Idea Development page 29

Michael Hoffman, started May 6, 2025

Crop by Michael Hoffman

Site Map – Previous page – Next page

Contents:

most links might only work on desktop Chrome/Edge browser – the first link works:

Incoming Ideas

Bad Trip Psychosis Prep: High Priest Put Blood of Sacrifice All Over Inner Temple, to Avoid Being Killed by God – Rescued by Idea of Substitute Blood

See YouTube videos that exclaim: The driving theme of Bible religious myth is blood.

Bunk model of mystical experience: positive unity.
Actual model of psychedelic peak mystical experience includes, according to Bible and other myth:

Psychedelics = religious myth = {blood} & {substitution} & {suffice}

Video title:
Why Christianity Is Obsessed With Blood — Worse Than You Think
YouTube channel: Mindshift (Brandon) – literalist
May 18, 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0NB2117Quw&t=1010s = 16:50

Video title:
The Bible’s Most Dangerous Story — Here’s Why [sacrifice of Isaac]
YouTube channel: Mindshift (Brandon) – literalist
Apr 27, 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoQ-qP3j2_A

Who is worst and stupidest? Literalist Christians, or literalist anti-Christians who merely prove that they are “those on the outside”?

Literalism kills, idolatry kills; mythology enlightens and transforms, delivering the treasure.

Better than 1) Old Testament literal blood sacrifice of horned livestock is 2) New Testament literal blood sacrifice of Mr. Jesus, but after I was saved from cybernetic loss of control threat by the IDEA of Jesus on the cross in 1995, I puzzled over the role/ function/ purpose of an actual, literal death of a literal Jesus.

I had a couple years to think and write about that question 1996-1998, which explains why I so quickly and immediately pivoted in 1999 as soon as I heard about ahistoricity.

I gladly immediately switched from asking Paul & Jesus to confirm the Egodeath theory, to asking religious myth to confirm the Egodeath theory.

3) Best is the idea (comprehension of mythic analogy) of blood violent sacrifice (eg you must bring a piglet to sacrifice, to the Eleusinian mysteries), or the idea of godman fastened to spacetime cross helplessly.

I can explain how the IDEA (mythic analogy) of substitute blood saves the mystic psychonaut from harm; I cannot explain how literal blood could save the psychonaut from harm. Magic thinking, literal thinking, cannot enlighten or save or transform.

Strangely, the angel of God never told Abraham to sacrifice the ram, though pictures show that, in the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}.

The angel said do not harm the boy, and don’t do anything to the boy.

The angel said because you have done this thing and NOT withheld your only son, your offspring will thrive and be blessed.

The angel did NOT say “sacrifice this ram instead of your son.” THE ANGEL DID NOT SAY BECAUSE YOU KILLED THIS RAM, YOU ARE SAVED/ BLESSED, AND ISAAC IS SAVED.

Angel ACTED like Isaac was let live because the ram was killed.

Sequence: Gen 22: Omits the setup where God commands Abraham to offer up Isaac.

Abraham makes the child carry the cut wood branches:
child-thinking = branching thinking

Abraham Tested <– NIV authors add headings

22 Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!”

“Here I am,” he replied.

2 Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.”

3 Early the next morning Abraham got up and loaded his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about [when?]. 

4 On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. 

5 He said to his servants [young men; youths], “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you.” [lying, or planning to cheat God? Is Abraham testing God?]

6 Abraham took the wood [cut branches] for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife.  [missing: {rock} altar]

As the two of them went on together, 7 Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, “Father?”

  1. “The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering.”
  2. Then he reached out his hand [like tree of life in Gen. 3] and took the knife to slay his son.
  3. But the angel of the Lord called out to him from heaven, “Abraham! Do not lay a hand on the boy. Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”
  4. Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns [probably horns = {branching}: consider: 7:52 pm June 9 2025: goat, ram, bull all have horns]. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son.
  5. And to this day it is said, “On the mountain of the Lord it will be provided.”
  6. “I swear by myself, declares the Lord, that because you have done this and have not withheld your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky. Through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.” Gen 22:7-18 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%2022%3A7-18&version=NIV

To “obey God’s commandments” (Rev 22:14 per KJB) is to be made willing to expose the vulnerability of egoic personal control system; to be made willing to sabotage one’s control-power.

Then receive idea of sufficient grasp of analogies instead, eg vicarious imaginal blood sacrifice of a provided ram or son of God.

Comments on Cyberdisciple Site Map Page

x https://cyberdisciple.wordpress.com/2025/04/25/announcement-site-map-of-cyberdisciple-wordpress-com-published/ –

I haven’t read the comments much.

Strickland Comment Against Writing ‘Alien’, but Only Strickland Wrote ‘Alien’

“Cyberdisciple, it’s so good to see your site map.

“I’m not sure if the following information is appropriate here, but thought I would give it a try.”

[I recall the concept of/ critique of, the “alien primitive psychology” theory of religious myth/ the alleged non-drug intense mystic altered state confabulated by academic inventors/ taboo-driven storytellers. Strickland should have stated that context, if that’s what this comment is about. -mh

Cyberdisciple, I must take issue with your advocating kicking puppydogs.

man of straw loses once again

Search Cyberdisciple site for “alien”:
https://cyberdisciple.wordpress.com/?s=alien

CITATIONS NEEDED]

“I don’t get why there is a misuse of labeling a reference of mystic altered state experience as ‘alien’, when the mystic altered state is commonly expressed in many ways throughout time.”

“From the very roots of the ancient world and found in literature, art, music, sculptures, religion, to name a few, the mystic altered state carries itself forward, through many mechanisms. and including through medicine where the Caduceus is alive and well, and commonly seen on ambulances in the modern world.

“The matching of the mystic altered state through natural entheogens with that of technological consciousness is scary simply because the roots of origin may differ, one being from heart and soul through the depths of earth, and the latter from machines.

“So just what is the motive behind the writings which support the word ‘alien’, if not just another form of fame seeking exploitation of the cherished mystic altered state, with effort of making it not only strange but also further away from the living heart and soul by placing it into the wires of lifeless AI.

“If using the word ‘alien,’ becomes the message for the ordinary world mindset in bringing forward expression of the mystic altered state, then what’s truly becoming ‘alien’ is not the magnificent mystic altered state, but rather the ordinary world mindset moving farther away from its natural origin.”

About 7 More Comments to Possibly Read

on same post by Cyberdisciple

Wrmspirit post at Cyberdisciple site June 9, 2025

“There is an elegance which comes from the whole of mystic altered state experience which becomes eclipsed by the power of the bible’s literal interpretations of the dark night of the soul.

The elegance of the whole of altered state experience is reflected within its creative expressions and not difficult to see, feel, and love, such as the Bernward Doors, stone carvings, statuaries and sculpted elements throughout the world, music, paintings, theory and literary compositions. Artistry in its finest form.

Even the most experienced in altered states can become blindsided in nullifying the purity of elegance by placing the gore as the core, stating gore is not gore, in order to differentiate between literal and analogical representation of mystic altered state experience with good intentions, never realizing the power of those images deeply ingrained within lifetimes of exposure to literalism’s lurking shadows.

Where is the power of prayer in the dark night of the mystic altered state. The forgotten power of gut-level prayer, not verbose wording, but prayer from the soul in its purest form, gets lost in the thrill for graphics of daggers and swords stabbing into the flesh of life taking full stage.

Pattern recognition, a valuable tool, used now for teaching the intricacy of mystic altered state experience with good intentions, may very well become the creation of a 3rd mode of interpretation. In addition to literal interpretation and analogical interpretation, there is pattern recognition interpretation. A new Bible. A new format to follow, dogmatic in the sense of ‘must adhere to,’ another layer of diversity placed onto the mystic altered state for new generations to peel away in order to find their naked heart.

From ancient hands gifting the modern world with treasures of the soul, who could ever have imagined that the simplicity of the mystic altered state could be reduced to a complexity that dilutes the very essence of its being.”

Psychedelics in Monotheistic Traditions: Sacramental Practice and Legal Recognition (Harvard Law School, March 5-6, 2025)

https://www.psychedelicsandreligion.info – “This interdisciplinary symposium brings together scholars of religion, legal experts, and religious leaders to explore the legal recognition of religious psychedelic use in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim communities.”

“Sessions will draw on methodologies of religious studies, law, and the humanities, and will cover topics including:

  • Biblical, theological, philosophical, and mystical bases for religious psychedelic use
  • Religious psychedelic practices in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim communities today
  • Theological, critical, and doctrinal perspectives on religious psychedelic use
  • Legal pathways to recognition including religious exemptions, decriminalization, and legislative initiatives
  • Critical perspectives on safety, ethics, representation, access, and justice”

Conference Schedule (Psychedelics and Monotheistic Traditions:
Sacramental Practice and Legal Recognition
Harvard Law School, March 2025)

https://www.psychedelicsandreligion.info/schedule —

“Wednesday, March 5
Religious Cultures and Theologies
Austin 101

9am Welcome and Introduction
Noah Feldman
Jay Michaelson

9:30-10:45 Jewish Techniques of Ecstasy, Mysticism, Magic, and Spiritual Guidance
Jill Hammer, The Drum and the Vineyard: Priestesses Changing Consciousness in Ancient Israel
Elly Moseson, Jewish Magical Techniques as Model for Psychedelic Practice
Sam Shonkoff, Enlightened Amnesia and Entheogenic Memory: The Case of Neo-Hasidism
Yosef Rosen, Ba’alei Shem as Predecessors for Contemporary Jewish Psychedelic Guidance

11:00-12:00 Contemporary Jewish Psychedelic Practice
Natalie Ginsberg, Rabbi Dan Goldblatt, Zac Kamenetz, Madison Margolin, Adena Phillips, David Sauvage

12:15-1:15pm Islam and Psychedelic Practice
Sughra Ahmed, Ismail Ali, Karina Bashir, Hena Malik
Kamal Abu-Shemsieh:
Harm Reduction and Islamic Jurisprudence
Fayzan Rab:
Muslim Communities’ Perceptions of Psychedelics

1:15pm Lunch

2:20-3:30 Christianity, Psychedelics, and Non-Ordinary Experiences
Rev. Jaime Clark-Soles,
Searching the Depths of God: Non-Ordinary States of Consciousness in Scripture
Hunt Priest,
Claiming a Healing Ministry: Resourcing Christians for Spiritual and Pastoral Care
Bryan McCarthy,
Could MDMA Support Catholic Faith and Practice? A Conservative Maybe
Ron Cole-Turner,
Psychedelics and the Christian Mystical Path

3:40-4:20 Syncretistic Psychedelic Practices
Jessica Felix-Romero –
The Rattle and the Rosary: Intersections Between Lay Theology and Shamanism
Joshua Falcon –
Catholicism & Psychedelics in South Florida: Ambivalence and Affirmation
oriana mayorga –
Nothing New! Communal Use, Ancestral and Ancient

4:30-5:40 Complexifying Psychedelic Theologies
Christian Greer,
Psychedelic Christianity: Real and Imagined
Sharday Mosurinjohn,
The Sweetest Taboo: Psychedelics and the Invention of Religious Experiences
Tim McMahan-King,
Natural Law on Drugs
Nathaniel Berman –
Nomopoeisis, Psychedelia, and Synesthesia: Envisioning Correspondences with Larry Tribe, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and the Sefer Ha-Zohar

5:50-6:20 Kabbalah, Space-Time Synesthesia, and Psychedelics
Elliot Wolfson and Noah Feldman

6:30 Dinner for Presenters
Milstein East, WCC

8:00 Open Space Sessions and Screening of A Table of our Own
WCC 2004 and 2024

Thursday, March 6
Law and Policy
Austin 111

9am Welcome
9:10-10:10 Safety, Access, Ethics, and Equity
Laura Appleman –
The Church of Eugenics? Envisioning Psychedelic Dystopias
Jeffrey Breau –
Care and Creed: Learning from Novel Psychedelic Spiritual Communities
Ayize Jama-Everett –
Pharmacological Reductionism, Unequal Justice, and Anti-Blackness in the Pursuit of Religious Freedom Under RFRA
oriana mayorga –
An Orated Ethnography

10:20-11:40 Legal Doctrines and Religious Realities
Martin Lederman, Victoria Litman, Mason Marks, Josh McDaniel, Charles Stang

11:50-1:00 RFRA, the DEA, and Religious Exemptions
Ismail Ali – Cultural Blind Spots and Growth Edges of US Protections for Entheogenic Religions
Allison Hoots – Religious-Based Exemptions Under RFRA and the Controlled Substances Act
John Rapp – RFRA Challenges That Have Succeeded… and Failed
Matt Zorn – So, You’re Looking to Litigate. Strategic Considerations in Filing a Lawsuit.

1:10pm Closing Remarks
Noah Feldman
Jay Michaelson

1:30 Symposium Ends
Lunch for Afternoon Session Participants
2:30-4:00 Afternoon Session 1 (invited participants)
Langdell Hall

4:15-5:45 Afternoon Session 2 (invited participants)
Langdell Hall

Conference Abstracts (Psychedelics and Monotheistic Traditions:
Sacramental Practice and Legal Recognition
Harvard Law School, March 2025)

Jeffrey Breau,
Care and Creed: Learning from Novel Psychedelic Spiritual Communities
Novel psychedelic spiritual communities (NPSCs) are new religious movements forming around psychedelic use that are distinct from Indigenous plant medicine traditions and unaffiliated with major world religions. They represent religions that are unique to the psychedelic space. NPSCs challenge conventional understandings of religious life, have sophisticated approaches to community care, and will face distinct hurdles to obtain religious freedom. This presentation will share preliminary findings from a multisite ethnography of NPSCs in the United States. Religion, the law, and care are inextricably entwined for NSPCs, and this presentation will argue that to learn from NPSCs we must attend to how these three domains shape their communities. The talk will focus on how NPSCs are creating safe psychedelic rituals, navigating the regulatory environment, and approaching ethical oversight. It will conclude by discussing what NPSCs suggest for established religious communities interested in entheogenic practices.

Rev. Jamie Clark-Soles,
Searching the Depths of God: NOSC in Christian Scripture
If the U.S. Constitution is the founding communal document for America, then Sacred Scripture is/are the founding communal document/s of Christianity. From Genesis to Revelation we find ample evidence of NOSC and even the attempt to induce them. How might this inform (or not) our current consideration of legalizing psychedelics for the purposes of spiritual formation within Christianity?

Ron Cole-Turner,
Psychedelics and the Christian Mystical Path

“The mystical in Christianity finds its center in lifelong spiritual transformation in relationship to the presence of divine love. The process of transformation might be punctuated by intense or non-ordinary experiences, but the experiences are not its defining feature. In the tradition of James or Stace, however, modern definitions of mysticism (and the Mystical Experience Questionnaire, widely used by researchers) focus almost exclusively on mystical experiences, and even then do not discuss love. My central questions are: When intense psychedelic spiritual experiences occur, can they lead to the rich spiritual transformation that Christianity values? Can church leaders and congregations support those who want to explore psychedelic experiences within a Christian context? Moreover, in terms of legal recognition, the use of psychedelics are not a traditional sacrament [FALSE!], but the use of groups for spiritual reflection and growth is a longstanding practice. If we imagine groups tailored to include reflection on psychedelic experiences, over time, such groups might come to consider psychedelics as central to spiritual growth. Would they be free to act on this belief?

Rabbi Jill Hammer,
The Drum and the Vineyard: Priestesses Changing Consciousness in Ancient Israel

“Biblical texts reveal that women in ancient Israel used the drum, dance and song to create sacred experience and change consciousness. Archaeology bears out that women with drums, acting as sacred musicians, were important figures in biblical culture, and were sometimes named as temple workers or prophetesses. While they used these tools in a variety of contexts, we can particularly note that women were the celebrants of biblical vineyard dedication rituals and annual vineyard celebrations. It is possible to conclude that wine was also involved in these celebrations—a further tool for trance. Set in the wider context of women’s sacred ritual in ancient Israel, these musical, earthy rituals seem to suggest that music and wine were openings to deep ritual experience and even to prophecy.”

Ayize Jama-Everett,
Pharmacological Reductionism, Unequal Justice, and Anti-Blackness in the Pursuit of Religious Freedom Under RFRA

“The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) was intended to protect sacred practices from government interference, yet its application reveals a stark racial bias. While Indigenous traditions involving peyote and ayahuasca have secured legal recognition– and even some largely-white entheogenic churches’ uses of them – African and African diasporic spiritual traditions—such as Hoodoo’s use of High John the Conqueror and Bwiti’s Iboga—remain marginalized. This talk explores how pharmacological reductionism limits the sacred to a material plane and constructs a view of the Sacred that is exclusory to traditions and religious effects that are collaborative in nature.. This exclusion reflects a deeper legacy of anti-Blackness, wherein Black religious innovation is dismissed, criminalized, or erased. Addressing these disparities requires an expanded legal and cultural framework that honors the full spectrum of sacred traditions.

Elly Moseson,
Mysticism, Magic and the Search for Psychedelic Analogues in the Jewish Tradition

“While the cultivation of altered states of consciousness (ASCs) for religious purposes in the Jewish tradition is typically treated in connection with the Jewish mystical tradition, this paper proposes that reframing ASCs in terms of magic offers a compelling framework for considering the place of psychedelics in contemporary Judaism.

“Despite the significant overlap between the two traditions, magic tends to focus on individual agency, prioritizing efficacy and pragmatic outcomes, whereas mysticism often emphasizes specific doctrines, pietistic ideals, and communal or initiatory structures.

“The relative absence of pietistic rhetoric and strictures in magical literature, along with its emphasis on efficacy, parallels both the availability of psychedelic substances without moral preconditions and their consistent effectiveness in inducing ASCs.

“Another parallel can be found in the ambivalence with which normative religion and culture regard both magic and psychedelics. Drawing on examples from the Jewish magical tradition, this paper suggests that reconsidering ASCs in terms of magic, rather than mysticism, provides a fresh perspective on both the integration of psychedelics into contemporary Jewish practice and its potential challenges.”

con’t below…

Video: Ep. 57: Can Psychedelics Replace Religion? – Sharday Mosurinjohn

Video title:
Ep. 57: Can Psychedelics Replace Religion? – Sharday Mosurinjohn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onlx_Lr0SQI –
ch: Atheists United
May 30, 2025
i think a re-release of same vid from 2 years ago, “ep 57”.
Beyond Atheism Podcast – 73 episodes
Desc:

“In this episode, we’re joined by Dr. Sharday Mosurinjohn, an Associate Professor in the School of Religion at Queen’s University in Canada.

“We learn about the current use of psychedelics as well as their links to religion in both the past [“BEEN DEBUNKED, MANY TIMES IN THE PAST 90 YEARS“ – Mosur.] and present.

“Sharday talks about the universal connections [“mystical experience = positive unity, which doesn’t require psychedelics“] and spirituality found through mind-altering chemicals.

“Along the way we meet a few mechanical elves.

“We also ask whether a “true psychonaut” can believe in an afterlife or attend a church.”

[I’ve been studying psychedelics since 1985, but I can’t be a psychonaut, because I attend a church.

The hosts (ordinary-state-based atheists) were surprised to find out that psychedelic churches exist.

What wisdom can atheists have regarding religion, and mystical experience, and entheogens – if they know nothing at all about them?

That lack is fairly well remedied by this pretty good interview with Sharday Mosurinjohn.]

“In the bonus section, available exclusively to Patreon supporters, we talk with Sharday about

  • the aesthetics of psychedelics,
  • issues around drug prohibition, and
  • her current book. [published, or planned?]

“For more on Sharday: https://shardaymosurinjohn.com

“Check out her latest book, The Spiritual Significance of Overload Boredom”

Video Transcript, Mosurinjohn

ranscript welcome to the Beyond Atheism podcast with me Nathan Alexander and my co-host Todd Dvarez

this podcast moves beyond questions of God’s existence to ask what’s next in the godless world

if you’re enjoying the show so far remember to like and subscribe rate and review and consider supporting us on Patreon

beyond Atheism is produced and distributed by Atheist United [Music] Studios

turn on tune in and drop out

this was the famous phrase by Timothy Liry addressed to the counterculture movement of the 1960s in which he urged people to explore the nature of reality and the meaning of life partly or entirely through the use of psychedelic drugs

but can psychedelics allow us to grasp deeper truths about life and reality and even to experience transcendence

to talk about these issues and more we’re joined by Dr charardde Morrison John

chararda is an associate professor in the school of religion at Queens University in Kingston Ontario

as a multidisciplinary scholar her work draws from a wide range of topics including religion cultural theory aesthetics and mind augmenting technologies ranging from AI to psychedelics

her first book is the spiritual significance of overlord overload boredom

her new [next] book project considers the psychedelic renaissance as an ethnogenic new religious movement in the long history of esotericism

[as if European use of psychedelics is “new”]

my goodness that’s a mouthful for our day welcome from the name to the books yeah

thank you thank you for having me yeah it’s great to have you here yeah uh thanks so much Charardai for coming on

really looking forward to talking with you i guess

the first question is

Why psychedelics? Why are you so interested in this topic?

well I probably first of all have to do the the Andrew Huberman style line like I wish to emphasize that

any real or perceived advocacy on my part is completely separate from my research and teaching roles at Queens University and service

um but is nonetheless part of my desire to bring um low low cost to consumer information to the general public about weird metaphysics

um yeah so uh

psychedelics is is the the most fun I’ve had in my career, the most interesting um thing that I’ve worked on

and you know and and personally like non-ordinary experiences um uh yeah that that’s that’s where it’s at

so how did did it start as a a research project or a hobby or an in how did it go from how did it become a focus of study

i think where it started was listening to Paul Stammit’s [Stamets’] TED talk about 10 or 12 years ago about fungi

And so well that’s kind of like the approximate starting point in a way um because you know really in some sense

it starts with the DARE program back when I was a kid in public school

do you all remember the DARE program they have come drugs are bad

yeah um and I I I really drank that flavor aid and I I was absolutely straight edge for for the longest time

[can’t relate. in school, I learned, but I was always critical – I read stacks of books at public library and schoolroom]

and um and it’s a funny thing because I was craving aesthetically interesting meaningful intense experiences but I had cut myself off from most avenues of doing that

um not just with respect to you know um like substances and practices but even socially

um I

I didn’t want to associate socially with people who did who did drugs

it seemed like the most morally bankrupt thing that anybody could do

but I I nonetheless or you know maybe tied up with that kind of prohibition that I’d set for myself was really really fascinated with the nature of mind and consciousness and you know this whole sort of family of concepts that taps into whatever we’re trying to get at with those words um and was kind of constantly experiencing some sort of low-level crisis of meaning

which is where my first book came from and I boredom as an idiom to describe this sort of um warping of time and problem of meaning

and as I was working on that I was thinking about you know different kinds of minds and phenomenology and what is it like to be a me or in anything

I was thinking about orked [artif?] intelligence and network thinking and network living because I I wound up really talking a lot about what it is to live like in our present computational condition

and uh and this was back in the early days of TED talks the cool days of TED talks and I listened to that and

I remember you know the idea of this um this agential and really kind of clever mycelium the the way that the that that the underground part that we don’t notice of the mushroom fruing bodies

like it could move fast and it could communicate fast and it could communicate with other organisms and it could do all kinds of things so I had that in my mind and I had that resonance of that um you know he he is fond of saying stemits and and others are fond of making a comparison between the way that that all fungal mycelia connect and communicate and the way that psilocybin the the active ingredient in so-called magic mushrooms does that for in in human body minds um and between people who have had those experiences so all of that was in there

[a complete(sic) mystical experience ie of just “positive unity”; nondual unity oneness – not cybernetic eternalism / mental model transformation]

and and percolating and

I was using some of those ideas in in my book The Spiritual Significance of Upload Boredom — i too, often say “overlord” I can’t say overload boredom i say o “overlord boredom”

um I don’t know what that pretends and then the funny thing is I mean we we

We started to get like the endless trip of Michael Pollen

you know eventually his his stuff came out and um and just

gradually it was definitely more and more in the air if not the water and then sbatical [? todo] became on the horizon

you know the

the book number one was done and people started asking me “What are you going to do?”

