Contents:
- Correctly Redefining and Recognizing the Rules and Goal of the Game, the Basic Game-Layout Premise
- The Standard Solution to Control-Loss Enlightenment: Pray and Mentally Sacrifice
- Conflict of Interest: Griffiths Allows Questions About Depression, but Silently Censors Questions About Control Loss
- Using Depression Effects to Cure Depression?
- Manic Depression Is Touching My Soul
- Article: “Human Hallucinogen Research: Guidelines for Safety” (Roland Griffiths 2008)
- Silently Omit the Non-Depression Challenge, of Being Drawn into the Threat of Loss of Control
- Oregon Psilocybin Board Follows Griffiths’ Lopsided Censoring of Control-Loss Risks
- Fact Sheet: Oregon Psilocybin Services
- Rare Proof that the Carl Ruck School has Heard of the Existence of a Mushroom Other than Secret Amanita 🤫🍄 😲
- Article: Entheogens (Psychedelic Drugs) and the Ancient Mystery Religions (M. Hoffman 2015)
- Article: Entheogens in Ancient Times: Wine and the Rituals of Dionysus (Ruck 2018)
- Lots of Psilocybin Evidence, Masked by Obsessive Monofocus on Secret Amanita
Correctly Redefining and Recognizing the Rules and Goal of the Game, the Basic Game-Layout Premise
The necessary reframing of “mitigating the risks” is not entirely new, but this corrected organization is far more organized than the existing clinic model, and Roland Griffiths does not understand the game.
The clinicians don’t understand what the game is, what the goal of the game is, and what the role is of the encounter with the shadow monster dragon.
It turns out that the shadow monster dragon is the very gate – and yes people say vague things along these lines, but the Egodeath theory is specific.
I explain exactly how the so-called “shadow” is precisely the gate which you have to go through.
And I explain how you go through the gate: by shifting weight from your {left leg} to your {right leg}, as our religious predecessors emphatically depict and communicate to us.
It is nonsensical to think in terms of “avoiding the shadow” and simply “avoiding” so-called “adverse reactions”; you don’t understand what the game is.
The game is to go through the dragon-guarded gate to reach the Gnosis treasure and gain the ability to routinely go into this state.
You certainly cannot win the game and gain the ability to be in the high-dose Psilocybin state if you think in terms of “avoiding the gate”; you have to go through the gate, not avoid the gate.
The “shadow” is the whole damn point of the whole thing: transformation through the encounter with the shadow monster dragon threat.
The “shadow” is precisely that which transforms you to make you immune to the shadow monster dragon, in your dragon-transformed, amenable form.
The Standard Solution to Control-Loss Enlightenment: Pray and Mentally Sacrifice
Life-saving, gnosis-delivering tip from & for those in the jaws of the attraction to the Control Vortex of probing control-loss to transcend it:
Pray that you will be made to put trust in the higher level of control and be given wisdom, Transcendent Knowledge.
That is the crucial important solution information, which the Griffiths group cannot deliver, because – insofar as their CEQ questionnaire represents – they refuse to even acknowledge the existence of the problem of the threat of loss of control:
Submit; surrender; repudiate and jettison the claim to monolithic, autonomous control power steering in a supposed tree of branching possibilities.
Jettison like mushroom Jonah, to stop shipwreck
From the Thomas Hatsis 🍄🧙♂️ gallery of evidence of Psilocybin in Christian art:
Rely on eternalism-thinking = {right leg}.
Repudiate habitual reliance on possibilism-thinking = {left leg}.
url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/06/29/hatsis-gallery-of-mushroom-imagery-in-christian-art/
Repudiate Childish Possibilism-Thinking, Rely on Eternalism-thinking.
Conflict of Interest: Griffiths Allows Questions About Depression, but Silently Censors Questions About Control Loss
Conflict of interest renders Roland Griffiths’ group’s CEQ questionnaire work lopsided, selectively scientific – rendering it unscientific.
No amount of impressive, science-styled posturing and phony put-on of fake math with gigantic gaps in it is going to save you from delivering an unscientific result, because of biased and selective inventorying of the challenging effects, omitting and opening up a gigantic barn-sized gap, a hole, a vulnerability in the side of the clinic.
🏥 🍽 🐉
Now the Oregon Health Authority Psilocybin board is being misled by Griffiths’ lopsided, mostly scientific research findings, which have silently censored out the loss of control as a challenging experience.
