give mixed wine to the engineer god Hephaestos and bring him with deformed foot (of qualified Possibilism thinking) on a donkey ride trip to Heaven to release the queen of the gods.

A god represents true control agency maturely understood.

This God is represented with two distinct different legs, one crippled leg — how is this like transformation of control mental models from Possibilism to Eternalism?

You end up with two distinct models of control one which is crippled — that would be the egoic model of control and a time.

After the series of loose cog sessions, you still have your initial thinking but now it is “negated” though utilized and relied on.

Sso what is really lacking in my two model / 2-level system is representation of the transitional turbulence period/duration, the nine months of pregnancy during which the dragon persecutes the mother.

First tight cognition gives naïve freewill Possibilism.

Then initial sessions of loose cognition give A PERIOD OF STRUGGLE with Eternalism to build and trying to grapple with the angel and struggle to reconcile without yet succeeding at learning, like riding a bicycle, learning the experiential Eternalism model.

That phase is the bulk of developmental psychology properly understood as struggle in loose cognition.

Thirdly the mind succeeds at reconciling with Eternalism in loose cognition.

This is equivalent to transcending fate — and this is fully compatible with what loose cognitive science observation shows us, that the mind learns to accommodate lose cognition and the Eternalism it reveals.

The mind has learned how to routinely betray the false claim of freewill power (the Possibilism experiential mental model of time, self, and control), routinely observes the sacrifice, we routinely receive communion of the mixed wine remembering and repeating the sacrifice of the false claim to freewill power, every time the mature Christian takes banquet in remembrance of the sacrifice, is practicing going through the motion of repudiate your freewill claim to power, that you may have peace and reconciliation and retain purity of thinking of advanced loose cog state advanced rational thinking, freed from the contamination pollution that raises the furies/panicked horses of Possibilism.


My source for this scientific observed data to be explained (tightcog gives Possibilism thinking, then loosecog gives STRUGGLE for Eternalism thinking, then loosecog gives Eternalism thinking) is the trip report hymnal canon including iron maiden, Blizzard of Ozz band, Rush, Metallica, and pop sike singles reporting to us from the experiential window of 1967. Supplemented by Greek mythology and bible mythology and shamanism and world mythology.

Copyright (C) 2015 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Unknown's avatar

Author: egodeaththeory

http://egodeath.com

Leave a comment