And I started hearing myself say psychedelics

and I and it it I just and it and it came true i I said it enough and I lived into it and then it became true

and I have oriented my whole research program around psychedelics and

it has been the most generative fruitful socially rich collaborative thing I’ve ever done

um there’s so much kind of intersectoral and interdomain collaboration in that space

right yeah and just just to go back you mentioned about you know

in school like this sort of anti-drug message and that really um kind of like hit you hard or whatever

and I wonder maybe like we can ask about like your religious background like if that in any way um informed like your attitudes toward toward drugs and and so on and and if there was a change

that Yeah that

that changed your like religious changes that changed your attitudes

yeah well yeah this is this is so it’s so strange um because so I always say

I would have made a really great zealot like for somebody if anybody had recruited me i would have been fabulous

i I was this kind of I mean I it would be nice to be able to say

rebel without a cause

but I I wasn’t you know particularly outgoingly rebellious it was it was just like

well I’ll show you by forming strong moral standards within my own self and like withholding experiences from myself

and so I grew up without

but I I think maybe that is because I grew up without um being raised in it just didn’t feel like anything in particular um so what

I was not was Irish Catholic that’s what my mom had been and then the nuns beat her sufficiently that she ran away and um and so therefore that is what I was not

[WHERE IS YOUR FATHER?]

and what I had was something like the like what does Megan Goodwin say something like it was Protestantism with the barcode filed off or the serial number filed off sort of like standard issue liberal mainline types of hegemonically Christian values floating around

there I’m sure because that’s you know what would have been residual in my mom I assume um and

I was really like there I just I didn’t have uh

there wasn’t sort of a community identity in terms of like a a neighborhood

there wasn’t you know extended family

[NOT EVEN A BASIC FAMILY, NO MENTION OF FATHER]

there wasn’t a kind of cultural identity

there wasn’t a religious identity

there just kind of wasn’t a lot to hang on to

so I think I started cobbling together a whole bunch of strictures for myself and I just kind of um things that would be I was this like virtue signaling for kids

i was like “Oh this if I if I can internalize this message then this will give me some kind of moral ground to stand on.”

and maybe look down at my tears but it’s neat that that you have an awareness of that without like were you were you

Was your family church going

[family with no father?]

were you sort of

No not at all

you didn’t have those rituals

no and I I remember for really no reason that I can point to until I was probably at the end of my undergrad i was vehemently anti-religious

i was so hostile

i was I mean

if the militant atheists had gotten me I would embrace them too it’s not claimed to me it’s true i

I haven’t my draft letter yet but um there’s still time before I get back

it’s a neat perspective which I don’t think we’ve heard much on this like

people who are raised without religion

yeah and because it seems to be a very different flavor and it’s not one that we’re very familiar with

but it’s also interesting that you go from that upbringing to something that at least is studying I mean are

do you feel like you study religion as an outsider now

it’s you well

this is the most insider I’ve ever felt

so I it was like it was very much a a sort of

I’m going to study this thing that I’m angry at

and the angle that I took for many years was I am angry at religion which I mean thankfully

my master’s supervisor pointed out is you’re you’re sort of angry at mainline Protestantism chararda

and I was like okay I’ll do

I’ll do an ethnography with the United Church Women’s Group and I’ll show them

and you know they were tremendously liberal lovely people um about whom I could say nothing like truly critical

and um and and so

that sort of vitriol that I had that I just did I didn’t know where to place it and I didn’t know what it was

except that I I thought okay I can I can say something about the fact that religion is tied up with sexism and capitalism and those things are bad so I’ll you know I’ll follow that angle

and then as I got into the discipline ipline of religious studies which I came to through

I came through socioultural anthropology

i came through some philosophy of science stuff

i came through museiology

i came through cultural studies

and sort of kept just like flirting with religious studies and

the more that I got into it as a discipline the more that I was allowed to just be metaphysically curious in some respects because there’s lots of boundary policing too

and I and at that point it became like

I am not doing anything that can ever be mistaken for theology

um and you know but

The more that I let my philosophical flag fly the more that was also sort of more and more a tense boundary that I had to deal with

uh and so at this point being that

I am doing work in a community of psychonauts that I’m part of

it’s the most insider that I’ve ever felt

and it’s not

it still you know comfortably falls outside the world religions

but like clearly I have embedded myself personally and professionally in something esoteric that as a religious studies scholar I can recognize is a kind of you know insider position

it’s like

so is it religion adjacent or like it has parts of religion

what’s what’s the best way to put that

this is a really interesting thing because uh

I keep having this experience in psychedelic communities where people will say things to me like well religion is disappearing right the the churches are closing their doors and um so what’s going to happen next and I say they’re doing it right now

this isn’t not that you know

if we look at what the functions are and they go we need community

like yep yep we do and that’s what religions have done yep and we’re and we’re still doing it right now

um and so I mean on the one hand I could just say

whatever it is is amanable to study with the whole conceptual toolkit that we have as religious studies scholars

and then uh in another way I could say yeah

I can firmly locate this in terms of religion in in the history of western esotericism

so if I locate it as a form as of esotericism it is something that I guess it it also I think this also sort of fits with Lois Lee’s definition of non-religion as something that gets its identity from being meaningfully different from religion that in

in Vder Hanikov’s [Wouter Hanegraaff?] sense of esotericism it’s the thing that is in that reject basket of both mainstream religion and mainstream science um but is informed by and always kind of intense relationship with both

right and and what

What do we mean exactly by esotericism?

[Laughter] um as um so it the

the absolute simplest kind of soundbite definition uh is Hannah Craft’s [Wouter Hanegraaff] it’s stigmatized knowledge or it’s rejected knowledge it’s the waste basket of knowledge and who is it rejected by religion on the one hand and science on the other

or mainstream religion and science on the other

[poor def., b/c it is negative: If I reject anything, that thing is “esotericism” BECAUSE i rejected it. The poor Chris Partridge approach to characterizing esotericism.]

What does it positively consist of?

very broadly speaking magic alchemy astrology

[I would define ‘esotericism’ like Timothy Freke & Peter Gandy’s book The Jesus Mysteries, 1999, https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Mysteries-Was-Original-Pagan/dp/0609807986/ ]

very broadly speaking and you know

those being histories that we can trace back to like say with astrology the earliest empirical practices of observing stars [all 7 of them in Hanegraaff’s sky] and like weather patterns in order to do practical things in the world

but that also takes on this kind of mysterious predictive esoteric dimension

um well there I just used the word to define itself but I said enough words at the time

yeah no I think

that makes sense

yeah and and so

How does psychedelics like fit into that?

like

Are there

kind of Yeah um almost

like churches or institutional sort of things like that around uh psychedelics?

oh man

there’s so many ways it’s a damn schmorggas board right now

it so okay so one thing is that yeah

There are these entheogenic NRMs

that was the That’s maybe that’s another thing we should define i don’t know yeah yeah so

entheogen means god-generating

okay okay i see okay and um this is another it’s a

it’s a synonym or sometimes I think a euphemism for psychedelic

that I’m hearing increasingly lately in fact so usually it’s being used specifically to point to religious uses or spiritual uses

like avowedly you know by the people avowedly religious or spiritual uses of psychedelics or other practices like fasting for a long time or like praying with your head between your knees for a really long time or holotropic breath work things that can [/ could/ might/ may] produce psychedelic experiences but for religious or spiritual purpose

[Breathwork can produce psychedelic experiences. Smashing your head against a wall can produce psychedelic experiences. The empty worthless tin “can”.]

but I’m seeing some concept creep increasingly

so for instance

I was at one of Kingston’s um psychedelic community events the other day and this was one that was targeted towards students because we have a a club at Queens for psychedelics

so there was a PowerPoint and it periodized the different eras in psychedelic history with the most recent one being the enthogenesis era

[athiests want psychedelics without entheogenic]

[era 1: the hippie 60s. era 2: Rave 90s. That’s it. I learned this from the intensive research of Chris Partridge etc. Swiss cheese history consisting of 99% holes/ absences.]

and I thought well that’s really interesting because

That embeds the notion of God or religion into the very premise and what what the era is about right now

but so that’s that’s enthogenic um and then it it’s just you know

there’s always some kind of strategic branding problem or communication issue or angle

um psychedelic comes from like psyche your suk mind soul and do loss manifesting so mind manifesting

[what about pneuma, spirit manifesting? Classical Antiquity vs Late Antiquity model]

and that was kind of coined in part to be able to not use the word hallucinogen uh you know just all of these things have baggage and get freighted and sort of need to so that’s that’s yeah so

there are enthogenic churches popping up

https://www.google.com/search?q=the+religious+studies+project+podcast
https://www.religiousstudiesproject.com
https://www.religiousstudiesproject.com/?s=psychedelic

and um I was actually just talking on the religious studies project podcast the other day about this one called the church of Silomthoxin which is started by two lawyers and a veteran in the states and they are very saviley using the legal form of a church in order to provide legal protection to give a psychedelic as a sacri

And the the fellow whose labor of love this is he has as a lawyer helped um establish over 30 other such churches so there’s a big anthogenic church movement

Psychedelic Science’s Claim that “The Root of All Religion Is Psychedelic” Has Been Debunked 90 Years Ago, Many Times [CITATION NEEDED!]

“but then there’s also just stuff like

“You would not believe the number of psychedelic scientists who say to me “Did you know that the root of all religion is psychedelic?”

and Did you know that the mysteries of Elucus were psychedelic? on it was actually psychedelic

“and then I go to my biblical studies friends and colleagues and I say you know they’re saying this still and they go we debunked that 30 years ago [CITATION NEEDED!] we debunked that 60 years before that [ie 90 years ago = 2023-90 = 1933] like how many times [answer: zero times]“

“um so so there’s that”

[my comment posted at video:

20:00 – there’s a false statement by Sharday Mosurinjohn that the claims that “the root of all religion is psychedelc” and “the mysteries of Eleusis were psychedelc” has been debunked many times by Biblical Studies scholars 30 years ago and 60 years before that.

In fact, entheogen scholarship has not really even started to investigate the question. There has only been 1st-generation entheogen scholarship (the Secret Amanita paradigm), and then starting in 1998, 2nd-generation entheogen scholarship (the Explicit Psilocybn paradigm).

In fact, Bible Studies has not even attempted to debunk the claim that “the root of all religion is psychedelc”.

Citations Needed, from Sharday Mosurinjohn:

In what publications did Bible Studies scholars debunk the claim that the root of all religion is psychedelcs?

Will Mosurinjohn resort to citing Andy Letcher’s 2006 book, in which he treated only a single piece of art evidence (page 35-36, Bernward Door), and gives phony endnote 31 falsely claiming that Stamets & Gartz tell a narrative of “secret, suppressed”?

The claim that the root of all religion is psychedelcs has been treated and debunked ZERO times – not “many times, 30 years ago and 60 years before that.”

Stop trying to reach negative conclusions and close the door, before sincere historical investigation has even begun.

-mh]

There’s also the fact that when psychedelic research got back up and running in the early 2000s when John’s Hopkins obtained regulatory approval after the whole freeze due to Nixon’s racist war on drugs, it was the mystical experience questionnaire that was at the heart of those first studies with psilocybin, saying psilocybin can occasion mystical experiences and things like mystical experiences that are indistinguishable from religious experiences [which came from Psilocybin -mh] that are had in you know a church setting um and

The mystical experience questionnaire was itself it was derived

so what was used there was derived from what Walter Panky [Tim Leary] used in the 60s

which was with the Marsh Chapel Good Friday experiment where he with approval dosed Harvard Divinity students in a Good Friday service in church and then said like do these psilocybin occasioned experiences compare to sort of regular religion occasioned mystical experiences that could be called the regular version [which came from Psilocybin -mh] of

And yes they did and so there’s been this kind of use of religion to legitimate psychedelics all the way through and that mysticism concept was itself taken from the perennialist Christian work of the philosopher Walter Stace earlier than than that

and so there there’s just so much also in this space I see so much interest in astrology in magic in past lives in ancient aliens and it just my friend Jacob used the metaphor of like a violently shaking snow globe of um of esoteric references it has everything yeah

so okay so far what I’ve got is that there are there’s a large community of psychonauts some of whom are using psychedelics to create gods which may or may not form into religion based on

mystical experiences [sic; the “positive unity” false model selectively fabricated & whitewashed & neutered for the purpose of trojan horse pretext [to push for international mundane unity] by Swami Vivekananda 1893, James 1902, Stace 1960] and spirituality

this sounds very different from what we typically understand as religion and it seems like most mainstream religions disregard this they’re not interested in it um

but spirituality is a universal part of religious experience

what is meant by spirituality and

How does this mystical esoteric phenomenon inform spirituality as an experience?

yeah good question so

that is really at the heart of what I’m tracking with these communities

because that

that part the

What does spirituality mean in this context?

it’s a discursive question that I can track through the literature and I can track through the way that people use it

and well I mean so

Charardai for me and I think this is true for most most atheists like it’s just it’s

it’s almost like an alien concept

it’s so weird I

I don’t have any functional grasp of it

And I don’t know Nathan do you have a spirituality

like a

Yeah

When you think of spirituality is there do you even have like a sense of it? Is it a feeling, can you define it?

no uh I don’t think I have a sense of it it’s hard to define

i mean

it’s one of those things like it’s hard to define without defining it in a circular way

i think um Right wasn’t Wasn’t there yeah may this is

maybe is it ineffable is that but I remember like I think at some point you looked up the definition there was something like you know spirituality is like believing in spiritual things or something like that

i mean I don’t know

it’s just some like totally circular definition

um but uh yeah anyway yes go ahead i can

I can offer something that can help ground this my dear friend and colleague the brilliant Dr galen Watts wrote his dissertation and first book on the spiritual but not religious in Canada

so espions millennial espioners um of which we are that generation and um I mean I think what they said so he he actually hung out at institutions where he thought that this particular type of spirituality was really embodied and he hung out at um C3 which I believe did understand itself specifically as a church but also Toast Masters and AA very interesting and what they said had a

lot to do with notions that I think will probably sound very familiar like connection and meaning and personal expression and the idea of I think sort of belonging in a responsive universe and things like that the far more interesting element that I think Galen articulated was the historical context of this that these notions come through like Wesleian charismatic Christianity through liberal and romantic modernity so it’s these these this twinned phenomenon of liberal and romantic modernity that carries what he calls uh advisedly because of it its root in this kind of like you know tent show situation with the strange warming of the heart um the religion of the heart so yeah I I think that that

That helps me historically ground where the those elements of the discourse of like belonging and connectedness and um all of these kind of good things come from but yeah in practice I think

one of the things that will be interesting is to see

does psychedelic spirituality actually show up differently than SBNR spirituality?

because the psychedelic spirituality very much about belonging in a responsive universe very much about connectedness

like with the the fungal mcelium as the primary metaphor of connectedness but very very much about direct non-ordinary experience which I mean is similar to the kind of charismatic impulse of having some kind of a revelatory event um an event deemed revoly in Tavian language but in this case there there’s a lot of drawing on kind of archetypal language and imagery

there’s a real interest as there is in a in generally in esotericism of authenticating things by going way way way back

European History Has No Entheogens, because I Accuse Fabrication by Appropriating Indigenous

[THE CENTER FOCUS AND CONCERN OF EUROPEAN ENTHEOGEN SCHOLARSHIP IS EUROPE.

THE CENTER OF FOCUS OF EUROPEAN RESEARCH IS NOT INDIGENOUS.

INDIGENOUS HAS NO PART, NO ROLE, NO RELEVANCE (IE, PERIPHERAL ONLY)

World religious myth informs the topic of European entheogen history, while the focus and concern of … these remain two distinct scopes and focuses of concern:

  • European religious myth – high pri. from POV of this research, non-Euro “indigenous” & world religious myth is low pri and in a merely peripheral supporting role.
  • World religious myth – subservient low pri in service of the high pri.
  • Indigenous religious myth
  • Indigenous European religious myth
  • Indigenous non-European religious myth

https://www.google.com/search?q=define+indigenous

“So very ancient yeah

“wanting to refer to stuff like the Greco Roman mysteries but also wanting to and

There is no “appropriation” needed, as accused by ignorant semi-scholars, no need to “appropriate”, because Europe has its own indigenous “traditions”, “mainstream”, of Psilocybin and other, lesser inebriants such as mixture of Datura, Amanita, opium, & cannabis to form deliriant non-psychedelics.]

“this is where it the psychedelic community is really reckoning with its relationship with um learning from and appropriating indigenous traditional knowledges“

“because there’s a lot of that way of of framing things and you know like making contact with entities from those traditions and so

these connections are are are really really broad and mean in a lot of different ways

you can have like it’s like the oneness across people a connection to the universe and a connection across time as well going back to other systems of belief and other people’s historically as well

that’s wow that’s a very broad notion of spirituality and it it does

it helps me make sense of other ways people have used it is when psychonauts

I’m sorry I just love that word and want to keep using it

when people draw these connections how far back do they see the the the use of psychedelics going back in time to build these connections

like does it go back to prehistory

is it only going back to the 60s

how far back does it Oh yeah

there is this fellow a lawyer who did a classics undergrad Brian Morasco who recently put out this book The Immortality Key [as if this one, “ergot Christianity” book = the state of entheogen scholarship in Europe] and

he claims that not only is the one of the psychedelic community’s kind of like foundational documents

and and you know a story that it often lives by um the road to elus by our Gordon Wson and Albert Hoffman who synthesized LSD and Carl Ruck the classicist not only were they correct in in saying that the Greco Roman mysteries were psychedelic [if you consider Amanita to be a psychedelic – like Ruck – which it is not]

Moresu wants to say that actually there were all these kinds of all these all these kinds of cults way before that uh and wants to stretch it back I think into prehistory

and it’s it’s an it’s an interesting thing because that so I

I have heard that hypothesis filtered through scientists who have picked up that book cuz they’re psychedelic scientists and they’re interested in it and they are unfamiliar with sort of humanity’s standards of evidence

[We have not even STARTED looking yet. IDIOT HUMANITIES washed out the cups and then claimed “there’s no evidence”, yeah because you dumbasses washed the cups and mixing bowls, so impressive, your standards for evidence]

and as I’m reading that book [THE ONLY BOOK YOU’VE READ ABOUT ENTHEOGEN SCHOLARSHIP!] I’m seeing okay there’s a lot that is frontloaded here on evidence that my colleagues who work in the Greor Roman antiquity area find spurious at best

[WE HAVEN’T STARTED LOOKING, SO THAT MEANS NOTHING]

and it dedicates many many many more chapters to going through a lot of detail about you know particular artifacts found at particular museums and telling a very sort of dramatic story about like how they don’t want you to find out about this

[= 1st-generation entheogen scholarship (the Secret Amanita paradigm) – a narrative-driven, narrative-restricted approach to scholarly gathering of evidence. MUST OMIT SUCH NARRATIVES. -mh]

and um and I just I noticed that the form that that takes is that it’s like

the farther away you get from that initial hypothesis [?] the more plausible it [?] seems to become

because all of this so-called evidence is stacking up in between it but if you remember that the hypothesis to begin with was on shaky grounds according to the people who have dedicated themselves to those disciplines you know except for a few kind of outlier figures it’s yeah it is suspect

[“WE WASHED OUT THE CUPS AND HAVEN’T STARTED LOOKING. SO, DO NOT LOOK, B/C THE EVIDENCE IS SUSPECT”]

so there are claims that seem to be being taken seriously because it looks to people who are not in that area

[LOOK IN THE MIRROR: YOU HAVE NOT READ ANYTHING ON THE TOPIC YOU PRESUME TO TALK ABOUT HERE]

like there’s a heck of a lot of evidence being marshaled for it um that it’s very very very very very old

and then I think you know with with traditions that are alive right now then I think the imperative there is to take what they say about how long their traditions have been going with psychedelic sacraments

yeah yeah i I wanted to ask um moving away from religion and to more like secular and atheist people i mean I feel like probably they would there

there’s benefit I think for atheists and secular people from psychedelics too

and perhaps more so I mean like well

what is your thought about taking psychedelics and like getting a new picture of reality but not ever not ever kind of abandoning like a materialist worldview or something like that but nonetheless um uh yeah still like finding doing psychedelics and then coming away with like you know change understandings of consciousness or something like that