The Oregon Psilocybin Advisory Board is depending too much on Roland Griffiths’ presentation/ research articles, which is lopsided and biased in favor of recognizing depression but not at all recognizing control loss as a challenging experience.
The Oregon board suffers the same biased blind spot: they expect and desire to find questions about depression effects, and they do not expect or desire to see questions regarding control effects, so they happily follow the Griffiths group mis-leading the field, because that’s the direction they wish to go, to invest in.
https://www.atmajourney.com/albertas-first-full-service-psychedelic-therapy-clinic-opens-in-calgary/
🦵🐉🚪🦵💎🐍🪨🌳🍄😇👑🏆
Relying on left leg, can’t pass through the dragon guarded no-free-will gate.
Rely on right leg to get treasure, snake worldline frozen in block universe rock.
Purified, now able go in and out through garden gate to eat fruit of immortality from tree of life.
Using Depression Effects to Cure Depression?
One has to wonder about the wisdom of prescribing Psilocybin, which causes depression effects, as a magic cure for depression.
Griffiths is OK with tackling this challenge to his narrative; at least the word ‘depression’ in the questionnaire doesn’t introduce a new, alien type of challenge (control loss effects) that’s beyond Griffiths’ ability to fathom and additionally take on and spin away in his marketing PR.
An irony is, within this phony posturing poser wannabe “scientific” style of writing, they talk about “control” all the time, constantly – but in the wrong sense.
The word ‘control’ appears many times within the Oregon board’s summary of research findings about risks and benefits, but they never use the word ‘control’ in the sense of effects, of the threat of loss of control.
Previous, general psychedelic experience questionnaires include questions about the word ‘control’.
What percentage of the previous questionnaires contain the word ‘control’, in the sense of the threat of loss of control, eg. the ‘marionette’ question that’s listed in the CEQ article from a previous questionnaire?
Hey Griffiths CEQ article: what is your scientific assessment of the challenging experience which people reported, about experiencing being “a helpless marionette” “unable to make even minor decisions”?
🦗 🦗 🦗
Song “Little Dolls” by Bob Daisley (psychedelic esotericist) & Ozzy
url https://youtu.be/T66Dr3p32PY
url https://youtu.be/fA79lLwRYTY
Song “Twilight Zone” by Peart/Rush (his first live performed song was “Ergot Forever”)
In all of the questionnaires which the CEQ article draws from: how many questionnaires have how many questions, or even entire question categories, that contain the word ‘control’?
Griffiths’ group chose to include the depression questions from previous questionnaires in their Challenging Experiences Questionnaire, but they chose to silently omit and censor and not mention the questions regarding control and the threat of loss of control, from their CEQ.
Griffiths’ CEQ questionnaire is designed to highlight depression, and censor and cover up control-loss problems.
Manic Depression Is Touching My Soul
url https://youtu.be/9nnGtB-PSw4
For extra manic, play at 1.5x speed, which I accidentally did. 😵 🏎 💨💨
Griffiths’ Big Pharma Psychedelics Industrial Complex is financially invested in selling depression services – never mind the song “Manic Depression” by Hendrix – and is willing to openly admit and work with the fact that psychedelics cause depression, as a Terence McKenna experienced.
Good job regarding that one topic, depression, but it’s like the book by Freke & Gandy, The Jesus Mysteries, where the publisher dictated to them: you’re not allowed to cover more than one controversial topic in a given, single book.
You are not allowed to cover both the ahistoricity of religious founder figures and also cover psychedelics/ entheogens in our own religions’ history.
Griffiths is not allowed to let on both that psychedelics cause depression and that psychedelics cause control loss. So, control-loss questions had to go, silently and covertly.
Psychedelic Industry 101: How to Get Involved
Join our “burger with one eye open” group. Our Pop Sike Cult imagery proves that you can can put full trust in our Mystery Agenda.
The Big Pharma Psychedelics Industrial Complex needed to reduce the footprint of the challenging effects from Psilocybin, so the loss-of-control effect had to go, had to be written out of the narrative, omitted from Griffiths’ very impressive 😲😑 “scientific”, hyper-formalized, poseur posturing affectation, sciencey-styled CEQ article, and their “safety” article.
Deleting data is the opposite of science and is an abuse of science.
Roland Griffiths has been called out in person, on camera publicly, very prominently for deleting scientific data and omitting and suppressing it.
Griffiths silently ignored and left out the reports by mystics and by other psychedelics users.
Charles Stang accused Griffiths of this; so Griffiths pointed out his 2008 CEQ, claiming that that presents negative effects, which it does; however, Griffiths’ CEQ silently censors out the major effect, control loss.
Article: “Human Hallucinogen Research: Guidelines for Safety” (Roland Griffiths 2008)
I moved this major section out to be its own posting. See:
Human Hallucinogen Research: Guidelines for Safety (Griffiths) https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/19/human-hallucinogen-research-guidelines-for-safety-griffiths/
“Guidelines for Safety” has some coverage of what amounts to control-related challenges – unlike the 1-page CEQ, which omits them, silently.
The coverage is inadequate to meet their basic safety bar – or to deliver successful gnosis/ transformation.
– Cybermonk, December 19, 2022
Silently Omit the Non-Depression Challenge, of Being Drawn into the Threat of Loss of Control
Janikian’s 2019 book Your Psilocybin Mushroom Companion focuses on the threat of loss of control.
But the CEQ silently omits control-related questions.
And the Oregon health board eagerly lapped up this reduced, narrowed artificial re-telling which, as Charles Stang scathingly pointed out, completely fails to match the data archive of mystic negative experiencing evidence.
Jan Irvin exposed Terence McKenna for stopping use of Psilocybin while still, fraudulently continuing to present himself for years as if he were using Psilocybin, but he had stopped because of depression.
Roland Griffiths admits in his questionnaire that psychedelics cause depression, and that that’s a challenging experience.
Roland Griffiths is trying to sell you his depression-curing services through Big Pharma; the Psychedelics Industrial Complex. Griffiths doesn’t want to also get involved in the control-loss challenge.
🦵🐉🚪🦵💎🐍🪨🌳🍄😇👑🏆
Loss of control and depression are both major challenges, but Griffiths only wants to take on the challenge of depression, and he does not want to get involved with the problem of control loss.
That’s why Griffiths silently and thus anti-scientifically, covertly deleted questions that contain the word ‘control’.
It was anti-scientific for Griffiths to be silent when he deleted the questions about control from his Challenging Experiences Questionnaire.
Griffiths’ silence about omitting those questions, which other previous questionnaires include, demonstrates a conflict of interest, and the opposite of science; a selective, lopsided, biased, inconsistent abuse of science, and the whole posturing and pretense with all this official formal apparatus used, in order to cover up his anti-scientific, silent and covert deletion of ‘control’-related questions.
The scientific approach does not mean something that you only use when it pleases you, when it gives you the results that you want (depression effects) and then you provide just a fancy, very impressive, very mathematical, very formal, lots and lots of citations bull shiite phony posturing.
Deception, a lie of omission to omit control-problem effects, is the opposite of science. Using science selectively, pick-and-choose, is abuse of science.
Jordan Peterson instantly and vigorously called out Griffiths’ bunk unscientific meditation claims, pointing out that there’s no data to support Griffiths’ exaggerated meditation claims, which Griffiths tried to slip-in as a confident aside on which to build an argument.
Charles Stang totally called out Griffiths hard, 100%, for his grotesque misrepresentation of the breadth of mystic experience, censoring negative mystic experience.
Peterson and Stang were not having it, not even for one second; they instantly called Griffiths out absolutely, in his face, point blank in public on camera.
Oregon Psilocybin Board Follows Griffiths’ Lopsided Censoring of Control-Loss Risks
Article: Oregon Psilocybin Advisory Board Evidence Review
In the “Scientific Literature Review” document from Oregon Psilocybin Advisory Board Evidence Review and Recommendations:
There’s no mention of the experience of the threat of loss of control.
And there’s no mention of the solution to the problem: surrender/ submit/ accept the loss of control; approach the dragon monster and ask it “What is the lesson you are teaching me?”
– even though the body of Griffiths’ 2008 article “Guidelines for Safety” lists these safety instruction techniques (albeit at an barely adequate, sub-scientific, folk level of explanation).
The article vaguely mentions ‘fear’ 3 times.
This scientific literature review never mentions experiencing the threat and fear of loss of control – even though Roland Griffiths’ 2008 article Challenging Experiences Questionnaire quotes other questionnaires’ entire category of questions about sensing a threat of loss of control.