[false dichotomy. religious analogy = changed understanding of mental model]

yeah this is something that I also want to work on and I think I’m going to have to do this in more of a data driven way because anecdotally it seems like a lot of people come through powerful psychedelic experiences

so I’m not talking about a micro dose or a mess dose but you know maybe a full acid trip or um something heroic

yeah yeah a heroic mushroom trip or a full embrace of DMT and and they come back ontologically shocked

they come back changed

they we

integration is such a huge part of the psychedelic community because these profoundly strange metaphysical things seem to happen that you then have to incorporate into your model of how the world is

[non-branching; 2-level, dependent control]

and so I am curious to know actually

how many people do go through that level of non-ordinary experience and do not deem it religious spiritual supernatural non-materialist

but then there’s also stuff like I don’t know like

are you a dual aspect monist

[monism here means Swami Vivek’s “positive unity” model of mystical experience – not cybernetic eternalism]

“maybe you think that there is one substance but it sort of shows up in two ways you know it’s it’s shakti and it’s Shiva it’s a particle and it’s a wave

it’s and so yeah I don’t know but

that really is something that we need to track

and I’m going to Yeah

there’s um Sam Harris who’s the this well one of the new atheists but he’s um

he’s written about like his experience with psychedelics and

he has this funny article where he’s talking about basically

he’s kind of going through a list of like substances and things like talking about his daughters

like you know like

he would be really disappointed if you know they took up smoking or like he would be horrified if they took up heroin

um and so on but

he said like I’d be really disappointed if they didn’t uh ever try psychedelics

um so as as a note:

psychedelic exceptionalism is a real issue: that psychedelics are the good kind of drugs but let’s keep the rest stigmatized

yeah it’s a real problem

oh that’s interesting yeah go on no no i mean it was

it was just just a note

that Yeah that that that Yeah that

the secular person is is uh kind of boosting them

[“look how the good, atheist, secular person is boosting psychedelics, against other drugs”]

yeah well

he’s ultra ultra spiritual now isn’t he

i think he’s psychedelics i think

he’s trying trying to like uh reappropriate or whatever um the word spirituality

but yeah uh yeah i mean I I wonder

how much of this is like that sort of like secularization of of something that’s seen as sort of ceremonial or sacred

right like

you have this thing it’s it’s part of a ritual it’s part of it’s either a right of passage or something connected to a bigger pro religious pro community project

and now it’s been taken out of that

are PE

Are the psychonaut community are they trying to rebuild around that notion trying to sacriize it or is it something that’s being left to be profane and meant to be secular and meant to be common

[I want religious mental model transformation to be made entirely commonplace and familiar -mh]

yeah that’s that’s such a good question because

there are I think um it’s not like counterveilling forces but

there are forces from different directions that are maybe converging such that you could say that

one strand of what’s happening is that

  • this psychedelic renaissance or enthogenesis era right now is a manifestation of the the weak secularization hypothesis
  • is religion is changing in the face of modernity like clearly there are things of some sort of worldbuing importance going on here and it’s not happening necessarily within the confines of the so-called traditional [McPriest article in the Journal of Psychedelic Studies​ doubts the “traditional Christianity” construct] world religions
  • um but reckoning with the same kinds of existential questions and impulses regarding meaning and um community
  • and so functionally there’s you know religious stuff happening but it’s it’s being but it’s it’s it’s secular it’s secularizing
  • and then another strand of what’s happening is that there are
  • particular ritual forms particular substances i mean I think IA is a really key example um I highly recommend checking out the work of Olivia Marcus who’s a medical anthropologist on shamanic tourism
  • she’s done field work at retreat centers Iaska retreat centers in um in Peru and uh and the tradition that is taken mainly in the iawaska space is specifically shapibbo and as those practices like that IA [Aya?] is typically done in a group setting led by somebody who hopefully is not only self-appointed as the shaman far as I understand ought to be a communal designation like that is driven from the opinion of the community and but
  • That form is what you see often transported into North America so there is a secularization there for instance mushrooms got popularized because Gordon Wson inappropriately took pictures of the Kurandera Maria Sabina and published them in I think it was time or
  • his wife um Valentina Wson also who was a brilliant myologist also ran a similar story in another like national magazine and so it the
  • a lot of mushroom lore and practice and just knowing about them how to identify them all kinds of stuff this is taken from the Masetch tradition
  • which is you know in both of those traditions that I’ve just mentioned Masetch and Shipo are very much extent um but have been seriously damaged by tourism like they ruined Maria Sabina’s life by overrunning her town and so so there’s so there’s that and then there’s the fact that um and interestingly I think because

A lot of the researchers who have been at the forefront of the really the Renaissance period so at Hopkins

Roland Griffiths um nearly left his his research career to go join an ashram

and Bill Richards is theologically trained

and there are a bunch of other people who actually come from some kind of theological training and then into this space

there’s something there’s some sort of secularization of some kinds of internal maps of how things go and bringing that into a clinical space and a research space and figuring out how to do that

and then there is also you know even beyond those particular um personalities a recognition of that whether it’s you know like

I don’t think religion can be used to explain this i think it’s just that

people do things in community um and those communities that some of these psychedelics have been done in historically could be described or people want to describe them in religious or spiritual terms

[see Jan Irvin, who disproves “religious” use of Psilocybin in Americas, that such “religious” has little match between Americas vs. Europe.

The present site proves that compared to actual “religious use of Psilocybin” in Europe, the Vivek/Stace model is false and fails to match actual religious Psilocybin mystical experience.

  • article series: The Secret History of Magic Mushrooms
  • latest book God’s Flesh.

and so then people go “Oh we’ve always done it this way so if we’re going to have the right set and setting to do it today we need to make new rituals.”

[seeming contradiction above: always done this way … new rituals — vague speaking.]

And so you do see the this is another line of where there is the invention it’s like the Sunday assembly for the research lab

it’s in the invention of secular rituals because they can’t be too clearly referential to any given tradition

but I have seen still photos for instance of some of the the settings where um where says psilocybin sessions would happen for trials or for for research and you know there’s like there’s a Buddhist statue there’s a candle there’s a rose and there’s a maybe there’s like celtic knot tapestry or something

so um yeah the the

there is a a a ritualization

https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/15/moving-past-mysticism-in-psychedelic-science-article-debate-series/

yan yeah and it it really tells the story because you’re as you say like

something is being co-opted

[define “co-opt”. religion comes from Psilocybin. To use Psilocybin, draw upon religious history. Stupid notion: “later culture is a cooptation of earlier culture“.]

right

it’s being being taken out of where it was but it’s being recreated in a in a a different society that’s secularized

[biggest false dichotomy: alleged gap between secular approach to psychedelics, vs. having religious experience from psychedelics]

that has this loss of meaning that’s being recreated but it has this setting set in setting meaning the

the conditions that you do you have a heavy trip in and who you’re with and how it establishes the mindset

you have to create sort of a ritualized setting and then you have a heavy dose you go through it and you you get to meet God that sounds pretty nice and then it and you come out of it with a spiritual awakening that really does sound like like it’s

it’s almost like

a secular road back to a sort of religious foundation

and I think weird it’s

[Zep: “I only wanted to have some fun” but had religious transformation instead]

it’s a strange path that secularism can take that’s unexpected

yeah that’s a good way to put it um Yeah and it it really

regardless of exactly the terms that it’s put in it it does come to this meaning crisis problem

and some people describe that by saying something more like

it’s because we’ve lost religion or tradition

um and some people put it more like no

those changes are a function of a much broader you know set of conditions that can produce you know enemy [anomie?] and disconnection and fragmentation

um but it it comes down to yeah

finding these different roads to experience something meaningful

right so

how do people get into it

that this is the we’re

we’re at the end

all right how do we all how do we do this uh

check out your your local society or community

and I guess the the disclaimer has to be made that

there are a lot of good folks fighting the good fight for legalization

um you know it’s following the medical cannabis model

there are legal challenges up right now that it

it violates sort of basic rights that people have to not be able to make these decisions for themselves and that there should be access

but so I have to say that because um of course

we can’t encourage anybody to do anything illegal now can we

yeah yeah the legality also extends to research doesn’t it where it’s still mostly illegal to to conduct research on psychedelics even for things like PTSD and

any sort of psychological treatment there are in Canada two ways to obtain um the special access program and section 56 exemption and so

the special access program I believe is the way that most researchers who are able to do this are are doing it like who researchers who are you know there are researchers who are collecting observation of naturalistic use say through um quantified citizen is a citizen science app [see Houot, Rise of the Psychonaut] where um a bunch of say micro do [dose] studies are going on right now

but yeah for researchers who are actually administering a substance it’s uh it’s not easy but it’s it’s possible but it can be said that um well so I’ve got

Cannabis Can Produce the Same Effect as High-Dose Psilocybin, So Cannabis Is a Psychedelic Like Psilocybin

“I’ve got friends who are absolely absolutely insistent that with the right set and setting and so a sort of ceremonial one and paired with breath work cannabis can [/ could/ might/ may] be just as psychedelic as anything else

[same with tobacco, and alcohol, inhaling engine fumes, and sniffing glue, and smashing your head against a wall -mh]

and so what I could say about you know if you kind of want to do a toe dip into this space is find a community that is doing that kind of group work and you can have a perfectly legal experience in that way but uh it seems like a lot of municipalities have a community like a psychedelics community and yeah I mean I think often about the fact that

It not that long ago and for friends of mine in this space who are of an older generation to put that out there could have you know maybe outed friends of yours or you know taken a a community that was supposed to be very close-knit and underground ground uncomfortably above ground and exposed

so it almost it feels weird in a way to say like go join your local community like do so carefully and with respect please but

excellent that I think that’s great advice and it’s Yeah and also

keep it legal and safe it’s it’s not just set in setting, it’s making sure it’s everything’s safe

um that’s right: setting, supply, dose, integration, all of that um we’ve got the lightning round charard

so I should we make it It’s normally

can a true atheist should we make it can a true psychonaut

yes i love that all right okay see if it works

yeah I think it’ll

I think it’ll work all right

well the easy one do you want to start Nathan sure okay so I guess we should just say these are just short short questions short answers and so on you can elaborate a little bit but it’s called a lightning round though I guess um anyway yeah okay so okay

Can a true psychonaut believe in God?

[Music]

i know a bunch of do

can you like can you have both can like I I mean we we mentioned it earlier

do you know people who’ve like gone through it and been like “Yeah I just I totally talked to God it was amazing.”

And then been like “Yeah but God’s not real.”

Can you kind of have that sense really actually yeah yeah I do i know

i know a particular neuroscientist who maintains uh I mean he has had he has he’s gotten into some pretty wild polyarm pharmacy like many layers of many substances and and had some really you know some experiences that were like yeah this shows something about how very profoundly weird reality is but I don’t know but uh but yeah Yeah so

they met God but maybe it wasn’t God trickster God

yeah that’s right yeah well

Can a true psychonaut attend church?

in fact

There’s a whole phenomenon of psychedelic chaplain

wait like like Ken Casey’s um I forgot what they’re called already man mary pranksters

the merry pranksters like where they were evangelicizing acid

is it like that um not evangelizing but actually uh you know maybe

working on the staff of the institutions that would traditionally employ chaplain for the sake of integration, which is something between like a spiritual direction and psychotherapy

and uh yeah and harm reduction and um and the I there is an idea that that actually yeah that

mainline churches may want to adapt to this and theo generation um by by training or providing psychedelic chaplain

so yeah I think I think yes okay okay um

Can a true psychonaut think we live in a computer simulation?

[Laughter]

i want the answer to that to be no

oh to be no yeah i I want it to be no i want it so that every you know the

I want the intel that people are bringing back to be like “Yeah don’t worry it’s all very true.”

That’s a good point yeah

does anybody endorse the the simulation

i mean nobody comes back from a trip and says like “Oh yeah it’s all programming

it’s Yeah people

people don’t tend to come back talking about computers.”

But there there is this this funny phenomenon of um the the gear elves the gear elves with DMT

so there there is like a mechanical flavor to some of these the aesthetics of some of these but I haven’t heard I have

I haven’t heard like Yeah it’s all code you know it’s it’s all binary

right yes like gear elves man

Can a true psychonaut believe in the transcendent?

i just Or do they have to yeah well I think

A true psychonaut probably thinks that the transcendent is imminent

oh yeah man

that’s draw you in horrible ro uh okay

Can a true psychonaut play with a Ouija board

oh every every Saturday night yeah

one hasn’t been busted out at any parties that I’ve been at

but um but

That is like esoterically on brand

mhm that’s true yeah

Can a true psychonaut believe in an afterlife?

one of my favorite things on this that I’ve heard recently is a

a dear friend of mine said to me with a straight face and then heard what he said and laughed hysterically but continued to endorse the sentiment

it’s hilarious that we think that people die

yeah it was so clearly circular in some way that that’s that’s quite telling yeah it’s a good one so is the answer yes yes okay or or I guess if you never

if no one dies then I guess there’s no afterlife

oh oh thank you

that’s actually a way more sophisticated answer cut out you saying that cut to me saying that well

if consciousness is fundamental then life is ongoing with no serious interruptions

we ties in our just last our last episode um we talked about about that um but uh the persistence of consciousness

how it just can’t Yeah exa Exactly we the self

The self dies but consciousness goes on

um I think it’s me um this one is more relevant for the

Can a true atheist part but

Can a true psychonaut use the prayer emoji?

[Laughter]

frequently religiously i’m I’m picturing Jason Baitman in that episode Arrested Development where he winds up on the cover of the magazine

yes but so but

the God that’s created isn’t is it an active God

i I’ve just thought of this because like there’s no one to pray to is there in Well I think

there’s so so many really you know I think it’s it’s like especially with the sort of desire to like

there’s a real pagan strain in that that all of the natural forces are sort of personified oh wow yeah as gods

and it’s like

call in whoever you need or want

um I see and

I’m not I’m not saying I of course everybody is like this and

if you’re working with any specific tradition you’re going to have particular figures or concepts or gods or whatever

it’s not just the recreation of monotheism; it’s not just the recreation of Abraham’s God

it’s it is like it’s it’s creating new gods all the time

there’s there’s a lot of a type of perennialism that is like and you know

when in that story Moses saw the burning bush you know that was psychedelic and you know the god that spoke to him was

and so like everybody’s gods might be able to play in this story in so far as probably the access through psychedelics

[WAIT, I THOUGHT Mosur. had firmly reached the conclusion that European history lacks entheogens, and any attempt or wish or desire to find entheogens in Euro history is cultural appropriation and oppression of indigenous? -mh]

and probably it’s just the many faces of some principle that transforms itself into many things

i see much multiplicity all right and finally I think it’s me um

Can a true psychonaut think life is sacred?

i don’t think I’ve met one who doesn’t

interesting all right yeah

that’s a beautiful place to end it

I think yeah nice

i don’t think life is sacred

it’s like how do they define that

but it seems like nice that’s deep and important and I’ve learned a lot thank you so much Charardai this has been fantastic

thank you so much thank you both for having me

this was so much fun

all right that was Charardai Mazerin john [Sharday Mosurinjohn]

uh what were some of your takeaways

well I mean there’s a lot to lot to unpack there i Well one thing

I finally learned what spirituality is

like that’s all right i feel better like this idea of uh

we’re all connected to each other, we’re all connected to the universe

that feels pretty good

do you uh

are you a spiritual person Nathan

it’s

now that we have a good working definition

[biased trojan horse “positive unity” beginner/ “lite” model of “mystical experience” fabricated by Swami Vivek., latched onto by James, Stace, etc. – “mystical experience lite”]

no I don’t i would probably say not i mean it’s like I think the thing is it can also just kind of kick the definitional can down the road

like then you get like

what does it mean to feel connected to the universe

i mean I’ve

I feel connected to

I mean

I realize that I’m part of the universe and I’m part of something that’s way way bigger than myself and so on

but I don’t know if I feel Yeah like

What does it mean to feel connection?

i’m not sure exactly

right yeah what about what about you no I mean like in the the like the one of the things that got thrown around like the SBNR like spiritual but not religious, not in that sense not in like a woo woo sense but I mean like it’s baked into like you know humanism

it’s like

you can have a materialist reality and still feel that connection

[beginner “mystical experience” Lite: the “positive unity” model of mystical experience, vs. the mature, cybernetic eternalism model]

and it’s weird things like I don’t know

have you ever seen that like I think it’s a paradox the checkerboard paradox where if you start working backwards so okay

here’s how it works out

you get a checkerboard 8 by8 64 squares right

you start with the first square and that’s you right

this is just a way to show that we’re all interconnected

that’s you

and then how many parents do you have okay so the next square that’s two and that’s a generation

and then we go back another generation it’s 4 8 16 32 264 blah blah blah blah blah

the problem is because it’s exponential you rapidly get to the point where it’s more people than have ever existed and how the hell do we get to the point where it’s more people than have ever existed to produce one person

right that’s weird there’s something there’s something so simple to the logic of it but it gives us this conclusion that’s so strange it doesn’t seem to make sense at all

in less than I mean 64 generations would be about 1,200 years right working backwards let’s say 1500 years so that’s um and you know

one of the logical answers that we come to is that we’re all related

right like yes of course of course

we’re all connected we’re all related

when you hear that somebody’s related to Charlemagne or Ginghan it doesn’t who gives a [ __ ] we’re all related to Charlemagne and we’re all related to Genghaskhan it doesn’t matter right like there’s no getting away from it

after a certain point you go back enough generations with the exception of extreme genetic isolation everybody’s related and like that

in that sense I have this sense of connectedness the sense of holism the sense of and you know the cosmic sense of like yes we are I mean we’re a pale blue dot we’re all stuck in the same situation whether we like it or not we’re all together so I I don’t you don’t need drug I I feel you don’t need drugs for that they certainly help apparently but you don’t need it

[1. Define a weak, feeble model of mystical experience = positive unity. A complete mystical experience of positive unity.” update: now the acceptable locution is: “a mystical-type experience“.
2. Point out that many ways can/ could/ might/ may give experience of positive unity.
3. Psychedelics give positive unity (as one of the resulting effects).
4. Reach the false conclusion:
“Many ways give mystical-type experience (ie positive unity), therefore Psilocybin is not the only way to have a complete mystical-type experience.” -mh]

yes yeah i think it’s so that’s

one thing I think that’s a good takeaway

is there anything anything you found Nathan uh just to add on to to that point i mean I think again

I don’t know that I would say it’s spiritual but like

even if we go beyond like how we’re related to human like other humans like like we’re literally cousins with animals and birds and plants like not like metaphorically like literally cousins if you go far far enough back

and so I think that’s pretty cool um that we’re all part of the same story of life um but again I don’t know that it’s I wouldn’t call it “spiritual“; maybe other people would and then maybe that’s just a matter of the terminology people are comfortable with

yeah yeah i mean you know if it’s this

if it’s more of a metaphysical sense but you can get to that point with without the metaphysical

I feel so that’s one thing um you know

what struck me you know what was weird that I hadn’t thought about before is that like the idea that religion permits drugs right or like advocates it which I never really like explicitly considered before

like religions do advocate explicitly ways to like alter your consciousness

and normally we think about like forbidding and I mean

I don’t know if if I ever told you this one but um

when I was in Korea I had a student who um didn’t drink alcohol

it’s first of all like some good background to know is like

Korea has a very strong drinking culture and particularly in workplaces you have to go out and drink as a group it’s kind of like socially mandated

and he um and he’s like I I don’t drink i’m like why why don’t you drink and he said “Well because I’m a Christian.”

It’s like “Well that’s kind of weird like the first miracle Jesus performed was turning water into wine like how do you how why do you not drink?”

I’m not looking for a theological discussion but like trying to get some insight into this kid and he’s he goes

“Oh yeah that turning water into wine that was really grape juice.”

[John MacArthur’s LAME made-up arguments]

What the That’s so weird but the thing was it’s like

That allowed him to escape what the rest of society does

right and we like and we have it and

the flip side is of course that Christianity permits it it’s very permissive with drinking

and in a lot of ways we see that like

that is a part of western cultural legacy

right like we have very strong drinking from very strong Christian communities

whereas in Islam you don’t have that right

and one way to look at it is like it’s banned in these but in another way it’s like it’s permitted it’s allowed it’s encouraged

i mean it’s a sacrament in Catholicism

[alcohol wine is not an authentic sacrament. Liberty Cap is an authentic sacrament; Liberty Cap in grape wine.]

Liberty Cap
lbc

“so if we think about it that way one of the things that we find is that like the state kind of when we think of like governmentality

the government is really um reinforcing this sort of civic legacy, this religious power that’s been passed down even if it’s not good by the way that we measure things by the government government typically I mean

one of the things that we discuss in in political theory is like the harm principle the idea that you permit things that are not that don’t cause harm to other people

there is no way you can look at something like alcohol and say it does not harm other people

it’s it it’s very very clear that it does

but we have it where it’s it’s passed down right we know that this is what the state does right it’s permitting this it’s reinforcing this social permission it it also allows businesses things like opiates pharm pharmaceuticals

but when we start pushing it into this drugs section these psychoactive drugs psychedelic drugs places where we don’t find any harm and cannabis is included in this category

there’s a break with this legacy with this religious legacy

it wasn’t religion that permitted permitted it

[Greco Roman Christendom was filled with drugs, so that’s an untenable sweeping assertion]

it wasn’t businesses that were permitting it

it’s it’s just democracy

right

it’s just people who have for a long time worked to legalize cannabis and then they it happens it happens and in the US I’m not sure about the Canadian case but almost every state in the US that’s legalized marijuana almost all of them did it through voter initiatives there’s only like one or two cases where state legislators did it so the government

it’s not the government rationally looking at a list of drugs saying “Okay what’s harmful what’s dangerous what’s bad?”

It’s got nothing to do with it uh

instead it was it was people going out voter initiatives saying this is what we want

and this is to bring it full circle back to you know the atheist project when we go out and we say “Okay

What does it look like if we have a government that’s divorced from religion, what do we do that disrupts a religious legacy that imposes culture on us imposes the rules on us?”