How come Michelle Janikian’s 2019 book Your Psilocybin Mushroom Companion knows very clearly about the problem of fear of loss of control, and I know about it, and everybody knows about this problem, as Janikian shows, but Griffiths is trying to cover it up?
Janikian’s book: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/07/standard-hazy-trip-advice-on-surrender-to-shadow-trust-submit-and-let-go-of-control/
In the CEQ article, Roland Griffiths is openly caught red-handed covering it up, that the main shadow terror from Psilocybin is the experience of the fear of loss of control, of the threat of loss of control, but he hides this when crafting his CEQ questionnaire.
Griffiths’ CEQ article quotes other questionnaires and shows that they address the effect of the threatening fear of loss of control, and yet his own questionnaire omits any questions about loss of control.
As soon as I saw the massive math and hyper-formal styling in the CEQ article, I knew it was bunk.
The CEQ is bunk and the CEQ article is bunk, because they hide and silently omit the number one, well-known challenging effect of Psilocybin, which is covered in other questionnaires: the threat of loss of control.
And that threat is discussed in the body of the “Guidelines for Safety” 2008 Griffiths article – albeit in a sub-scientific, unclear, disorganized way, piecemeal and fragmented barely adequate for temporary safety and ineffective and even regressive as far as achieving the goal of completing transformation and initiation into gnosis. the adult form mental development.
The only way to reach safety, together with accomplishing scientific knowledge and enabling research of this domain, of this realm of experiencing (Psilocybin Mythemeland), is by coherently organizing this Transcendent Knowledge, as the Egodeath theory has done.
Griffiths doesn’t state the solution to that well-known #1 challenging problem: in folk-speak, “Surrender/ submit/ accept the loss of control.”
I advised the Oregon Board about this challenging effect and its productive, rewarding solution: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/11/18/proposed-rules-for-oregon-measure-109-psilocybin-centers/
Fact Sheet: Oregon Psilocybin Services
url https://sharedsystems.dhsoha.state.or.us/DHSForms/Served/le4226.pdf
That’s linked from:
https://www.oregon.gov/oha/ph/preventionwellness/pages/psilocybin-what-are-psilocybin-services.aspx
Regarding “research on psilocybin benefits and risks”, the pdf links to:
Oregon Psilocybin – Scientific Literature Review and Cultural and Anthropological Information
https://www.oregon.gov/oha/PH/PREVENTIONWELLNESS/Pages/Psilocybin-Scientific-Literature-Review.aspx –
“the Oregon Psilocybin Advisory Board reviewed available medical, psychological, and scientific studies, research, and other information related to the safety and efficacy of psilocybin in treating mental health conditions. This rapid evidence review was published in July 2021 “
“The Board also acknowledged cultural and anthropological information regarding centuries of psilocybin use that was not included in the scientific literature review. “
I partly informed the Oregon Board about Wasson/ Ruck’s Secret Amanita & Muraresku’s Eleusis harmfully blocking our view of Psilocybin centrally used within our own religious history:
in ALL mystery religions’ psilocybin sacred meals, NOT %#$& Eleusis! 🚫🌾, and
in psilocybin symposium mixed wine parties, and
in psilocybin branching-message mushroom trees all throughout & inside mainstream medieval Christianity.
Rare Proof that the Carl Ruck School has Heard of the Existence of a Mushroom Other than Secret Amanita 🤫🍄 😲
“A subsequent Cultural and Anthropological Review was published in November 2022, amplifying the cultural and anthropological information that scientific research may not address.”
Psilocybin advisory board’s summary – https://www.oregon.gov/oha/PH/PREVENTIONWELLNESS/Documents/Cultural-Anthropological-Review-2022.pdf
Cites: Akers BP, Ruiz JF, Piper A, Ruck CAP. A Prehistoric Mural in Spain Depicting Neurotropic Psilocybe Mushrooms?. Economic Botany. 2011;65(2):121-128. doi:10.1007/s12231-011-9152-5
Good job there, Carl Ruck, finally acknowledging the existence of psilocybin in Western religion, instead of obsessing exclusively on your irrelevant Secret Amanita.
To a slight degree, this is a redemption arc for Carl Ruck – though too little too late.
It is extremely good news that this Oregon research summary article includes this tiny little acknowledgment, at least, of the existence of Psilocybin in western religious history tradition.