[Euro’n religious legacy gives us many pharmacopia/theon]

This is a case where we’re doing that right this is a blank slate

We don’t have a religious legacy that endorses psychoactive drugs

[False, overbroad assertion based in IGNORANCE]

but we know socially they’re not harmful right compare opioid deaths tens of thousands i mean it’s really ridiculous in the US right the tens of thousands of opioid deaths every year um which were like artificially created in laboratories

compared to psychedelics that have killed literally no one over

Yeah right for entire history

yeah i I agree i mean one interesting thing is like and I think Charardai we talked a little bit about this with her like that sometimes

you can even make a religious freedom argument for legalizing certain like uh psychedelics or whatever

which is almost um Yeah almost like a kind of a reverse case where Yeah but atheists aren’t going to do that

are they no but I I think I think

she was talking about

like these sort of if I recall correctly like

particular churches

well I mean the thing is

what does it mean to be a church

like church kind of based around uh psychedelic drugs or something uh and claiming that religious freedom

I mean it’s sort of like this

like the satanic temple uh using that idea of religious freedom um yeah whether that’s that’s a good thing

here’s the flip side of that Nathan like with marijuana [sic; cannabis] nobody did that and we don’t need to

that’s true right and

if we’re going to be atheists we we can just we can say “Yeah we can do that.”

Or we can just say “No we we like this

We think about it rationally: we measure the harm verse um like the risk versus the reward

we think the outcome is totally okay.” Yeah I Yeah and

it’s a weird thing right because

we’re getting rid of that grounding that used to be there

[now admit Euro history includes psychedelics]

jesus drank wine we should be allowed to drink wine right

our our elders ate peyote, we should be allowed to eat peyote it’s an important part of a ritual

or right so I mean so

one of the things I find which I hadn’t thought of is that like

when we think of things as like an atheist culture, an atheist society: what does an atheist world look like, we don’t need to do that

right

we can wash away these things that religion says are good to do or you need to do socially

i think that’s powerful yeah i think Yeah um and I think

there is more of a focus on like um you know rationally considering laws versus like such and such thing is just bad it’s just immoral that’s just the way it is

you know like

even if it’s not even religiously like there’s no like you know religious prohibition on psychedelics [good point] or something like that but it’s more like you know drugs are bad and like why well they’re just bad okay like they’re just immoral like we they should be illegal

but rather than like actually sort of thinking about like what is the harm versus benefit or so on which more more rational way to approach it

I think yeah and I mean like

This isn’t to say that as an atheist or a non-believer you need to endorse psychedelics, you need to go out and do them, it’s just that we you know yeah that we have to think about these things rationally

with like and look at things like Like we aren’t looking into an abyss right like

whoa where do we want to put the ground

do we want to right like

we get to make these decisions, take it seriously become uh interested in and invested in it whether or not you’re doing it

so Nathan are you going to start hitting up the mushrooms

now well there is

I never done psychedelics before but there is um here in Ottawa there’s a ton of cannabis stores but I saw on my street there’s like I think there’s like a like a dispensary or something for like magic mushrooms

Crop by Michael Hoffman
Crop by Michael Hoffman

i don’t know you know like Yeah I’m not sure like I assume it’s illegal but it’s like it’s one of those things where it’s probably becoming sufficiently like widespread that people will do it the other way maybe i’m not sure so maybe we’ll see see I should I don’t know

We expect you to report back in the next episode about what happened with the magic mushroom discussion

yeah yeah all right yes better not just be like creini mushrooms or oyster mushrooms oh it’s got it’s got uh psychedelic artwork and stuff on the building so obviously yeah maybe they just color Did they put food dye on the mushrooms yeah right yeah yeah yeah yeah i I don’t think

I’m not going to be smoking DMT no anytime soon

yeah okay that sounds like a good thing probably yeah but

if uh anyone’s interested you can stop follow Charardai’s work um we’ll put some links below um what else we should plug her what What else can we say about Charardai other than she’s a fantastic scholar doing incredible work so

her book is called the spiritual significance of overload boredom

i almost said overlord as well overlord and uh check that out and

she’s got a new well she’s working on a new book on psychedelics which is mostly what we talked about

so Um keep an eye on her website and and follow her on social media if you want to and I’m sure if you have fantastic stories she would love to hear from you that’s always a question for

It’s always an issue for people doing research in that field yeah yeah good otherwise what do we I don’t know

nathan do you have anything to plug what’s going on no nothing to plug um follow me on Twitter I guess uh Nath G alexander

well it still exists i’m I really have have I think I sort of have not being there anymore but you never know so it’s still there

i’m also do it a lot so he notices push the buttons really hard

yeah I guess yeah so check that out nathan’s there um

as always like and subscribe if you like what you hear that’s the easiest way of course if you have extra money hanging around we’d love to have you throw some our way and become a patron

big support to our patrons we love you guys so much thank you and uh remember even for $5 a month you get some of the behind the scenes you get the extra talk which is a little looser a little sloppier more swearing I think and that’s totally worth the money too that’s that’s the best part

um and yeah be sure to check out Remember

we are part of Atheist United Studios check them out there are partners on the on the network and Atheist United if you’re in California looking for a good time sign up they’re always out there they’re always doing stuff looking for members looking for people to join the project

um and that’s it from me Nathan any last words thanks again people for listening and we’ll see you next time

awesome [Applause] [Music]  

About Mosurinjohn, Who Advocates Ignorance of European Entheogen History and Is Against Scholarly Research on That Topic

https://www.queensu.ca/religion/people/faculty/sharday-c-mosurinjohn –

“Dr. Mosurinjohn studies the discursive construction of spirituality and religion as well as concepts of nonreligion and secularity.

“Specific interests include the study of “new religious movements” (NRMs), ritual, and religion and/as media.

“Her broad interest in the material turn touches on contexts of contemporary (especially conceptual) art; museums; everyday aesthetics; digital contexts (eg. social media; surveillance cultures), and affect.

“Her major line of research continues to be about boredom and spirituality—taking the modern concept of boredom as a spiritual crisis as a heuristic through the late modern context of choice and information overload.

“Professor Mosurinjohn’s research is about contemporary mind-body experience as spiritual and religious experience.

“Her work bridges religious studies, cultural theory, aesthetic philosophy, and media and technology studies.

“Prof. Mosurinjohn’s first book is The Spiritual Significance of Overload Boredom (2022; McGill-Queen’s University Press).

“Her new project explores the concept of entheogenic esotericism in a way that reunites the study of religion, magic, and science in the psychedelic turn.” [didn’t say “re-integrate psychedelics into religion”]

Relevant to new book by Hatsis
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/04/21/idea-development-page-28/#psychedelic-injustice-how-identity-politics-poisons-the-psychedelic-renaissance-hatsis-june-16-2025

Conference Abstracts (Psychedelics and Monotheistic Traditions:
Sacramental Practice and Legal Recognition
Harvard Law School, March 2025), con’t

Sharday Mosurinjohn,
The Sweetest Taboo: Psychedelics and the Invention of Religious Experiences

“This talk responds to the idea that the ancient Eleusynian Mysteries were psychedelic, as claimed by Carl Ruck and co-authors in The Road to Eleusis (1978), revitalized by Brian Muraresku’s The Immortality Key (2020), and popularized by the Overton window-widening Joe Rogan.

It begins by exposing critical methodological flaws in the arguments, namely, a pattern of presenting claims, followed by mild circumstantial evidence, and then rhetorically solidifying the interpretation of this evidence into a “fact,” on which is built each subsequent round of conjecture.

In The Road To Eleusis, a speculation like “It seems obvious that an hallucinogen must have induced it” (2008: 47) immediately furnishes the next premise “To identify the Eleusynian drug…” (2008: 47) that begins the following paragraph.

I argue that these writers’ dogged pursuit of evidentiary mirages has to do with wanting a western civilizational pedigree to dignify the use of stigmatized drugs.

[Mos. equates – like terrible writers McC & Priest – Muraresku as if TIK is an adequate representative of Euro entheogen scholarship.

Mos. equates European history research in psychedelics with “myopia” b/c not focusing on non-Europeans] [

Succesful strategy:

Focus on European history, and mostly ignore non-European history.

Like how bad Amanita scholarship abuses Psilocybin by only employing Psilocybin as a slave to sing the glory of Amanita; subsuming Psilocybin in service of the Ruck committee’s grand narrative of “Amanita = Europe = mixed wine”.

Use non-European entheogen history, only employ non-European entheogen history in service of the only goal that matters for this Euro Entheogens project.

Pay attention to non-European entheogen history only insofar as it can be used to prop up European entheogen history.

The little, feeble effort to find entheogens in European history was impeded and blocked by the duplicitous Wasson, who had to resort to lies, deception, censorship, and play-acting con-artistry:

Conflict-of-interest Gordon . . . .🔍🧐🤔 Wasson LIES, as the banker for the pope, and falsely says no Psilocybin in Christian history, resorting to duplicity and censorship, Soma p. 180 top, his ellipses in same paragraph as his admonition to”consult art historians”.]

Browns’ expose of the Panofsky two 1952 letters shows what got censored and replaced by . . . . at top of SOMA 1968, page 180:
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/01/07/panofskys-letters-to-wasson-transcribed/#Sentence-1-6 –

“If you are interested, I recommend a little book by A. E. Brinckmann, Die Baumdarstellung im Mittelalter (or something like it), where the process is described in detail. Just to show what I mean, I enclose two specimens: a miniature of ca. 990 which shows the inception of the process, viz., the gradual hardening of the pine into a mushroom-like shape, and a glass painting of the thirteenth century, that is to say about a century later than your fresco, which shows an even more emphatic schematization of the mushroom-like crown.
[handwritten:]
Albert Erich Brinckmann
Baumstilisierungen in der mittelalterlichen malerei”
= Tree Stylizations in Medieval Paintings (Brinckmann 1906)

Mosurinjohn con’t:

“This myopia is rooted in colonial violence that precludes seriously relating to the many well-documented Indigenous histories of psychedelics, as well as a sort of functional fixedness that prevents seeing contemporary psychedelic practice in continuity with other, and maybe even older, non-pharmacological methods of changing consciousness.”

[myopic over-focus on alleged indigenous psychedelics history [see Jan Irvin’s new book] precludes seriously relating to the many well-documented mushroom imagery in Christian art & greco-roman.

Your bullsh!t sword cuts both ways. -mh]

“I conclude that, given how the psychedelic hypothesis is fundamentally flawed in its study of antiquity, it is a shaky foundation [SO MAKE IT STRONGER, NOT GIVE UP BEFORE YOU EVEN TRY LEGITLY] on which to build an argument for modern psychedelic use for therapeutic and spiritual practice.”

[1st-generation entheogen scholarship (the Secret Amanita paradigm) is fundamentally flawed in its study of Antiquity. Switch to 2nd-generation entheogen scholarship (the Explicit Psilocybin paradigm).

A naysayer crowd who sucks at building arguments, should not lecture others.

WE HAVEN’T EVEN BEGUN TO LOOK, AS PROVED BY MY recent additional of mushroom imagery in Christian art.

Refusing to discuss the tons of evidence, is foisted here as “there is no evidence”.

Argument from ignorance, like Letcher 2006 only considering 1 evidence, even ignoring the other evidence in the Bernward Door/ column/ chandelier.

Fallacy: premature negative conclusion before we have started to even look – properly per 2nd-generation entheogen scholarship (the Explicit Psilocybin paradigm).

“Let’s stop looking, before we have started looking.”]

“I also report on the multi-year history of the rejection of the manuscript on which this talk is based as it is emblematic of the way popular audiences and scholars fail to communicate around psychedelic history and culture, even as psychedelic bioscience scholarship is at the centre of today’s social mainstreaming.”

  • Your ms. was rejected. Maybe it is nonsensical:
  • You here tell scholars to stop looking for entheogens in European history.
  • And you accuse scholars of failing to communicate re: psychedelic history.

[BUNK, PREJUDICED, AGRESSIVE CRYBABY (CRYBULLY) ARG: “Indigenous entheogens history is well doc’d. Euro entheogen history is not well doc’d, therefore, we should not try to doc Euro entheogen history.“]

Anti-European Prejudice: Europe Is Not Allowed to Have Psychedelic History, because That Oppresses Non-Europeans (per Sharday Mosurinjohn)

Sharday Mosurinjohn Disrespects, Discredits, & Dismisses European Entheogen History Scholarship, Pushes Divisiveness

… Implying that European Entheogen History Scholarship Should Disrespect, Discredit, and Dismiss Non-European Entheogen History

Zero-sum arg: “We should not look for entheogens in Europe/ Mediter. history, b/c that fails to promote entheogens in non-Europe history, and steals credit from Indigenous.”

MOSURINJOHN USES HER OWN IGNORANCE OF EUROPEAN ENTHEOGEN HISTORY TO FALSELY ACCUSE EUROPE HISTORY OF STEALING CREDIT FROM INDIGENOUS.

Mosur takes advantage of two weaknesses of The Immortality Key by Brian Muraresku, 2020:

  • Should focus broadly on all Mystery Religions, not only Eleusis; and sacred meals, “mixed wine”.
  • Should focus broadly on all entheogens eg Lib Cap, not only on ergot.

Muraresku restricts theorizing to ergot in Eleusis & proto Christianity. A weak case results.

Mosur leaps on that weakness to accuse Europe scholarship of fabricating European history of entheogen use.

Thanks for Your Divisive Recommendation, Mosurinjohn, your effort to delete entheogens from history.

F*ck social-suppression narratives! This is the “deletion” effect produced by narrative-driven entheogen scholarship.

In entheogen scholarship, Social-Suppression Narrative = effort to restrict entheogens, thus accommodating & perpetuating Prohibition and ignorance of history.

McPriest’s Presentation (Conf. Abstracts, con’t)

Rev. Hunt Priest,
Claiming a Ministry: Resourcing Christians for Psychedelic Spiritual and Pastoral Care

“With high-quality educational resources and training, Christian congregations could, through existing programs and ministries, support parishioners and the wider community in their psychedelic experiences by providing a safe and non-judgmental space for open discussions and peer support.

“Clergy and layleaders could offer spiritual guidance and integration support, helping individuals make sense of their psychedelic journeys within a Christian context.

“Additionally, churches could explore how the psycho-spiritual insights gained in a psychedelic experience might be integrated into existing Christian practices and beliefs, fostering a more inclusive and expansive approach to spirituality, religion, and mental health.

Yosef Rosen,
Ba’alei Shem as Predecessors for Contemporary Jewish Psychedelic Guidance

“Not too long ago, Jewish shamans roamed through Ashkenaz, offering healing and mystical ecstasy.”

“These practitioners were called Ba’alei Shem, masters of the name, because kabbalistic names of God and angels were a core part of their medical craft—written in amulets or chanted over herbs.

“Trained in Kabbalah, bloodletting, herbalism, other pre-modern healing modalities, and magical incantations, they offered a uniquely Jewish style of healing throughout the early-modern period.

“This talk will propose that these figures—with their integration of ecstasy, healing, meditation, and ascent—provide the best historical template for contemporary Jewish psychedelic facilitation.”

[better let Mosurinjohn know about this terrible fabrication and stealing credit from indigenous – Europeans must stop pursuing this mirage, myopically, and put indigenous in the center of focus instead. https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/04/21/idea-development-page-28/#psychedelic-injustice-how-identity-politics-poisons-the-psychedelic-renaissance-hatsis-june-16-2025 ]

“As more Jews search for psychedelic settings that offer healing modalities rooted in Jewish lineage, “Ba’al Shemkeit” offers a model of training and practice for emergent Jewish facilitators.

“Unlike more traditional (theoretical) Kabbalistic models, Ba’al Shemkeit emerges from Practical Kabbalah and is thus better suited to contemporary models of psychedelic facilitation that integrate the earthy, somatic, and curative aspects of existence.”

/ end of: Conference Abstracts (Psychedelics and Monotheistic Traditions:
Sacramental Practice and Legal Recognition
Harvard Law School, March 2025)

“Karina Bashir” (Psychedelics Today podcast) Video

Video title: Karina Bashir
YouTube ch: Psychedelics Today
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vI81OvFWwU —

Non-drug entheogens; diminishing actual psychedelics while falsely elevating non-drug, avoidance strategies to the level of “psychedelic”

I strive to be the extreme voice representing “ppl who say entheogens are the only way to access the intense mystic altered state” – I defend that position, against the tired repeated assertion that other ways “can/ could/ might/ may” produce the same effect.  

Has legal ramif.  I reject any diminishment of entheogens (the source of religion) & I reject false elevation of other approaches above, or to the level of, entheogens. Other approaches are lesser.   

1:30 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vI81OvFWwU&t=90s –
Harvard Law School conference:
Psychedelics in Monotheistic Traditions: Sacramental Practice and Legal Recognition
March 5-6, 2025:
“interdisciplinary symposium brings together scholars of religion, legal experts, and religious leaders to explore the legal recognition of religious psychedelc use in J, C, and M communities.”

https://www.psychedelicsandreligion.info

harvard+law+school+logo.png
Psychedelics and Monotheistic Traditions – psychedelicsandreligion.info

15:30 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vI81OvFWwU&t=930s –
psychedelcs vs. potential of non-drg methods.  The gold standard reference is Psilo; other ways that ppl have accessed the intense mystic altered state are the deviant nonstandard exceptions that are far less reliable and strong and effectual.  Non-drg methods “can/ could/ might/ may” produce same effects as high-dosce Psilo, but are poor and serve as ways of avoiding the experience.  

Joe’s Weak, False Elevation of Breathwork to Steal Credit from Psychedelics: “Breathwork Is a Psychedelic Practice”

17:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vI81OvFWwU&t=1020s –
“breathwork is a form of psychedelc practice” –  no, it is a misuse of language to construct the notion of “non-drg psychedelcs”. This is a contradiction in terms.  Moves like proposing “non-drg entheogens” is a way of falsely elevating other methods, stealing credit from entheogens to elevate ineffectual attempted alternatives that serve as a way of avoiding the actual transformative experiences that primarily come from entheogens. 

Esotericism in Western Culture: Counter-Normativity and Rejected Knowledge (Wouter Hanegraaff, May 29, 2025)

Esotericism in Western Culture: Counter-Normativity and Rejected Knowledge
May 29, 2025
Wouter Hanegraaff
https://www.amazon.com/Esotericism-Western-Culture-Counter-Normativity-Knowledge/dp/1350459690/ —

Replaces 2013 book Western Esotericism: A Guide for the Perplexed. 2nd, expanded & revised version.

Blurb:

“This accessible introduction by the world’s leading expert explains why the study of esotericism is not a marginal pursuit but belongs at the center of modern research in the humanities. Reflecting updates in the field since the foundational publication Western Esotericism: A Guide for the Perplexed (2013), Wouter J. Hanegraaff demonstrates that the exclusion of “rejected knowledge” from normative accounts of Western civilization is the reflection of a narrow Eurocentric ideology that became the template for discrediting and ultimately destroying so-called “primitive” cultures associated with “superstition” and “pagan idolatry” during the global colonial age.

Rejecting this “rejection of rejected knowledge” means restoring the suppressed to its legitimate place in history and cultural analysis. Through this approach, Wouter J. Hanegraaff depicts a radically inclusive vision of the Greater West and its forgotten histories, from pagan antiquity through Jewish, Christian, and Islamic cultures up to secular modernity and beyond.”

Before You Trip (Caution Site)

https://beforeyoutrip.org

CPC Healthcare Professionals/Healers meeting report (June 5, 2025)

Signal group post:

CPC Healthcare Professionals/Healers meeting report, June 5, 2025

cpc website = ?? 

Guest presenter: Leo (Leonora) Russell (knows [ppl])

https://entheosociety.net — “Entheo Society – We support the therapeutic, spiritual, and medical right to heal ourselves with entheogens and join together to decriminalize, de-stigmatize, and honor their use.”

https://adapt-wa.org

😱 🚫☸️

https://adaptwabill.org – TRIGGER WARNING for Matthew Johnson (advocate of Naturalism Materialism Scientism): includes Buddha statue. 😱 🚫☸️
https://egodeaththeory.org/2022/12/17/meditation-is-bunk-and-is-pushed-solely-to-eliminate-psychedelics/

The meeting was at X’s place, where they’ve had a series of meetings, usually w/ “therapy/ healthcare providers rather than policy activists”.

It was a lovely ride through the arboretum, to East of … Was able to mobile Zoom book club, Singh’s new Shamanism book. (back-to-back Zoom meeting & in-person meeting)

I made it to the 2nd hour of Leo’s presentation, missed presentation but discussed with [ppl]:

Leo pointed out advantages of legalizing psil rather than simply Repeal of psil Prohibition.

Leveraging 2nd-Generation Entheogen Scholarship (the Explicit Psilocybin Paradigm) for Repeal of Prohibition

In the meeting, I explained:

Entheogen scholarship needs to put aside the question of “What kind of ppl used psil in Medieval Christendom history?”, and instead greedily gather all evidence that Christendom fully included psil.

Evidence-first approach, not driven by (= restricted by) baseless social speculation conjectured narratives that tend to restrict, not expand, the evidence.

Do not allow entheogen history to be co-opted by (Carl Ruck-type) agenda of anti-Christian restrictive narrative that perpetuates & accomodates Prohibition.

Avoid narrative words “secret”, “heretical”, “mainstream”, “tradition”; just give the raw evidence that “Throughout Medieval Christendom, psil was fully used.”

I found more evidence than Ruck, by ignoring speculative narratives of restriction/suppression; by focusing on Psil rather than Amanita; & by avoiding would-be explanatory constructs of “secret” & “tradition”.

“There’s no textual evidence”: false; see “Eucharist” & “the Teacher of Righteousness” and its effects; superior Theory produces maximal evidence.

Inferior theorizing (eg narrative-driven, restrictive presuppositions) restricts the evidence.

Darren Le Baron

I am to contact Darren Le Baron 
mesoamerica Psilocybin history –> reform activism
https://www.darrenlebaron.com

In the meeting:

Discussed rift among conservatives: ignorant prohibitionists, vs informed libertarians.

/ end of Signal group post

Entheogen Scholarship Habitual Narratives of Restricting Mushroom Use in Medieval Christendom

Signal group post:

narrative-driven entheogen scholarship (Carl Ruck school) is funny how it waffles between trying to tell contradictory stories/ constructs: 

“evil elites always restricted the sacrament to themselves” vs. 

“here’s more evidence of the sacrament that was always restricted to underground, suppressed, heretical, closed cults/ groups”.  

So which is it? Which narrative of restriction is correct?

Answer: Drop all restriction narratives. Stop trying to pick out specific, bounded groups of users. Evidence does not support the presupposition that Psilocybin mushrooms were restricted to selected/ specific groups of users.

Drop the construct “groups that had the mushroom”.

Stop obsessing and prioritizing the “all-important, most fundamental question: Which group was the mushroom restricted to?“

Evidently, use of the sacrament was broadly spread throughout Christendom (& greco-roman, eg Mixed Wine = Lib Caps). WITH NO DISCERNIBLE RESTRICTION TO ANY PARTICULAR GROUP(S).

/ end of Signal group post

1st-Generation Entheogen Scholars Serve as Gatekeepers to Keep Prohibition in Place Perpetually

Gatekeeper effect: The Carl Ruck school with its defeatist narrative of restriction serves The System of Prohibition as a gatekeeper; enabling Prohibition; accommodating Prohibition perpetually.

The evidence goes against speculations about restirction to any particular group.

The evidence indicates LACK of restriction to any particular group.

There is simply no evidence supporting Browns’ arbitrary adding the word “secret” to the plain word “initiation”.

The “suppression”/”secrecy” narrative converts sheer “initiation” to “secret initiation”, thus propping up Prohibition.

from my comment on my page: https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/03/19/letcher-disproved-1st-gen-entheogen-scholarship-secret-amanita-paradigm-by-using-2nd-gen-explicit-psilocybin-paradigm/comment-page-1/#comment-2932 —

Listen to the self-contradiction here:

“The prevalence of this psychedelic tradition in a wide variety of texts and artistic media including illuminated manuscripts, bronze castings, and stained glass windows in the high holy places of Christianity shows that this tradition was not suppressed by the early Church, but to the contrary was made available as a secret practice for initiates.” – p. 156, Brown & Brown 2019

WHAT EVIDENCE FOR ADDING YOUR NEEDLESS AND UNJUSTIFIED WORD “SECRET”?

“(b) by arguing that based on the presence of these images in the high holy places of Christianity, these psychedelic traditions were not suppressed by the Church, but were rather maintained for the secret instruction of initiates and possibly for the education of the illiterate masses;” – p. 161, Brown & Brown 2019

WHAT EVIDENCE FOR ADDING YOUR NEEDLESS AND UNJUSTIFIED WORD “SECRET”?

Need a way of writing about the evidence without employing the narrative construction, arbitrary, loaded, presupposition-laden words “tradition” and “secret”. These arbitrary words complicate the situation and reduce and restrict the evidence and the framing we present.

Use simpler, cleaner words that don’t have a lot of contentious baggage attached.

“I experimented with X.” vs. “I used X.”

What do we think we are trying to show, and WHY?!

“evidence for the secret tradition of use of Psilocybin mushrooms”
vs.
“evidence of use of Psilocybin mushrooms”

Are we here to discuss and propose “secret tradition“?
Or, conversely, here to propose and discuss use of Psilocybin mushrooms?

Letcher 2006 disproved 1st-generation entheogen scholarship (the Secret Amanita paradigm) by using a single instance of 2nd-gen entheogen scholarship evidence: a Liberty Cap mushroom-tree explicitly on Bernward Door.

Prejudiced, bad reasoners are using the heavy-handed “secret” construct/ framing/ narrative, to try to appear that they have disproved sheer USE of Psilocybin mushrooms.

Psychedelic Science Conference ’25 (Denver, June 16-20, 2025)

Psychedelic Science Conference ’25
https://www.psychedelicscience.org

Agenda (5 days):
https://www.psychedelicscience.org/agenda?tab.day=20250616#/

Brad Necyk AI muppet movies:
https://www.psychedelicscience.org/agenda?tab.day=20250616&search=%22Brad%20Necyk%22#/
search web: https://www.google.com/search?q=Brad+Necyk+puppet —
https://www.bradnecyk.com/psychedelic-puppet-show
https://psychedelicpuppet.show/
https://www.youtube.com/@psychedelicpuppetshow

https://www.lucid.news/psychedelic-science-gathers-community-to-integrate/
Charles Lighthouse, May 21, 2025:

“Thousands of researchers, clinicians, activists, and curious minds will gather in Denver next month for Psychedelic Science 2025: The Integration, a week-long conference exploring the future of psychedelics in medicine, policy, and culture.

Hosted by the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), the event will run from June 16 to 20 at the Colorado Convention Center.

This year’s theme, The Integration, emphasizes

  • The merging of science and spirituality.
  • The merging of traditional wisdom and modern medicine.
  • The merging of research and real-world practice.

“It’s time to unite and integrate the insights, progress, and passion that have defined the psychedelic movement,” said MAPS representatives in a statement.”

Effects of Psilocybin on Religious and Spiritual Attitudes and Behaviors in Clergy from Various Major World Religions (May 30, 2025) – “Religious Leaders Study”

Added nearby entries (above/below) to https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/15/moving-past-mysticism-in-psychedelic-science-article-debate-series/

The long-awaited “Religious Leaders Study”.

Effects of Psilocybin on Religious and Spiritual Attitudes and Behaviors in Clergy from Various Major World Religions
Roland R. Griffiths, Robert Jesse, William A. Richards, Matthew W. Johnson, Nathan D. Sepeda, Anthony P. Bossis, Stephen Ross
May 30, 2025
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/psymed.2023.0044
Psychedelic Medicine (journal)

PDF/EPUB

Abstract

Background: 

“Although historical writings, anthropological accounts, and experimental studies document associations between psilocybin use and religion, no prospective experimental study has investigated how the effects of psilocybin are experienced and interpreted by religious clergy.

“This exploratory study evaluated the overall safety and the acute and enduring effects of psilocybin in clergy.

Methods:

“Participants were psychedelic-naïve clergy from various major world religions.

“A randomized, parallel group, waitlist control design was used to assess the effects of two supported psilocybin sessions, with participants receiving 20 and then 20 or 30 mg/70 kg about 1 month later.

“Outcomes were compared between the Immediate Group (n = 13) and the Delayed Group (n = 16) at 6 months after screening using self-report measures.

“The effects of psilocybin were also assessed on session days and 4 and 16 months after the second psilocybin session in the 24 participants who completed both sessions.

Results:

“The primary outcome assessment at 6 months after screening showed that, compared with the delayed control group, participants who had received psilocybin reported significantly greater positive changes in their religious practices, attitudes about their religion, and effectiveness as a religious leader, as well as in their non-religious attitudes, moods, and behavior.

“Follow-up assessments showed that positive changes in religious and non-religious attitudes and behavior were sustained through 16 months after the second psilocybin session.

“At that time, participants rated at least one of their psilocybin experiences to be among the top five most spiritually significant (96%), profoundly sacred (92%), psychologically insightful (83%), and psychologically meaningful (79%) of their lives.

“Furthermore, 42% rated one of their experiences to be the single most profound of their lifetime.

“At 16-months follow-up, most (79%) strongly endorsed that the experiences had positive effects on their religious practices (e.g., prayer or meditation) and their daily sense of the sacred, and most (71%) reported positive changes in  their appreciation of religious traditions other than their own.

“Although no serious adverse events were reported, 46% rated a psilocybin experience as among the top five most psychologically challenging of their lives.

Conclusions:

“In this population of clergy, psilocybin administration was safe and increased multiple domains of overall psychological well-being including positive changes in religious attitudes and behavior as well as their vocation as a religious leader.

“The study was limited by a waitlist control design, homogenous sample, and the use of some unvalidated outcome measures. Further research with more rigorous control conditions and diverse samples is needed.”

/ end Abstract

Web Search for Hopkins/NYU Religious Clergy Study

web search:
“Religious Leaders Study” Hopkins “Psychedelic Medicine” journal
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Religious+Leaders+Study%22+Hopkins+%22Psychedelic+Medicine%22+journal

Post at X by Psychedelic Alpha, about Religious Clergy Study


Post at X (May 30, 2025) by Psychedelic Alpha:
https://x.com/Psyched_Alpha/status/1928507396067864624 —

“After Controversy, the Psilocybin & Religious Leaders Study Is Finally Published

“After years of anticipation and controversy, Johns Hopkins and NYU have released their research on the effects of psilocybin on religious leaders via a journal article in Psychedelic Medicine.

“The road to publication has been turbulent.

“Earlier this year, the Johns Hopkins Medicine IRB identified “serious non-compliance” in the study’s conduct, including undisclosed conflicts of interest and improper handling of participant data.

“Regardless, a majority of participants have spoken out in favour of publication, defending their agency and the value of their experience.

“Headline findings:

📌 Most rated at least one psilocybin session among the top five most spiritually significant of their lives.

📌 At 16-month follow-up, most reported lasting positive effects on both their religious practices and their daily sense of the sacred.

📌 Nearly half also described the experience as among the top five most psychologically challenging of their lives.

📌 No serious adverse events were reported.”

“The study: https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/psymed.2023.0044 “

/ end of X post

Psychedelics and Spirituality in Light of the Religious Leaders Study (Livestream, June 11, 2025) – Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley

[4:59 pm June 11, 2025] – notes:

Psychedelics and Spirituality in Light of the Religious Leaders Study (Livestream)
https://events.gtu.edu/event/1016144?_eid=661037201279569522088ea4
https://events.gtu.edu/event/gtu.events.1016144

Video title:
Psychedelics and Spirituality in Light of the Religious Leaders Study
June 11, 2025
https://www.youtube.com/live/WwXbPfx1vAI —

Wed., June 11, 2025, 5:00 PM – 6:30 PM, PST (Berkeley, CA)

Desc:

“Entanglements between psychedelics and religion are nothing new.

“Such intersections span countless cultures across millennia, presumably ever since humans started gathering to ingest psychoactive plants and fungi.

“This fact has both enchanted and tormented modern researchers who wish to study these substances within the secular frameworks of scientific materialism.

“We now find ourselves at an intriguing moment in the history of psychedelics and religion.

“Nearly a decade ago, a team of scientists from Johns Hopkins and NYU observed the effects of psilocybin on dozens of religious leaders from various traditions.

“The researchers sought to replicate and improve upon the groundbreaking “Good Friday Experiment” of [April 20,] 1962, conducted beneath Howard Thurman’s Marsh Chapel by a Harvard PhD candidate [Walter Pahnke, under Timothy Leary] who sought to measure the impact of psilocybin on local divinity students in a devotional setting.

“Central questions underlying both studies were:

“Given the tendencies of psychedelics to induce “mystical” or “spiritual” states typically associated with religions, what happens when you administer them to seasoned religious practitioners from traditions that do not normally incorporate psychedelics?

“Are these individuals somehow primed for the psycho-spiritual terrain?

“Do psychedelic experiences change their religious identities or outlooks?

“For a variety of reasons, publication of the scientific article from the Hopkins/NYU study was stalled for years.

“Just recently, on May 19th, Michael Pollan published his own article in The New Yorker about the study, its contexts, and its controversies.

“Then, the scientific article finally appeared on May 30th in the journal Psychedelic Medicine.

“During a panel discussion we are hosting at the Graduate Theological Union and via livestream on June 11,

  • Pollan will engage in discussion with
  • Rabbi Zac Kamenetz, who participated in the Hopkins/NYU study;
  • Aidan Seale-Feldman, an anthropologist researching contemporary psychedelic “churches” [eg Sacred Garden Church] with an eye toward secularism;
  • Bia Labate, an anthropologist who has published extensively on Indigenous plant medicine traditions, as well as other marginalized psychedelic cultures; and
  • Michael Silver, a neuroscientist and co-director of the UC Berkeley Center for the Science of Psychedelics.
  • Sam Shonkoff, a scholar of religion at the Graduate Theological Union, will moderate.

“Together, these speakers will shed light on the cultural significance of the Hopkins/NYU study and how its results and reception ought to inform perspectives on psychedelics, religions, and the entanglements between them. 

“This event is hosted by the GTU with support from the Berkeley Center for the Science of Psychedelics and the Berkeley Center for the Study of Religion.

To learn more about earning a Master of Arts in Psychedelics and Spirituality from the GTU, visit our website. https://www.gtu.edu/academics/ma-program – “The Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley brings together scholars of the world’s diverse religions”

If you find that you are unable to join us in person, you can access the panel discussion via livestream at: youtube.com/@gtuberkeley.

My Notes and Comments About Livestream

video has no timestamp yet; raw stream

33% in: He [Sam Shonkoff?] says the awaited article starts w/ 1902-1975 citations – he points out like Erik Davis:

How come the most recent scholarship cited about defining “mystical experience” is 1975, 50 years ago?!

From start of main article “Effects of Psilocybin on Religious and Spiritual
Attitudes and Behaviors in Clergy from Various Major World Religions”, Roland R. Griffiths et al 2025:

“Mystical experiences are characterized by a range of subjective features including a sense of unity, “noetic” quality (e.g., an authoritative sense of truth), transcendence of time and space, a sense of awe or sacredness, intense positive mood, transiency that nevertheless feels timeless, presence in awareness of mutually exclusive states or concepts, and ineffability.1–8“

References

1. James W. The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature. Longmans Green and Company; 1910. [1902??]

2. Stace WT. Mysticism and philosophy. Philosophy 1960; 37(140).

3. Russell B. Mysticism and Logic and Other Essays. Longmans, Green and Co.: London; 1918.

4. Huxley A. The Perennial Philosophy. 1945. London: Chatto & Windus. 1974.

5. Pahnke WN. Drugs and Mysticism: An Analysis of the Relationship Between Psychedelic Drugs and the Mystical Consciousness: A Thesis. Harvard University; 1963.

6. Maslow AH. Religions, Values, and Peak-Experiences. Ohio State University Press: Columbus; 1964. p. 123.

7. Hood RW. The construction and preliminary validation of a measure of reported mystical experience. J Sci Study Religion 1975; 14(1):29–41.

Citation: https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/15/moving-past-mysticism-in-psychedelic-science-article-debate-series/#Effects-of-Psilocybin-on-Religious-and-Spiritual-Attitudes-and-Behaviors-in-Clergy —

The long-awaited “Religious Leaders Study”:

Effects of Psilocybin on Religious and Spiritual Attitudes and Behaviors in Clergy from Various Major World Religions
Roland R. Griffiths, Robert Jesse, William A. Richards, Matthew W. Johnson, Nathan D. Sepeda, Anthony P. Bossis, Stephen Ross
May 30, 2025
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/psymed.2023.0044
Psychedelic Medicine (journal)

Panel Speakers

Michael Pollan is a writer, teacher, and activist.

His May 19, 2025 New Yorker article “This Is Your Priest on Drugs” focuses on a study by researchers at Johns Hopkins University and N.Y.U. about religious leaders’ experiences with psilocybin.

Pollan is the author of several highly acclaimed books, including This is Your Mind on Plants, How to Change Your Mind, Cooked, Food Rules, In Defense of Food, The Omnivore’s Dilemma, and The Botany of Desire, all of which were named New York Times Bestsellers.

In addition, The Omnivore’s Dilemma and How to Change Your Mind were listed among the ten best books of the year by The New York Times.

Pollan teaches writing in the English department at Harvard University, and for many years, served as the Knight Professor of Journalism at UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Journalism.

Several of his books have been adapted for television, such as series based on How to Change Your Mind (2022) and Cooked (2015) that are streaming on Netflix, and The Botany of Desire and In Defense of Food that premiered on PBS.

From 2022-23 Pollan was a Guggenheim Fellow and in 2010 he was named one of Time Magazine’s 100 most influential people in the world.

Pollan lives in Berkeley with his wife, the painter Judith Belzer.
 
Aidan Seale-Feldman is a medical anthropologist interested in affliction and its treatments who has spent the past decade conducting ethnographic research in the Himalayas.

Based on this research, her forthcoming book, The Work of Disaster: Crisis and Care along a Himalayan Faultline, is an ethnography of mental health governance in Nepal in the aftermath of disaster.

Dr. Seale-Feldman’s current research focuses on the mainstreaming of mysticism in the United States.

Funded by the John Templeton Foundation, her current project, Ethical Substance: Psychedelic Medicine in Times of Social and Spiritual Crisis, is an interdisciplinary study that explores the incorporation of mystical experience in to the lives of secular Americans and their therapeutic practices.

Dr. Seale-Feldman’s work has been published in journals such as Cultural Anthropology, Ethos, HIMALAYA: The Journal of the Association for Nepal and Himalayan Studies, and the Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, and has also been featured in The Microdose. Dr. Seale-Feldman received her PhD in Anthropology from UCLA in 2018. Prior to joining the faculty at the University of Notre Dame, she was a Postdoctoral Research Associate and Lecturer in Bioethics at the University of Virginia.
 
Zac Kamenetz is a rabbi and community leader who is based in Berkeley.

A highly sought-after educator and qualified MBSR instructor, Zac’s work is centered on seeking answers to life’s essential questions within the context of Jewish tradition and embodied spiritual practice.

Zac is the founder and CEO of Shefa, an independent 501(c)(3) organization that was founded in 2020 and is dedicated to supporting Jewish psychedelic explorers in North America and abroad.

Shefa, a word that means “flowing abundance” in Hebrew, is helping to

  • cultivate greater awareness in the Jewish community about the potential rewards and risks of psychedelic use in a variety of settings;
  • advocating for a more culturally competent and religiously inclusive approach to Jewish experience in the psychedelic world; and
  • integrating Jewish spiritual traditions and psychedelic exploration in ethical and authentic ways.

Through these efforts, Zac is pioneering a movement to

  • bring safe and supported psychedelic use into the Jewish spiritual tradition,
  • advocating for individuals and communities to heal inherited trauma, and
  • inspiring a Jewish religious and creative renaissance in the 21st century.

Zac is also

  • a co-founder of the Jewish Psychedelic Summit, is
  • trained in psychedelic-assisted psychotherapeutic care through Inbodied Life, and is
  • certified in psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy by the Hakomi Institute of Northern California.

Bia Labate (Beatriz Caiuby Labate) is an anthropologist, educator, author, speaker, and activist, committed to the protection of sacred plants while amplifying the voices of marginalized communities in the psychedelic science field.

As a queer Brazilian anthropologist based in San Francisco, she has been profoundly influenced by her experiences with ayahuasca since 1996.

Dr. Labate has a Ph.D. in social anthropology from the University of Campinas (UNICAMP) in Brazil.

Her work focuses on plant medicines, drug policy, shamanism, ritual, religion, and social justice.

She is the Executive Director of the Chacruna Institute for Psychedelic Plant Medicines and serves as a Public Education and Culture Specialist at the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS).

Additionally, she is a Visiting Scholar at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley and an act as advisor for around 15 organizations, among them the Veteran Mental Health Leadership Coalition and the Alaska Entheogenic Awareness Council.

Dr. Labate is also a co-founder of the Interdisciplinary Group for Psychoactive Studies (NEIP) in Brazil and the editor of its site.

She has authored, co-authored, and co-edited 28 books, three special-edition journals, and numerous peer-reviewed and online publications.

Michael A. Silver is a Professor of Optometry and Vision Science and Neuroscience at the University of California, Berkeley.

He has served as the Faculty Director of the UC Berkeley Center for the Science of Psychedelics (BCSP) since its founding in 2020.

His research investigates how the human brain constructs representations of the visual environment and how these representations are modified by cognitive processes such as attention, expectation, and learning.

He addresses these questions by applying a combination of behavioral, neuroimaging, computational, and pharmacological techniques to the study of both healthy human participants as well as patients who suffer from diseases that affect perceptual processing.

Last year, Dr. Silver’s group launched the first ever studies involving administration of psychedelics to human research subjects at UC Berkeley.

Blurb con’t:

UC Berkeley Center for the Science of Psychedelics (BCSP)

Blurb con’t:

“In the BCSP’s first five years, it has

  • created a widely read newsletter on psychedelics (The Microdose),
  • conducted and disseminated results from the UC Berkeley Psychedelics Public Perception Survey,
  • launched an award-winning podcast (Altered States),
  • developed a free online course (Psychedelics and the Mind),
  • incubated the BCSP Certificate Program in Psychedelic Facilitation, and
  • supported fellows in the following programs:
  • Ferriss – UC Berkeley Journalism Fellows,
  • Psychedelics in Society and Culture,
  • Indigenous Student Research Fellows, and
  • Mycoskie-UC Berkeley Social Media Fellows and
  • Psychedelic Documentary Fellows.

Panel Speakers, con’t

Sam Shonkoff is the Taube Family Assistant Professor of Jewish Studies at the GTU, where he teaches on Jewish religious thought and methods in the study of religion.

“His scholarship focuses primarily on German-Jewish and Hasidic theologies, as well as integrations of Hasidic spirituality in relatively secular spheres.

Dr. Shonkoff invites students and readers to examine how perspectives on the very fabric of reality are always morphing through interpretive acts, and how these practices are always mutating in the protean habitats of history.

He takes an interdisciplinary approach to building bridges across historical, theological, and cultural studies and his commitment to mentoring, public engagement, and expanding interreligious dialogue strengthens the GTU’s significance as a hub for innovative and inclusive theological scholarship.

Dr. Shonkoff is co-editor with Ariel Evan Mayse of Hasidism: Writings on Devotion, Community and Life in the Modern World (Brandeis University Press, 2020) and the editor of Martin Buber: His Intellectual and Scholarly Legacy (Brill, 2018).

His current research project investigates themes of embodiment in Buber’s representations of Hasidism vis-à-vis the original sources.

He earned his PhD with distinction in 2018 from the University of Chicago Divinity School and his MA in 2011 from the University of Toronto, and graduated magna cum laude from Brown University in 2007.”

/ end of info page about livestream event

Livestream Chat

Graduate Theological Union – ​​Thank you all for joining us for Psychedelics and Spirituality in Light of the Religious Leaders Study! The panel will begin shortly.

Michael Hoffman – ok

Jaime Clark-Soles – ​​👍

Michael Hoffman – ​​lots of chatter, for a single person looking at phone

Graduate Theological Union – ​​We have about 110 folks who registered to join us on campus today!

Michael Hoffman – ​​🎉

Michael Hoffman – ​​hey that’s Clif

Paul Houston Blankenship – ​​that’s wonderful!