– despite the overall total failure of entheogen scholarship, for it to even occur to them to open their eyes (stop shutting your eyes, squeezed tightly shut in your Secret Amanita/ Kykeon Ergot monoplant blind frenzy) and actually try (for once) to find Psilocybin evidence in western religious history.
Article: Entheogens (Psychedelic Drugs) and the Ancient Mystery Religions (M. Hoffman 2015)
Mark Hoffman’s 2015 toxicology journal article on entheogens in mystery religions has an empty Psilocybin section that just states that someone oughta start looking to see if there’s any psilocybin in Western religious history – proving that entheogen scholarship has massively failed to do so, due to their single-plant monofocus on Secret Amanita and on Eleusis Ergot.
Full quote of the article’s section:
Psilocybin and Psilocin (Mushrooms) and DMT, 5Meo DMT: Spirit Molecules
“These closely related entheogenic compounds should be mentioned in a discussion of the Mystery Religions.
“While evidence for their use in this context has not been fully* explored, it is extremely unlikely that the chemical properties of psychoactive mushrooms** and the natural sources of DMT would have been overlooked by ancient herbalists and alchemists.”
*Translation: Under the mis-leading, bad leadership & harmful bad strategy of Carl Amanita Promoter Ruck and Mark Amanita Hoffman, the field of entheogen scholarship has failed to at all explore, investigate, or even think of investigating Psilocybin in Western religious history; the idea doesn’t even occur to them.
The exceptions are so rare, that they prove the rule.
The list is short: Giorgio Samorini, Michael Hoffman, Jerry & Julie Brown, and Fulvio Gosso.
**Poor writing; Mark Hoffman fell into a very specific trap in this specific field: he used the term ‘psychoactive mushrooms’ without acknowledging that due to the fault of his group with Carl Ruck, when you use the word ‘mushrooms’ in this field of entheogen scholarship, that means specifically and exclusively Secret Amanita, according to their bad usage and firm connotations which they have established.
An example of this forceful narrowing of the word ‘mushrooms’ in Western entheogen scholarship is Thomas Hatsis’ video, which he titles braggingly “Disproof of mushrooms in Christianity” – but then what he discusses in the video is exclusively Secret Amanita, and it never even occurs to him to think of psilocybin.
Thomas Hatsis tells me: “The shape of the liberty cap is anachronistic.”
Thus proving and clearly demonstrating how entirely unthinking and closed-minded entheogen scholarship has been, completely biased against and blind to psilocybin in western religious history.
Paul Stamets not excepted; he is part of the problem, spreading blindness of psilocybin in his 1996 book Psilocybin mushrooms of the world: an identification guide.
Contrast the long, well-crafted, and placed-first Secret Amanita section of Hoffman’s article – in contrast to his empty, short, last-placed Psilocybin entry in his article.
Article: Entheogens in Ancient Times: Wine and the Rituals of Dionysus (Ruck 2018)
https://www.academia.edu/44299129/Entheogens_in_Ancient_Times_Wine_and_the_Rituals_of_Dionysus – contains only 1 hit on ‘psilocybin’:
“The civilized product resulting from the controlled recognizably fungal growth of the fermenting yeasts was contrasted with the wild naturally occurring toxins, among which mushrooms, containing psychoactive psilocybin and muscimol, and ergot of grain containing Lysergic acid amide, played a fundamental role as similarly fungal.”
That sentence includes dubious 1880s-type, heavy anthropology dept. sky-castle theory, instead of Jerry & Julie Brown’s more grounded, down-to-earth coverage of the topic of mushrooms in Western religious history.
Ruck delivers Anthropology dept. theory heavily slathered over entheogen scholarship, as Cyberdisciple posted about.
That quintessentially representative sentence also includes Carl Ruck’s signature pet word that only he uses, ‘fungal’. As in: “fungal Secret Amanita alchemy”.
Lots of Psilocybin Evidence, Masked by Obsessive Monofocus on Secret Amanita
The extreme over-focus on Secret Amanita (and Brian Muraresku’s narrowing monofocus on Eleusis ergot) serves only to blind people to Psilocybin in our own relious history, thus supporting the Supreme Court putting people in cages for using Psilocybin, based on the completely bunk and totally ignorant argument that Western religious tradition (such as inside cathedrals, chapels, & illuminated manuscripts) lacks Psilocybin.
Chartres Cathedral:
Saint Martin’s chapel:
Great Canterbury Psalter:
url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/#gallery
— Cybermonk, December 18, 2022
The Egodeath theory 