Julio A – ​​Good to see Cliff

Julio A – ​​and Phil

Graduate Theological Union – ​​Thank you for bearing with us on the delays, everyone!

Michael Hoffman – ​​I imagine the interest in academia is greater than openly expressed, among many departments

Michael Hoffman – ​​article title: Effects of Psilocybin on Religious and Spiritual Attitudes and Behaviors in Clergy from Various Major World Religions (May 30, 2025) – the “Religious Leaders Study”

Michael Hoffman – ​​before 1902 Wm James was 1893 Swami Vivekananda, who defined mystical experience as positive unity, and met w/ James – historical root of the debatable def’n

Michael Hoffman – ​​Elaine Pagels’ first 3 books show vying against each other in early Christianity, “orthodox”/ literalist vs. “gnostic”/ experiential. so, can trace this tension through history

Graduate Theological Union – Thank you for all of the contextual points, Michael!

Graduate Theological Union – Please feel free to share any questions you have in this chat. We will share them with the folks in Berkeley in hopes that the panel can respond to them during the Q&A.

Michael Hoffman – ​​Question: Will Hood’s Mysticism Scale, the Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ), & the Challenging Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) be replaced by a more balanced and complete model of mystical experience?

Michael Hoffman – ​​For example, Ann Taves, Erik Davis, and Charles Stang have questioned the 1960 Walter Stace “positive unity” model of mystical experience.

[Bia Labate said “overly biased on positive”]

Michael Hoffman – ​​Best list of negative/ challenging experiences is Dittrich’s 1994 version of OAV questionnaire: the A/”Angst/ Dread” dimension listing 21 effects eg item 54: “I was afraid to lose my self-control.”

[panelists said “Michael’s article”]

Michael Hoffman – ​​article: This Is Your Priest on Drugs (Michael Pollan, May 19, 2025, New Yorker)

/ end of livestream chat

Email from Jennifer Ruppert re: Michael Pollan re: Replacing MEQ, from Livestream on Religious Leaders Study

Jen Ruppert, Chief External Affairs Officer, Graduate Theological Union wrote:

Hi Michael,

Thank you for tuning into the livestream of our Psychedelics and Spirituality in Light of the Religious Leaders Study event last night.

I am sorry we never got to the Q+A portion of the program so we couldn’t share your question with the panel.

You asked:

“Will Hood’s Mysticism Scale, the Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ), & the Challenging Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) be replaced by a more balanced and complete model of mystical experience? For example, Ann Taves, Erik Davis, and Charles Stang have questioned the 1960 Walter Stace “positive unity” model of mystical experience.”

I was able to run this past Michael Pollan who said:

“Yes, absolutely. People are already working on this.”

While I suspect you were seeking a more in-depth response, we are hoping it will be possible to hold a “part 2” event on this same topic to explore additional themes and ensure that attendees can ask questions.

We will let you know if and when that happens.

We greatly appreciate your interest in this topic and thank you for participating in our event!

Sincerely,

Jen

Jen Ruppert 
Chief External Affairs Officer
Graduate Theological Union 
2400 Ridge Road, Berkeley, CA 94709

gtu.edu 

My Reply Friday the 13th of June, 2025 to Jennifer Ruppert

Hi Jennifer,

Great, thanks.  

Many ppl are interested in this field, yet also, livestreams sometimes have almost no viewers or posts in the livestream chat.  In my own specialty in the field (eg mushroom imagery in Christian art), the field often feels deserted.  Ppl might not want to post publicly, due to Prohibition.  

I worried that my question was extreme and punchy, because of the condensed chat format (I like how chat forces tight posts).

Good to hear Pollan’s response.  His book p. 283 (“experienced eternity”) says Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ) is so misrepresentative, he had to answer “N/A”, because he did strongly experience the “timeless” effect, but it was challenging/ unpleasant, instead of mystical/ pleasant (a false dichotomy at the root of the field). 

Pollan, whistleblowers, Matthew “lose the Buddha statue” Johnson: but in this debate, the root problem is the mis-defined, misconceived word “mystical”/”mysticism”:

at-war-with-the-mystics.jpg
Moving Past Mysticism in Psychedelic Science (Article Debate Series)egodeaththeory.org

My equivalent of the Challenging Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) but without its mistakes during its construction:

img_0047.jpg
ECQ – “Eternalism and Control Questionnaire” (Hoffman 2022)egodeaththeory.org

— Michael Hoffman, Egodeath.com, member of Sacred Garden Church

Sacred Garden Community Churchsacredgarden.life

Expanded States of Consciousness Mega Summit (June 17–26, 2025)

https://www.expandedstatesworldsummit.com
June 17–26, 2025
Daily videos of presentations.

  • Ken Wilber – Philosopher, Visionary, Integral Theorist, Founder of the Integral Institute [todo: quote by Christian debunker of psychedelic pseudo science, from Integral site: “We are the superior evolved people”]
  • Matthew “Lose the Buddha Statue” Johnson
  • Christopher Timmermann (neuropseudoscience, associate of Chris Letheby = Phil Dept discovers psychedelics)
  • Stan Grof
  • John Vervaeke – Cognitive Scientist
  • etc.

Video: DMT Isn’t Enlightenment… It’s Something Else | Dr. Rick Strassman [YMTP]

Moved content from below to new page: https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/06/06/dmt-isnt-enlightenment-its-something-else-biblical-rick-strassman/

Other Videos Where They Might Have Said “Want More Coverage of Threat”

Alcoholics Anonymous: Another Lying, Psychedelics-Diminishing Religion

AA founder Bill Wilson was inspired by Belladonna (scopalamine) and advocated LSD to break addiction. So it is odd to say AA is “against psychedelics”.

AA’s history follows a common pattern in religions: the original (& ongoing) inspiration = largely psychedelics, then later, deny that inspiration and compete against psychedelics and diminish and disparage them.

VR Matches Psychedelics According to the Poor, Weak, Beginners Model of Mystical Experience

Video title:
David Glowacki – scientist, artist, cultural theorist
YouTube channel: Psychedelics Today
Streamed live 5 hours ago [May 30, 2025]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R05TqGsHpfg —

Desc:
“Join us to learn about VR, MEQ, psychedelics and much more!”

My Comment 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R05TqGsHpfg&t=1834s = 30:34 —

Beginner visuals phenomenology in VR goggles only has to be compelling enough to match the Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ) & Mysticism Scale, which are based on a half-baked, skewed, whitewashed, “positive-balanced” model of alleged “mystical experience” based on Swami Vivekananda 1893, William James 1902, & Walter Stace 1960.  

The 1893 trojan-horse agenda of the “positive unity experience” model of mystical experience was to create international political unity, giving a denatured, reductionist, narrowed model of mystical experience. 

That model falsely excludes challenging experiences from mystical experience, per a “positive-balanced” model, as Roland Griffiths told Charles Stang, as a euphemism for a false, half-complete model of mystical experience. 

That model equates positive unity (nondual unity oneness boundary-suspension) with mystical experience, and omits any “divine Wrath, demon, monster, threat, guarded gate, fire, puppet, non-control, loss of control, control instability, or sacrifice-idea” type of mystical experiences, where much or most of the transformative, significant dynamics are at.

/ end of video comment

My Comment 2 [comment not posted yet]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R05TqGsHpfg&t=1900s = 31:40 —

“Against psychedelics advocates, there are other ways for doing this”: vague; the altered-state effects are specified too weakly, such that any feeble effects are conflated with the full classic Psilocybin transformation effects. 

A “complete authentic mystical experience” then is reduced to merely perceptual distortion or mere “positive unity” sensation, ie the cessation of the self/other boundary construction.  

VR goggles can produce perceptual distortion and some beginner positive unity (nondual unity oneness boundary-suspension).  

But the full criteria or goal for mystical experience includes transformation of the mental model of time, self, and control; mental model transformation of “control steering in world”.

By that criteria, alleged non-drug meditation and non-drug methods of the mystics fail to meet the stringent criteria defined and delivered by  psychedelics.

Being merely dizzy doesn’t meet the meaningful criteria.

Non-drug meditation can produce some effects, but not the main effect of full mental model experiential transformation.

The Term ‘Pneumadelic’

[potential comment, not posted]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R05TqGsHpfg&t=1900s = 31:40 —

David Glowaki defines ‘pneumadelic’, oddly, as less than psychedelic.

https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/04/04/idea-development-page-27/#acid-tragedy-unfortunately-psychedelic-means-merely-psyche-not-spirit-revealing-ie-psychedelics-are-not-pneumadelics-856-am-apr-19-2025-only-exposes-the-enslavement-imprisonment-in-block-universe-eternalism —

I coined & posted the descriptor ‘pneumadelic’ on April 19, 2025, to mean: more developed than psychedelic, based on the Late Antiquity model: 

hylic body; psyche soul; then pneuma spirit.  

Psyche-delic merely reaches heimarmene/ Fatedness/ eternalism; end up imprisoned, trapped, and enslaved in block time, per Classical Antiquity (before 150 AD).

Then Pneuma-delic brings the person’s spirit to above sphere of the fixed stars; partly transcending heimarmene/ Fate/ eternalism, escaping the cosmic rock. Redeemed, saved, rescued, emancipated, per Late Antiquity  (150+ AD).

Respect Both Possibilism & Eternalism; Mature Hybrid Mental Model = Integrated Possibilism/ Eternalism Thinking

Gnosticism plays with “demonize Psilocybin-revealed eternalism, to put all value on phase 3: transcend eternalism.” See my summary in book review of 2013 book Nicola Denzy Lewis: Under Pitiless Skies. https://egodeaththeory.org/?s=%22Nicola+Denzy+Lewis%22

Book Review: Cosmology and Fate in Gnosticism and Graeco-Roman Antiquity: Under Pitiless Skies (Lewis 2013)

“Cosmology and Fate in Gnosticism and Graeco-Roman Antiquity: Under Pitiless Skies (Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies, 81)
by Nicola Denzey Lewis, 2013
https://www.amazon.com/Cosmology-Fate-Gnosticism-Graeco-Roman-Antiquity/dp/9004245480/ —

5 of 5 stars
Lone review by Michael Hoffman
https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/RO5N2HMBGSY1O/
Reviewed November 12, 2014
Title of review:
You are ignorant slaves of fate; we have been released from fate

I had my university library order this book in hardcover and electronic form.

People in Mediterranean antiquity including Jews, Pagans, Gnostics, and Christians, around the 1st Century, believed in fatedness. Then around the 2nd Century, people adopted a rhetoric of transcending fatedness, while disparaging other people or the other groups as being ignorant and being slaves to fate. This book supports the 3-tiered systematic analysis in my Egodeath theory, in which we move through three stages during initiation experiences:

1. Ignorant freewill thinking.

2. Enlightened realization of fatedness and personal noncontrol. This stage disparages stage 1 (ignorant freewill thinking).

3. Transcending fatedness to gain a transcendent freedom. This stage conflates and disparages stage 1 (ignorant freewill thinking) and stage 2 (realization of fatedness and personal noncontrol).

Lewis’ analysis is not as systematic, but supports this explanation of how stage 2 was first positively valued and then later was negatively valued.

Lewis shows that competition and rhetoric inflation led all the groups (Jews, pagans, Christians, gnostics) to praise themselves as having true freedom and disparage the other people as being both ignorant (per stage 1) and slaves of fate (as realized in stage 2). People didn’t complain of themselves being enslaved by fate; they disparaged other people as being ignorant and enslaved by fate. However, during initiation, as I have analyzed, the experience of fatedness and personal noncontrol give rise to panic and egodeath, which amounts to suffering enslavement by fate.

Lewis misses this point and understates the intensity of ancient experience of enslavement to fate; she argues that enslavement to fate was mere rhetoric, but in fact enslavement to fate was intense peak experiencing. Lewis’ theory is literary scholarship unplugged from intense, lightning-bolt, ancient experiential transformation of consciousness. Once this connection is made, from initiation experience to the encounter with fatedness, Lewis’ book can be corrected and recognized as relevant to explaining the heart of religious origins in antiquity.

Introduction
Chapter 1: Were the Gnostics Cosmic Pessimists?
Chapter 2: Nag Hammadi and the Providential Cosmos
Chapter 3: ‘This Body of Death’: Cosmic Malevolence and Enslavement to Sin in Pauline Exegesis
Chapter 4: ‘Heimarmene’ at Nag Hammadi: ‘The Apocryphon of John’ and ‘On the Origin of the World’
Chapter 5: Middle Platonism, Heimarmene, and the Corpus Hermeticum
Chapter 6: Ways Out I: Interventions of the Savior God
Chapter 7: Ways Out II: Baptism and Cosmic Freedom: A New Genesis
Chapter 8: Astral Determinism in the Gospel of Judas
Chapter 9: Conclusions, and a New Way Forward
Selected Bibliography
Subject Index

— Michael Hoffman, the Egodeath theorist

/ end of review

Don’t demonize possibilism, don’t demonize eternalism; keep balanced and respectful toward both mental models, esp. integrating them while differentiating them.

  1. Develop possibilism-thinking – that’s good.
  2. Learn eternalism-thinking — that’s good.
  3. Develop integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking – that’s good.
  • Learn naive possibilism-thinking.
  • Learn basic heimarmene (eternalism).
  • Learn transcend heimarmene.
  • Learn qualified possibilism-thinking.
  • Learn integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking.

Avoid attitude pattern:

2-phase, Classical Antiquity pattern to avoid:

  1. Start with possibilism.
  2. Get rid of possibilism; demonize it; affirm eternalism instead.

3-phase, Late Antiquity pattern to avoid:

  1. Start with possibilism.
  2. Get rid of possibilism; demonize it; affirm eternalism instead.
  3. Get rid of eternalism; demonize it; affirm possibilism instead.

basic possibilism-thinking
qualified possibilism-thinking
transcendent possibilism-thinking

basic eternalism-thinking
qualified eternalism-thinking
transcendent eternalism-thinking

integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking

Criteria for Altered-State Technologies

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R05TqGsHpfg&t=3880s = 1:04:40 —

“Ask: The right question to ask is not which technology is better, but rather:

“Which of these technologies is able to simulate the other ones?”

  1. Can a VR headset or non-drug meditation simulate the visual-distortion effects of Psilocybin?
  2. Can a VR headset or non-drug meditation simulate the beginner positive unity sensation of Psilocybin? ie cessation of mental construction of the self-other boundary; moving or suspending this cognitive experience.
  3. Can a VR headset or non-drug meditation simulate the ultimate transformation effect of Psilocybin? ie mental model transformation from possibilism to eternalism; of the mental model of control, time, and possibility branching.

David Glowacki Is Friends with Chris Timmermann

https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/03/10/mbq-metaphysical-beliefs-questionnaire-timmermann-letheby-2021/#Link-Citation

Reversible Tauroctony, {blood}, {snake} 3x, {right foot touches right trunk}

Crop by Michael Hoffman. Instead of snake licking bull’s blood, snake is in tree, seen. Blood is the snake’s destiny brought, producing fertile wheat-tail in heimarmene (eternalism) fixed stars in billowing cape of Liberty Cap state of loose cognition.

In this tauroctony, instead of snake licking bull’s blood, snake is in tree, seen.
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/22/reversible-tauroctony-mithraism-bull-sacrifice-scene/

Standard tauroctony: two snakes:

  • Snake under the bull: The worldline leads to ingesting Liberty Cap mixed wine, krater, wine mixing bowl that heals.
  • Snake at the bull’s shoulder POWER MUSCLE: The worldline leads to {blood} vision of realization of helpless 2-level, dependent control that could be made to have control violation and cause harm.

{bull’s shoulder} both in the mini scene and in the main scene, {blood} at bull’s shoulder = personal control power to steer in tree of branching possibilities.

Crop by Michael Hoffman, April 25, 2025

Mithras’s L foot does not touch R trunk of tree
Sol’s R foot touches R trunk of tree

11:27 May 29, 2025: Sol’s R foot almost touches trunk, it is where the bull sees snake. R side of bottom of tree trunk = snake = see worldline in frozen block-universe eternalism; see 2-level, dependent control.

Snake = R side of tree; billowing cape (the eternalism state of consciousness) = non-branching/ worldline in frozen spacetime block.

frozen spacetime block
fsb

4D spacetime block
fdsb

4D spacetime
fds

todo: study symmetries in L side & R side, near {threaten with arrow at rock}.

Crop by Michael Hoffman

Helps explain why Sol kneels wrong orientation, why L foot is forward against the {kneel} motif.

This can be a clue to help interp decode {kneel} w/ both feet bent, not standing w/ straight legs.

copied 3 new crops to Tauroctony page:

Crop by Michael Hoffman
“Tauroctony snake tree crowns Sol.jpg” 19 KB 11:38 May 29, 2025
Crop by Michael Hoffman
“Tauroctony weild shoulder.jpg” 28 KB 11:36 May 29, 2025
Crop by Michael Hoffman
“Tauroctony zodiac arch threat arrow upper row.jpg” 106 KB 12:02 May 29, 2025

Mytheme Decoding: {fall down and worship the god}

To fall down and worship = to acknowledge “you have greater power than me, power to make me think {blood} and harm; pls do not harm me.”

Phase 1: Inventory the motifs and handedness.
Phase 2: Interpret the motifs and use of handedness.

Only sometimes is it the case that to inventory = to interpret. Should differentiate these, because:

  • It is difficult to inventory motifs.
  • It is difficult to interpret motifs after inventory them.

ie, when I inventory Features (motifs), I am NOT thereby doing interpretation and bragging that ever motif proves the Mytheme theory.

On L,

  • Mithras = altered state billowing cloth,
  • Mithras stand on right foot.
  • Sol is wearing robe (mental model).
  • Sol: stand on left foot (slightly).
  • Crown touches Sol’s head.
  • Mithras’ cap touches R side of tree.
  • Sol’s L arm touches L side of tree.

On R,

  • Mithras = ordinary state, not billow cloth,
  • Mithras: stand on left foot (bad)
  • Sol has no outer robe (mental model). (good)
  • Sol has L foot forward. (bad)
  • Sol: stand on right foot. (good)
  • Crown doesn’t touch Sol’s head. Mithras controls the bull’s shoulder, so Sol is not in control.

The tree of the knowledge of good and bad (ie, of cybernetic eternalism and cybernetic possibilism).

The tree and snake of the knowledge of cybernetic eternalism and cybernetic possibilism.

Every Liberty Cap in Great Canterbury Psalter has
a L arm/fruit and a R arm/fruit, =
good and evil, =
good and bad, =
possibilism-thinking & eternalism-thinking =
monolithic, autonomous control (in branching world) vs. 2-level, dependent control (in non-branching world).

Crop and annotations by Michael Hoffman, Jan. 30, 2025

Mithras says by insert blade in blood, I control your source of control power and can make you cause harm, and I remove branching possibilities appearance, undermining your power; personal control system. monolithic control-agent. monolithic, autonomous control, steering in tree.

Vision of {blood} is destined in the worldline, at the point where bull’s power is overpowered by Mithras.

Outcome/ benefit/ boon: Sol becomes an authorized steersman.

Sol is made aware of being helpless puppet of Mithras, after Mithras brings Sol to the banquet of Liberty Cap mixed wine over the dead bull, sacrificed bull and bull’s blood that gives new life & authorized steersmanship/ control agency aware of 2-level, dependent control.

Blood is the snake’s destiny brought, producing fertile wheat-tail in heimarmene (eternalism) fixed stars in billowing cape of Liberty Cap state of loose cognition.

Literal Blood (Fails to Give Transcendent Knowledge) vs. Mythic-Realm Comprehension of {blood} Mytheme (Gives Transcendent Knowledge)

Relying on literal blood sacrifice fails to give Transcendent Knowledge, and causes harm.

Relying on comprehending {blood} analogy gives Transcendent Knowledge, without causing harm.

To rescue the mystic unharmed, giving Transcendent Knowledge without causing any harm, requires comprehending the analogies of {blood}, not literal magical-thinking literal {blood} that saves and rescues.

Vision of {blood} can be part of loss of control during peak window of intense mystic altered state. The person can be struck down and harmed, or, the person can receive the message transcendent message from the angel of God:

“Do not lay a hand on the boy. Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son. Because you have done this and have not withheld your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky. Through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.”

{obey God’s commands} = the mind’s personal control system is made to recognize 2-level, dependent control.

The person is made to see that they could be made to do harm, = {blood}, but is given instead the comprehension of {blood} idea via analogy, as fulfillment of expression of 2-level, dependent control. via comprehending analogy, it is finished: the mind is brought into mature alignment with revealed, 2-level, dependent control, mitigating or complementing monolithic, autonomous control (possibilism-thinking).

Do not lay a hand on the boy. Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son. Because you have done this and have not withheld your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky. Through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.

Genesis 22:12-18, the angel of the Lord telling Abraham what the Lord says; https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%2022%3A12-18&version=NIV

“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering.” Then he reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. But the angel of the Lord called out to him from heaven, “Abraham! Do not lay a hand on the boy. Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”

Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son.

And to this day it is said, “On the mountain of the Lord it will be provided.”

“I swear by myself, declares the Lord, that because you have done this [what, killed a ram? killed Isaac? almost killed Isaac? killed his offspring in some way?] and have not withheld your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky. Through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.”

— Gen 22:7-18
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%2022%3A7-18&version=NIV

Finally I can employ Cyberdisciple’s translation of Cain & Abel panel in Great Canterbury Psalter.

Grain offering can’t represent control violation and restabilization; loss of control is represented by {blood} not by “grain”.

Especially, specifically: blood of the ram caught in the thicket by its horns.

Notable silence: The angel does not tell Abraham to sacrifice the ram.

Not just the blood of any man; the blood of son (prince) of God (ruler); Jesus is king hung from tree branch.

These are mythically meaningful blood sacrifice ideas/ instances/ analogies. It’s all about comprehension …. effective blood sacrifice, blood as cybernetic violation/ transcendence, is a matter of analogy comprehension, NOT literal blood magical thinking literalism.

Literal, ineffective: literal blood sacrifice of a random sheep or of a man.

Effective for salvation and avoiding harm while receiving Transcendent Knowledge: comprehending analogy of blood.

Experiencing threat and “I don’t understand” = please explain the analogy:

The mystic peak mind can be made to cybernetic control instability = {blood}, but receive message idea concept analogy comprehension from messenger of control-levels:

“Do not lay a hand on the boy.

“Do not do anything to him.

“Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.

“Because you have done this and have not withheld your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky.

“Through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.”

To {obey God’s commands} = you have been made to perceive 2-level, dependent control. Like Balaam says after passing through the angel of death gate on the vine yard non-branching path:

All the words I say are given to me by God, the higher controller above the local personal control agent.

Rather than the initial {robe} (mental model of control, time, and possibility branching).

Messenger of control-levels:

  • Hermes.
  • angel of the Lord
  • raven psychopomp, in Mithraism.

Raise a sheep or a goat or a bovine, in order to use its blood as substitute for one’s own harmful control violation {blood}.

To show that blood to higher thinking, as a lightning rod, as comprehension of levels of control, and non-control.

Not just any sacrifice (eg grain, lamb); specifically blood and fire sacrifice of the ram caught in the thicket by its horns.

And especially the message, the idea, from the angel:

appease apotropaic wrath in intense mystic altered state, gain non-harm, peace, harmony, good relationship of 2-level, dependent control.

Hand Shapes: R Hand = YI = Eternalism; L Hand = IY = Possibilism

f11 row 4 right: Cain and Abel sacrifice ram and grain

Crop by Michael Hoffman, Jan. 4, 2025

Features:

  • God approves Lamb via R hand making YI form; straight fingers held together on L, non-branching thumb on R.
  • God’s L hand does not show awareness of Y vs I, branching vs non-branching — touching grain. Grain offering = no comprehension of non-branching; only of branching.

{sacrifice a lamb} somewhat stands on its own (instead of you being made to loss of control and harm = blood, God provides idea of sacr animal instead), but after the sacrifice of Isaac, also must see each sacr’l lamb as meaning, specifically, “God provided a ram caught in a thicket by its horns“. – which has stronger cybernetic comprehension.

[8:12 pm May 27, 2025] f134 row 1 M: red guy on right brought by angel is same as hanging in tree.

  • When brought by angel, he displays The Shape w/ L hand.
  • When hanging, he displays The Shape w/ R hand.

Angel’s L wing has like 4 fingers (blue lines) and thumb.

Today, building on past few days of reflection on decoding The Hand Shape (roots go back some years), proposed that:

Regardless of perspective, R hand is read as YI form (the preferred/ favored form, over L hand = IY form).

Branching vs. non-branching is ALWAYS significant.

Handedness is significant 50% of the time in such art (“such art” = more broadly than the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees} strictly speaking).

f134 Row 1 Middle: Hand Shapes
Crop by Michael Hoffman. f134 Row 1 M

Passover, {pass over}, {blood}, threat, deliverance from enslavement and death, lightning rod, bloody threat then peace – Exodus 12

{blood} = life = cybernetic levels relationship control stability limitations and switch of modes and mental models that are an inherent dynamic birth death rebirth limit-violation transformation-causing maturation of integrating a 2nd mental model from loose cognitive state

{blood} = threatened personal control system, control violation, control cancellation/limitation climax and adding a 2nd control level outside under rock substrate worldline frozen.

receive idea of idea of blood as control violation threatening to death while lifting up the experiential mode from possibilism to eternalism mode, causing death and stability limit of control for operational boundary maturation

the maturation rebirth transformation into the mature form that bows and stands, fear of the wrath of the gate guard tree of that fruit you ate, Transcendent Knowledge is the fruit; knowleddge

the snake in the tree claims that higher knowledge is about tree vs. snake, the fruit of the tree is konwledge of stable and unstable, tree and snake, possibilism-thinking and eternalism-thinking / experiential mode.

the time aspect: eternalism
the control aspect: cybernetic

cybernetic eternalism

the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence

the Cybernetic Eternalism Theory of Ego Transcendence

literalist ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control

analogical psychedelic eternalism with dependent control

psychedelic = loose cognition

ordinary state = tight cognition

if i could only have 1 word, eternalism (not cybernetic modifier).

the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism

the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence

Curt Jaimungal trying to get Doug Hofstadter on the show Consciousness & Science.

change from mental model: mental model of time, self, and control
from

monolithic, autonomous control in branching possibilities into open future

2-level, dependent control worldline block-universe eternalism with extremely closed future

Spectrum of Determinism Models

  1. determinism; causal determinism; determinism that’s always defined as domino-chain causality across time. Retains egoic thinking, the egoic personal control system with minimal & hidden impact. Similar to freewill thinking; shares/ retains much of same network of concepts. Bromhall calls this “causal determinism”.
  2. deterministic manyworlds; deterministic branching manyworlds; Everett Quantum Physics. Sustains egoic personal control system steering in branching possibilities.
  3. superdeterminism – the mode of reasoning of determinism (domino-chain causality), amplified and broadened to include the decision about which measurement to make (similar to my adding a focus on Cybernetics to the topic of Eternalism and models of time).
  4. Strong Determinism article by Eddy Chen, Apr 2024.
  5. Wm James 1897 article The Dilemma of Determinism tries to make domino-chain causality (future is weakly closed/ inevitable) produce block-universe eternalism (future is strongly closed/pre-existing), as Kyle Bromhall article points out: An Inchoate Universe: James’s Probabilistic Underdeterminism (2018).
  6. logical determinism – McTaggert: A series & B series; arg’n in terms of truth value of statements about future states. 1908 article The Unreality of Time. Bromhall calls this “logical determinism” as opposed to “causal determinism”.
  7. the all-at-once universe –
    The “All At Once” Universe Shatters Our View of Time (Emily Adlam)
  8. eternalism – the future is real, the future exists. Minkowski 4D spacetime block universe. Philosophy of time. presentism vs. eternalism. Source/ Pege, unity. Omits considerations/ discussion of control transformation; personal control system aspects. Gets sidetracked into wrong contrast, metaphysics-based: Presentism vs. Eternalism; ought to focus on control-contrast in Possibilism vs. Eternalism.
  9. experiential cybernetic eternalism; psychedelic cybernetic eternalism – future control actions already exist, non- branching possibilities. (cybernetic) possibilism vs. (cybernetic) eternalism. Conceive of “the Source” or “the One” as uncontrollable source of control-thoughts; cybernetic death boundary violation, more than nondual unity oneness non-boundary unity. The cybernetic eternalism experiential mode/state; the mind can experience eternalism & cybernetic non-control –
    Psychedelic 4D-Spacetime Block-Universe Mysticism

naive assumption: any conception of determinism is the same b/c “future is closed” or inevitable.

actually, determinism and eternalism are extremely different, and there are expressions that are in between; each model has a different sense of “future is closed”.

Turns out, the weakest, most possibilism-soaked, un-reconstructed model is “determinism”, which, per Kafei, is ALWAYS, universally defined as domino-chain causality – to the extent that, the word ‘determinism’ ought to be replaced by what they are REALLY talking about, specifically: domino-chain causality.

The poorly chosen contrast between Presentism vs. Eternalism is due to framing this as a debate within the field of Perception/ Epistemology/ Ontology/ Metaphysics. Within the more relevant concern of personal control system steering within world, the far more relevant contrast – per the mushroom-tree artists – is Possibilism vs. Eternalism.

Presentism – only the present exists. Hyper solipsism: I only know that my present time slice exists; I think now therefore the the present-time-slice “I” am. Don’t know if “me yesterday” exists.

Possibilism – the present and past exist, the future is open and non existing.

4D Spacetime Mysticism vs. Quantum Mysticism – Must integrate the two competing Physics models proxy models

4D Spacetime Mysticism (male, 2nd) weds Quantum Mysticism (female, 1st born)

4D spacetime block universe

eternalism w/ 2-level, dependent control

upon seeing fountainhead source of control thoughts arm in cloud with chain, slave of Christ, passed over

God’s wrath passed over you because you received idea of blood = cybernetic transgression of limit of possibilism-thinking, the mental model vs the state…. concept-label for the two states of

the eternalism experiential state gives the Eternalism mental model

the eternalism state of consciousness — omits “control” modes

the cybernetic eternalism

the cybernetic eternalism state of consciousness

I complained long ago about NIV vs KJB having entirely different translations of Jonah’s Prayer.

Old Testament myths I am tracking
todo: list

Jonah

Isaac

Overnight Pastures

Eden

Offerings from Cain vs. Abel

we (while only having possibilism-thinking) are not allowed to eat from tree of knowledge; we are cast out the gate guarded by dragon demand sacrifice maiden princess ruler

the egoic mental model based possibilism-thinking based egoic personal control system

{gate} {guard} {serpent}

kicked out of Garden mushroom-tree by angel flame sword gate (tradition built out — added {gate} theme as a figuration of the bible text Gen 2-3 – the analogy is easy after it is set up to see the analogy:

psychedelics are forbidden because they cause death that day,

snake wins, makes you have wisdom and non-dying immortality.

forbidden fruit, not allowed to ingest

snake makes you ingest the forbidden fruit that surely causes death on that day, snake says that snake eternalism-thinking does not kill you but makes you wise, as snake makes you ingest to have gods take you transform your source foundation

blood of the savior idea in whom

Gen 22:

“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering.” Then he reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. But the angel of the Lord called out to him from heaven, “Abraham! Do not lay a hand on the boy. Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.” Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son. And to this day it is said, “On the mountain of the Lord it will be provided.” “I swear by myself, declares the Lord, that because you have done this and have not withheld your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky. Through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.” Gen 22:7-18 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%2022%3A7-18&version=NIV

The egoic personal control system is not allowed to enter loose cognition state until mental model transformation to die to sin to possibilism-thinking then it is resurrected and 2-level faith relationship is formed,

Ariadne is married by Dionysus after Ariadne was abandoned on island by husband King and the minotaur

Gods climaxing cybernetically via mortals overpowering and transforming – maturation as cybernetic climax and death limit and – the region of control stabliity after which possibilism-thinking is overpowered and undermined by eternalism-thinking climax excitement death and resurr and new life basis in the dangerous climactic transformative model-switching inner chamber where the threat draws and transforms and gentle peace dove lamb good shepherd Wrath, offense, dishonoring then being made to honor eternalism-thinking revealed underlying {snake frozen in rock} united with blodd of lamb – a pair of the two main {sacrifice lamb/ram}

todo: myth cluster:

golden fleece lamb:

golden apples,

the themes in douris krater

jason

ladon serpent drakon guarding
golden apples immortality tree garden hesperides ladon
https://www.google.com/search?q=golden+apples+immortality+tree+garden+hesperides+ladon

athena spear splits levels/ boundary non-branching spear

tree in the garden hesperides has golden apples of immortality guarded by seeing-dragon,

to see is to be made to self cancel or escape personal control system viable reach of its control power, Mithras holds your power you bow, while Mithras crowns the local control, {blood} in tauroctony the tauroctony bull-sacrifice scene​ while tail of wheat ears (sometimes branching) against Mithras’ heimarmene {billowing cape} = saying: artists knew: altered state of loose cognition = tantamount to: fixed stars,

dine over bull dead drinking horn lib cap cap on sword blade stem holding grapes = liberty cap = vine = worldline = snake brings you the loose cognition wafer – image: brown – St Martin: Isaiah impure lips coal from the god angel arm given, Jesus at last supper giving Judas the psychedelic, making Judas correctly kneel stand on right foot left foot lifted laying down mental model possibilism-thinking limited domain, and transformed re-stabilized by eternalism-thinking added to possibilism-thinking in the ego death inner chamber bull in labyrinth

MIthras’ bull overpowered/ undermined, lifted up awareness changes from experiential mode possibilism-thinking lifted up to the level of eternalism-thinking , undermining or showing hte the limit and 2-level, dependent control again, repeated purification exposure of teh possibilism-thinking mind – or mental model —

the Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control
pmm
“eternalism” mental model
emm

whirlwind up to heaven drawn by horses steering,
the Possibilism horse on the Left
the Eternalism horse on the Right

how rev 22 14 has two translations – each one fits, but still, how are they so different?

{wash your robe} = {obey God’s commands}: both are analogies for no-free-will; puppethood; 2-level, dependent control; etc.

Passover: display the blood of the lamb so that the angel of death doesn’t kill your FIRSTBORN child/son/sons.

Features:

  • {lamb}
  • {blood}
  • {door}
  • lightning-rod dynamic: to avoid your {firstborn} {child} being killed, kill a lamb and display its blood.
  • judgement, wrath, mercy
  • do “not touch” the child, if blood of lamb displayed (compare the sacrifice of Isaac).
  • suspend egoic activity of working

A baby goat is called a “kid”.

Exodus 12: Passover Blood Displayed to Not Have Your Firstborn Child Killed by the Lord

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2012&version=NIV — entire chapter, NIV:

The Passover and the Festival of Unleavened Bread

12 The Lord said to Moses and Aaron in Egypt, 2 “This month is to be for you the first month, the first month of your year. 3 Tell the whole community of Israel that on the tenth day of this month each man is to take a lamb[a] [or kid] for his family, one for each household. 4 If any household is too small for a whole lamb [or kid], they must share one with their nearest neighbor, having taken into account the number of people there are. You are to determine the amount of lamb [or kid] needed in accordance with what each person will eat. 5 The animals you choose must be year-old males without defect, and you may take them from the sheep or the goats. 6 Take care of them until the fourteenth day of the month, when all the members of the community of Israel must slaughter them at twilight. 7 Then they are to take some of the blood and put it on the sides and tops of the doorframes of the houses where they eat the lambs. 8 That same night they are to eat the meat roasted over the fire, along with bitter herbs, and bread made without yeast. 9 Do not eat the meat raw or boiled in water, but roast it over a fire—with the head, legs and internal organs. 10 Do not leave any of it till morning; if some is left till morning, you must burn it. 11 This is how you are to eat it: with your cloak tucked into your belt, your sandals on your feet and your staff in your hand. Eat it in haste; it is the Lord’s Passover.

12 “On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn of both people and animals, and I will bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt. I am the Lord. 13 The blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are, and when I see the blood, I will pass over you. No destructive plague will touch you when I strike Egypt.

14 “This is a day you are to commemorate; for the generations to come you shall celebrate it as a festival to the Lord—a lasting ordinance. 15 For seven days you are to eat bread made without yeast. On the first day remove the yeast from your houses, for whoever eats anything with yeast in it from the first day through the seventh must be cut off from Israel. 16 On the first day hold a sacred assembly, and another one on the seventh day. Do no work at all on these days, except to prepare food for everyone to eat; that is all you may do.

17 “Celebrate the Festival of Unleavened Bread, because it was on this very day that I brought your divisions out of Egypt. Celebrate this day as a lasting ordinance for the generations to come. 18 In the first month you are to eat bread made without yeast, from the evening of the fourteenth day until the evening of the twenty-first day. 19 For seven days no yeast is to be found in your houses. And anyone, whether foreigner or native-born, who eats anything with yeast in it must be cut off from the community of Israel. 20 Eat nothing made with yeast. Wherever you live, you must eat unleavened bread.”

21 Then Moses summoned all the elders of Israel and said to them, “Go at once and select the animals for your families and slaughter the Passover lamb. 22 Take a bunch of hyssop, dip it into the blood in the basin and put some of the blood on the top and on both sides of the doorframe. None of you shall go out of the door of your house until morning. 23 When the Lord goes through the land to strike down the Egyptians, he will see the blood on the top and sides of the doorframe and will pass over that doorway, and he will not permit the destroyer to enter your houses and strike you [your firstborn child] down.

24 “Obey these instructions as a lasting ordinance for you and your descendants. 25 When you enter the land that the Lord will give you as he promised, observe this ceremony. 26 And when your children ask you, ‘What does this ceremony mean to you?’ 27 then tell them, ‘It is the Passover sacrifice to the Lord, who passed over the houses of the Israelites in Egypt and spared our homes when he struck down the Egyptians.’” Then the people bowed down and worshiped. 28 The Israelites did just what the Lord commanded Moses and Aaron.

29 At midnight the Lord struck down all the firstborn in Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn of the prisoner, who was in the dungeon, and the firstborn of all the livestock as well. 30 Pharaoh and all his officials and all the Egyptians got up during the night, and there was loud wailing in Egypt, for there was not a house without someone dead.

The Exodus

31 During the night Pharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron and said, “Up! Leave my people, you and the Israelites! Go, worship the Lord as you have requested. 32 Take your flocks and herds, as you have said, and go. And also bless me.”

33 The Egyptians urged the people to hurry and leave the country. “For otherwise,” they said, “we will all die!” 34 So the people took their dough before the yeast was added, and carried it on their shoulders in kneading troughs wrapped in clothing. 35 The Israelites did as Moses instructed and asked the Egyptians for articles of silver and gold and for clothing. 36 The Lord had made the Egyptians favorably disposed toward the people, and they gave them what they asked for; so they plundered the Egyptians.

37 The Israelites journeyed from Rameses to Sukkoth. There were about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children. 38 Many other people went up with them, and also large droves of livestock, both flocks and herds. 39 With the dough the Israelites had brought from Egypt, they baked loaves of unleavened bread. The dough was without yeast because they had been driven out of Egypt and did not have time to prepare food for themselves.

40 Now the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt[b] was 430 years. 41 At the end of the 430 years, to the very day, all the Lord’s divisions left Egypt. 42 Because the Lord kept vigil that night to bring them out of Egypt, on this night all the Israelites are to keep vigil to honor the Lord for the generations to come.

Passover Restrictions

43 The Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “These are the regulations for the Passover meal:

“No foreigner may eat it. 44 Any slave you have bought may eat it after you have circumcised him, 45 but a temporary resident or a hired worker may not eat it.

46 “It must be eaten inside the house; take none of the meat outside the house. Do not break any of the bones. 47 The whole community of Israel must celebrate it.

48 “A foreigner residing among you who wants to celebrate the Lord’s Passover must have all the males in his household circumcised; then he may take part like one born in the land. No uncircumcised male may eat it. 49 The same law applies both to the native-born and to the foreigner residing among you.”

50 All the Israelites did just what the Lord had commanded Moses and Aaron. 51 And on that very day the Lord brought the Israelites out of Egypt by their divisions.

Footnotes

  1. Exodus 12:3 The Hebrew word can mean lamb or kid; also in verse 4.
  2. Exodus 12:40 Masoretic Text; Samaritan Pentateuch and Septuagint Egypt and Canaan

Displaying the Hand Shape with Thumb Out, Fingers Straight, Held Together, L or R Hand

hand shape in f134 – subtle distinction, a hypothesis: 7:02 pm May 27 2025:

  • Left hand with thumb out and 4 fingers straight together, palm facing viewer. Proposal: Read it as IY.
  • Left hand with thumb out and 4 fingers straight together, back of hand facing viewer. Proposal: Read it as IY even though appears to viewer as YI.
  • Right hand with thumb out and 4 fingers straight together, palm facing viewer. Read it as YI.
  • Right hand with thumb out and 4 fingers straight together, back of hand facing viewer. Proposal: Read it as YI even though appears to viewer as IY.

Proposals seem sound / consistent, as follows:
Displaying “the shape” with L (inferior) hand produces inferior IY form.
Displaying “the shape” with R (superior) hand produces superior YI form.

For analysis of art motifs, I frame possibilism as (generally) inferior to eternalism.

Be cautious about belittling Left or possibilism-thinking in any way.

The fully mature mind affirms integrated possibilism/eternalism.

I predict much inconsistency in the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}, nevertheless this analysis is obviously needed.

Inventory of f134 row 1 Left, YI hand shape variants:

  • student 1: R hand IY form with back of hand facing viewer = R hand with YI form facing the figure and facing the instructor. Instructor sees R hand with YI form; student is showing YI form to instructor.
  • student 1 L hand = holding up outer garment forming {lifted garment} motif.
  • instructor: R hand IY form with back of hand facing viewer = R hand with YI form facing the instructor (& student 1).
  • re: my recent correct that re-assigned the L hand to the instructor instead of to student 2: it’s variable, given that the face of student 2 can be read as the instructor’s initial, possibilism mental model. The instructor has two heads: one with beard, both(!) with {furrowed brow}. The L arm comes out from the instructor’s outer garment, BUT, the instructor has two heads (two mental models, and we can arguably assisng the L arm – as I initially did — to student 2 instead of to the instructor.
  • L hand belonging to the instructor and/or student 2:
Crop by Michael Hoffman

image: f134: {blood} motif: Row 3 L; Row 3 M; Row 2 M-L.

f109 – some L & R hands that form “the shape” have negative L hand and positive R hand – but, not always; not always significant:

  • significant: blue guy in net makes The Shape with R hand, which means YI regardless of appearing to viewer as IY. Red companion has stand on right foot; both figures affirm Right, and the vine leaf tree is mostly Right = cut; has {cut right trunk} & {cut right branch}.
  • God reaches R hand forming The Shape, but notably holds back the L hand making The Shape.
  • Jesus boy makes The Shape with L hand, fitting being a child AND DOES NOT HAVE A R HAND, b/c the immature mind knows possibilism-thinking but not yet eternalism-thinking.
  • 4 saved safety guys who have been purified (upper right) have no limbs [7:30 pm May 27 2025] because they affirm non-branching (eternalism-thinking).
Crop by Michael Hoffman

Lower right: the group clustered around the asp blocking ears, MUST be connected / equated. None of them display The Hand Shape, but on L (blue) is two {raised garment}.

  • lower right group of 7 guys: none of them display The Hand Shape. Artist says “I am hiding and refraining from showing The Shape.” Group above them — in same space as the purifying trajectory — has 1 guy making The Shape w/ R hand: appears to viewer as IY, but read it as YI given that it’s the R hand – his companions refrain/withhold The Shape.
  • This raises Q about f177 row 1 L (“the Egodeath community”): the outstanding furrow brow guy displaying his L hand, which I read as “IY” (~= possibilism-thinking).
  • The smooth brow (at peace) guy looks at viewer and displays semi-splayed R fingers, no thumb.🤷‍♂️

Canterbury-f177 row 1 R

Crop by Michael Hoffman
Canterbury-f177 row 1 R

f134 Row 3 R

7:02 pm May 27 2025: from last Thurs teaching meeting to teach how to read Great Canterbury Psalter – f134 row 3 R sowing Cubensis spores: pretty sure I wrote that speculation within the past couple years:

Crop by Michael Hoffman
f134 Row 3 R

Motif Identified: Hand-Shape (IY & YI)

{lion} = threaten-to-death; wrath kills egoic personal control system (monolithic, autonomous control; possibilism-thinking), forces transformation to 2-level, dependent control (eternalism).

Wrath threat, then appeasement peace reconciliation. https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/26/the-sacrifice-of-isaac/#threat-then-peace

child = egoic personal control system (monolithic, autonomous control; possibilism-thinking).

Crop & image processing by Michael Hoffman ~2005.
From window of the Legend of St. Eustace in Chartres cathedral

11:22 am May 26, 2025:

Like grid-cap is considered “branching” in Great Canterbury Psalter:

Four straight fingers held together are considered multiple and thus map to {branching} (even though not splayed);
thumb is singular and maps to {non-branching}.

Emoji is semi-splayed (depending on platform):

✋ 🤚
YI IY

“Standard orientation” = YI:

  • Y = branching = L (conventionally) = possibilism.
  • I = non-branching = R (conventionally) = eternalism.

— 11:27 am May 26, 2025.

11:11 am May 26, 2025:

  • Eustace’s Right hand (on Left for viewer) is YI form, and the tree-pair on the Left is a YI pair.
  • Eustace’s Left hand (on Right for viewer) is YI form, and the tree-pair on the Right is an IY pair.

11:14 am May 26, 2025:
Look at palm of your L hand: IY form.
Look at palm of your R hand: YI form.

Viewer’s POV vs. figure’s POV, makes the {handedness} motif the most squirrely motif.

  • Medium importance: {mushrooms}
  • Low importance: {handedness}
  • High importance: {branching}
  • High importance: {stability}

The Goal Is Reached via Analogy, not via Literalism

If analogy-based modelling cannot deliver the ability to have stable control in the intense mystic altered state, then neither can literalist religion and literal violence and literal sacrifice deliver that.

The final state of mystery is the future and the uncontrollable source of control-thoughts, how we — determinism puppets — are to live as active control agents when we believe in no-free-will.

How is that stable control, during the fated peak loose-cog experience that we are often fated to be subjected to, at points in our worldlines?

The mind is designed to be threatened, and dependent on the mysterious unfathomable uncontrollable source of control-thoughts upon which we are utterly dependent.

How to trust in the Creator of our worldlines?

What is the usable, practical foundation and source of stable control, then?

We can never say we are secure, if we are brought into loose cognition divine mania and threatened and ego-killed and reconfigured, all driven by the mysterious Source.

We are stable, by being threatened with control instability – is that “safe”?

Life is semi-stable danger; so is peak religious experience that the mind undergoes in the normal course of religious maturation; psychospiritual development.

How to have stable control when we are forced to ingest the loose cognition agent?

“The god wants an exchange bargain honor-shame hierarchy.”

Goal: Have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city.

Goal: Be able to high-dose loose cognition, with reasonable degree of stable control, as claimed by {stand on right foot} in the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}.

The mind’s personal control system is given the sacrament by the Creator, by the snake-shaped worldline.

The mind is then tormented by demon-thoughts and angel-message-thoughts and shown the uncontrollable source of control-thoughts.

The outcome is that we end up with 2-level, dependent control; stand on right foot; eternalism-thinking.

The mind’s personal control system ends up with mature, integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking.

“Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city.” – Revelation 22:14 (the last page of the Bible), NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=rev%2022%3A14&version=NIV

From 2007 main article:
https://egodeaththeory.org/the-entheogen-theory-of-religion-and-ego-death-2006-main-article/#Wrath-Compassion-and-Making-Peace

The sections below, May 18 to May 24, 2025, are mostly focused on the {threat-then-peace} dynamic of the peak state, when non-control (of a sort) is demonstrated in practice, not just in theory.

Literalist Jewish Religion, Literalist Christianity, and Analogical Mythic Religion

The battle between literalist religions: Which literalist religion is the correct religion?
The True Israel Of God (video series, May 2025)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQZIohUP7xg
This church leader is focused on “Christians are the true Israel”, disagreeing with my Dec. 2, 2013 classroom lecture statement that it’s purely analogy, that:

{Israelites} = people who are destined to have mental model transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

Balaam goes to curse Israel, but encounters the angel of death on the non-branching path, and is threatened and transformed to bless Israel: I now know that every word I say is put there by God, not by myself as an egoic, monolithic, autonomous control agent steering in branching possibilities.

Reality-realm Amanita is a poor entheogen.
Mythic-realm Amanita is the ultimate super-psychedelic.

Reality-realm Israel and Abraham, Isaac, ram, lamb, Mr. Historical Jesus being literally killed:

How can these past events be required in order to have psychedelic maturation and mental model transformation?

It doesn’t make sense and cannot make sense.

When reading as analogy, THAT is relevant; that can make sense.

Analogy describing mental model dynamics, THAT is relevant.

Abraham sacrificing the bush-caught ram, that Abraham is not responsible for providing, caught by its Y-like pair of horns in a branching thicket, when considered as an enlightening comparison and analogy, THAT is relevant to the dynamic of altered state {threat-then-peace}.

This principle has been part of the successful Egodeath theory since like 1995.

Literalist violence, killing an actual ram way back in 150 B C or 200 BC era when the Old Testament was written, how is that required, for mystic control restabilization, when we now can only know the IDEA of that happening.

We can’t know if it literally happened, and there is no clear way to connect the LITERAL killing of animals, to the cognitive dynamics, when the IDEA of killing as in lightning-rod demonstration and comprehension, IS explicable.

Conventional theological doctrine is a half-baked incoherent mishmash of literal and analogical.

Exoteric religious thinking seems to never make sense, because it is a magical, nonsensical mode of thinking.

I can explain how the idea of killing ram instead of son is involved in, or is like, cognitive dynamics of personal control system when the mind is brought into the loose cognition state of eternalism experiencing.

I cannot explain how literal violence and literal killing of a ram, lamb, or man is required, for the mind to undergo mental model transformation in the altered state — especially for how Abraham must kill his ram in order for Mithraism initiates or Eleusis initiates to have transcendent reconciliation.

How does the threat-then-reconciliation dynamic depend on and require literal Abraham to literally threaten his literal son and then kill a literal ram instead, so God gives such a man health and prosperity?

I can explain in terms of mythic analogy.

I cannot explain in terms of literalism.

This analogy-based, successful explanation — this model of mental model transformation — explains not only Jewish religion; not only Christian salvation, but also, Mystery Religions eg Eleusis & Mithraism, and world religious myth.

In contrast, literalism is baffling, inexplicable, MAGICAL THINKING.

Literalist Israelites = magical thinking, literal sacrifice in literal temple is “required”?

{Israelites} as analogy — analogical psychedelic eternalism with dependent control — is mature and coherent, intelligible thinking.

Salvation, Rescue, and Mental model Transformation Makes Sense via Analogy, not via Literalist Religious Myth

All the dynamics of ego death and reset makes little sense — in various religions and regions and eras — if it requires literal sacrifice of a specific ram, or literally willing to kill your literal only son, or literal crucifixion of literal Mr. Historical Jesus.

Another reason why I believe a science model of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence per 1988, before I really knew religious myth:

My Jan. 1988 theory did not involve literal Jewish or Christian religion, yet in 2025 I still assess (as measured by 1997 summary) that my 1988 theory of mental model transformation is sound.

I can upload my 1988 August Minn. draft or the first Word document draft, and it matches my 1997 outline; my 1988 & 1997 core theory is sound. It’s just not fully mature so as to integrate the two ways of thinking.

As I said in my chalkboard presentation in 2013 Dec. 2, — and I can upload audio, but the video is still at the orig address —

{Israelites} = people whose mental model was transformed from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking.

Maturely, that includes integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking.

This non-literal theory is desirable because it applies universally to the human mind in ancient Greece; global world religious mythology, and other planets, in all eras.

If I have to cobble and restrict the Egodeath theory so that it depends on literal existence of Abraham, Isaac, ram, lamb, Jesus, crucifixion, resurrection — that sounds like what the Bible warns against and mocks, literalist incomprehension.

The bad guys are literalists; those on the outside.

The good guys are analogical comprehenders; those on the inside.

The objectively preferable explanation of Transcendent Knowledge is that ALL CULTURES AND PLANETS CAN HAVE THE SAME DYNAMIC, without depending on arbitrary particulars.

from
Amanita, Christianity, surface form, low esotericism
to
Psilocybin, Greek + Christian, cognitive effects, high esotericism

I have written about this before; thinking about it since maybe 1995.

A video series about the promise to Abraham proposes to change from Jewish literalism to Christian literalism.

Per the explanatory model of mental model transformation in the Egodeath theory, no literal Abraham, ram, Jesus, or crucifixion is needed or involved.

Suppose there was:

  • no literal Abraham.
  • no literal Isaac.
  • no literal ram caught in bush, to substitute for Isaac.
  • no literal Jesus.
  • no literal crucifixion.

Does the lack of these specific literal things make the peak dynamic of “threat and then receive idea for peace” not work?

My principle is based on assumption that:

Ancient Classical Antiquity Greek religious myth 500-300 B C contains the same dynamic of “threaten to death, and then receive peace and stable control and Transcendent Knowledge”, as I received in 1995, and that people receive by thinking of the substitute sacrifice idea of ram caught in bush and replacing Isaac.

From an altered state analogy perspective, “Isaac” does not mean literal son and literal offspring; “son” means egoic personal control system, and not harming oneself or others during the enlightening cybernetic dynamic of peak-state threat and transformation gate and peaceful no-harm outcome.

“King Jesus, son of God, crucified and resurrected” is not literal.

Where the action is actually at is, the IDEA of Jesus taking the lightning-strike so that we who are “in” that mythic figure are not harmed, yet brought to Transcendent Knowledge and forcing mental model transformation, like a birth through the transformation gate and momentarily destroys egoic control power, to produce mental model transformation and Transcendent Knowledge.

A scientific theory of mental model transformation in loose cognition should TRY to not depend on elements that are unknown to the ancient Greek mind and Mystery Religions and symposium parties, which knew nothing of:

  • literal Abraham
  • literal Isaac
  • literal ram caught in bush
  • literal Jesus
  • literal crucifixion
  • literal resurrection

Receiving of Transcendent Knowledge & Rescue from Threat only Requires God to Provide Ideas (Including Mythic Analogies), not Literal History

From 2007 main article:
https://egodeaththeory.org/the-entheogen-theory-of-religion-and-ego-death-2006-main-article/#Wrath-Compassion-and-Making-Peace

Gospel of John says figurative analogies, not literal; same with Mark 4:12.

I doubt Transcendent Knowledge can be reached by depending on literalist thinking – whether literalist Jewish, literalist Christian, etc.

My theory is coherent, my explanatory model of altered state mental model transformation, if the model explains Mystery Religions and religious myth and Jewish myth and Christian myth.

If the mechanism of the “saved from threat” dynamic depends on literal existence of Abraham, Isaac, ram, Jesus, and crucifixion, that’s hard to make a coherent scientific explanatory model.

But if the dynamic depends on figurative analogy, and the salvific angel-message that bypasses us from taking harmful lightning-strike is analogy, then an explanatory model is possible.

The fundamental question of literalist vs. analogical salvation and enlightenment:

Are we saved (peaceful and un-harmed) by literal external historical events, and thereby given Transcendent Knowledge?

Are we saved (peaceful and un-harmed) by mythic analogy comprehension and thereby given Transcendent Knowledge?

Does mental restabilization depend on literal Jesus crucifixion, or literal ram, or literal threatening literal Isaac?

My reasoning since 1995, before even I found about mythicism, is that:

In ~1995, I WAS SAVED FROM HARM BY RECEIVING THE IDEA OF JESUS HARMED ON THE CROSS taking the lightning-strike.

Given that the IDEA was salvific for me, receiving just the message from the higher thinking angel of God, I then struggled to find any reason why Jesus would want or need to be literally crucified.

Around 1998-1999, when I first heard of ahistoricity, I had thus been already wrestling with puzzlement about literalism, for 3-4 years.

When I was saved from harm (~1995) by receiving the idea of lightning-strike figure of Jesus on the cross, I started wondering what Mr. Jesus’ purpose was in actually being willing to be crucified.

A LITERAL DEATH OF A VICARIOUS PERSON WAS RECOGNIZED TO BE SUPERFLUOUS!

Superfluous = wrong = ineffectual.

A literal godman undergoing a literal death, has no saving power, and in fact PREVENTS SALVATION/ Transcendent Knowledge / rescue, and might cause harm.

  • Greek Mystery Religion, aliens with Transcendent Knowledge on other planets, and other brands of religion (demon guards in Buddhism) can’t be explained in terms of literal Abraham/ Isaac/ ram/ Jesus-lamb/ crucifixion.
  • The Bible has plenty of indicators saying “those on the outside = literalist”, “those on the inside = analogical/ mythic realm ideas”.
  • I was saved from harm by an IDEA of lightning-rod Jesus around 1995.
  • The several times that I was threatened and came out unharmed but given Transcendent Knowledge, a literal Abraham/ Isaac/ ram/ Jesus-lamb/ crufixion was not required, and played no discernible role.
  • I am successfully explaining Mithraism by studying equivalent dynamic of the sacrifice of Isaac & crucifixion of the gentle lamb on the tree.

The more that the angel of God teaches me, I’m saved and redeemed in idea-space, I’m not seeing how a literal violence is required and plays a role in mental model transformation, given that receiving IDEAS of violence and no-harm and benevolent God is centrally involved in the experience of threat and ego death and cybernetic seizure and release, lightning-strike IDEA that many, multiple people participate in the same idea-pattern — vs. requiring physical, temple, physical literal sacrifice that has to be repeated literally — that cannot save.

IF WE CANNOT BE SAVED BY RECEIVING THE IDEA OF VICARIOUS VIOLENT LIGHTNING-STRIKE, IT’S NOT CLEAR HOW LITERAL SACRIFICE COULD SOLVES THAT GAP AND SHORTCOMING.

There is far more to explain, unclearly, if our salvation is a matter of literalism than idea-space.

If someone tells me to make the Egodeath theory require literalism, I give up; I don’t see how to do that. And the Bible speaks against that, and doesn’t make sense.

I hear God and angel telling me to write explanation of how lightning-strike enlightenment & Transcendent Knowledge & no-harm rescue, that is so great, so fulfilling and sensible, so comprehensible, that it explains:

  • Greek myth
  • world religious myth
  • Mithraism
  • Jewish mythemes
  • Christian mythemes
  • Rock lyrics

The Egodeath theory is a huge success at that. But if God and angel tells me I have to make this theory depend on literal ram of Abraham, I DON’T KNOW HOW TO EXPLAIN HOW OUR MENTAL MODEL TRANSFORMATION DEPENDS ON LITERAL DEATH OF A RAM, or requires temple, or sacrifice, or priest, or worship.

I am incapable of MIXING literalist thinking and analogical thinking, to make a useful, helpful, relevant (and simple & clear) explanatory model of mental model transformation.

1) Take the successful, coherent: analogical psychedelic eternalism with dependent control;

2) then try to add literalist dependence on literal ram or lamb being sacrificed literally;

3) Now the Egodeath theory is a smoking ruin. No longer “analogical psychedelic eternalism”; it would be psychotic chaos of literalist-analogical, ordinary-state/psychedelic, possibilism/eternalism.

New Testament Christianity doesn’t involve temple, sacrifice, priest, or worship.

After my 1995 salvation in the form of receiving an idea of violent Jesus crucifixion that I am “in” as an idea, now in 2025 I am re-assessing — because of a sermon series about how literalist Jewish is wrong, and literalist Christian is right — he actually

The Lightning-Rod Dynamic Producing Peace

copied from below:

The lightning-rod dynamic: the high transcendent mind receives the threat of loss of control, and then receives the holy saving idea of idea of fulfillment in idea-space and no-harm participation (a collective aspect; a vicarious atonement; subst sacr.

eg in myth-space, the bull of Sol is made to lose control and we the followers of Mithras are “in” that fulfillment): gentle dove not eagle; gentle donkey not warhorse; gentle lamb not ram.

From 2007 main article:
https://egodeaththeory.org/the-entheogen-theory-of-religion-and-ego-death-2006-main-article/#Wrath-Compassion-and-Making-Peace

YI Tree Pair: Prince Absalom Hung [May 25, 2025]

May 25, 2025:

  • Left tree: YI
  • Right tree: IY
  • Right tree is relatively non-branching compared to Left tree.
  • Horse (or donkey) saddle has no rider.
  • Left hand: YI (but fingers pressed together like f109 Great Canterbury Psalter: hand shape displayed)
  • Right hand: IY (but fingers pressed together like f109 Great Canterbury Psalter: hand shape displayed)
Crop by Michael Hoffman – f109 Great Canterbury Psalter

Shaken Control Death and Transformation/ Purification

(Email 1 to Cyb & Max, May 19, 2025, 3:38 pm)

Symposium religious drinking party

Exotic coveted incense #5 vintage 2001 – weak after 24 years?  No; too strong.

🐸

The frog god https://www.google.com/search?q=frog+god brought the followers to the god’s banquet called by the god.

Invited (forced) from the beginning of time.

Worshippers of the frog epically BTFO’d.

Strangeloop followed my instructions at Egodeath.com, but didn’t have ego death control seizure. 

The devotee was given the sacrament by the frog god.

He vividly and lucidly had that in the symposium.

He and God were alone in the intense bridal chamber, in community of devotees.

I can improve my instructions and talk with Strangeloop about this type of experience / the control vortex transformation.

Image: the tauroctony bull-sacrifice scene in the colorized reversible tauroctony:

He was the bull forced to look at snake (= threat of psychotic loss of control, experienced being Semele struck down by Zeus’ revealed power, giving brith to Dionysus godman/boon) – the wheat sprouting (fruiting) from tail of bull against the heimarmene fixed stars (eternalism) = no harm was done, but    https://www.google.com/search?q=Zeus+Meilichios – benevolent snake-in-rock god – gave well-formed control model and honoring the divine control level, killing a claim to have control.

Had well-formed “loss of control” and “forced surrender” and the sense of “i have control” lifted off.

Shamans Do Not Have Superior Control Technology Above Mystics’ Surrenderism

Relevant for analyzing “mystic surrender” w/ Alan Houot.

I reject the assertion in Houot dissertation that Americas shamans have control-technology better than mystics’ surrenderism.

Fear “loss of control” or fear harm-inflicting loss of control.  What is “loss of control”?  

What is “psychotic” or “psychotic-like” loss of control – what ego calls “loss of control” is a forced revealing of “in some way, you never HAD control, of a certain type”. 

The “control death gate” is a kind of loss of control that gives non-harmful, viable, stable well-formed right honoring of the control-levels relationship.

“Do not harm the child, do not do anything to the child.  You are blessed and healthy and prosperous because you have done this thing; were forced to want to …”

Initiates lose control [? define carefully!] and are forced to surrender and die – there is a bad/ incomplete & good/complete way of this:

* if malformed and incomplete, can cause harm/ “catastrophe” (or, might just put on a token display of scrambling one’s room –  but that’s still a form of harm; thus is not proper).   

* If well-formed and complete, the revelation of loss of control / non-control/ control transformation is non-harmful and the person is made to honor higher control or, honor the right relationship of control-levels.

Being forced to have mental loss of control in psychotic-like, or manic DIVINE MANIA state, is a kind of cybernetic “death” to the personal control agent.

Mentally overpowered at the root, given that you surrendered when overpowered, were caused to surrender, by the higher power; [the illusion or virtual effect of] control was taken out of your hands – without harm, without real psychosis, because well-formed control-relationship/ arrangement.  The robe [of the sense of “I have control”] is taken off by higher thinking.

This cybernetic dynamic of the mind can be explained, but is not easy to explain. 

The separate higher controller lifts up the soul on cloud of smoke, and strips away the garment clothing robe, the sense of “I have control” – that circuit, that mental construct: egoic personal control system is shown to be illusory re: source of control thoughts. 

This is a kind of psychosis-like state and is like psychotic loss of control, but when well-formed, produces a boon, no harm, and honor to the gods, ie, a stable control relationship.

  • Noah releases a raven (death psychopomp), a dove comes back
  • peaceful harmless dove vs eagle
  • peaceful harmless lamb vs ram
  • peaceful harmless donkey vs. warhorse
  • good shepherd.

Does the mind then have [psychotic] loss of control?  

Better to ask: “Do I have viable, stable, non-dysfunctional control?”

You’d have to fully grasp the mushrm-state diagrams in Great Canterbury Psalter, to be able to go through this death transformation gate; demon-guarded gate: the demon = psychotic harmful loss of control; the threat of that.  

Those who are pulled through the door 

* endured no harm except deepest humility and honoring/ spiritual elevation and purification.  

To get through the door:

* Be lifted by God level control, 

* Be pulled through the gate, and 

* Have no harm done, except ego death/ made to surrender and allow loss of control (lightning bolt), and then 

* Made to give honor to the more powerful control-level.

The transformed mind in the peak state does not experience focusing on “unity”. 

The claim of having control is pulled away like a garment. 

Beyond this no-harm loss of control gate, no-harm control-transformation gate, unity is one reward.  

But the gate is where all the action is at: the heart of mystical experience.  psychotic-like type of “loss of control”, as defined here.  

That is what myth cares about, that is what the mushroom-tree artists care about: the control transformation gate, not “unity” …. 

The bridal chamber unity of the god bridegroom who overpowers and marries the bride.  

THAT kind of relational unity; a unity that includes oneness yet also includes the separate self.

Includes the individual separate self as locus of control, revealed as illusory / virtual (this is not dishonoring or getting rid of self), along with unity experience.

A unity that does not destroy the individual creature/ local control agent is per Ken Wilber, Tim Freke, & Jessica Nathanson, who all say to preserve the initial developmental structure, even while affirming AT SOME LEVEL a nondual unity oneness boundarylessness.

— Cybermonk 

David Bowie:

Oh no
Not me
We never lost control

We lost control [in what way?] in divine mania when the god brought us up to his banquet.

We were shown to never have had that type of control really, but control was stable – not harm or unstable, not falling.  

We were held up only by the grace of God.  image Great Canterbury Psalter 177 row 1 panel 2:

Crop by Michael Hoffman

Email 2 to Cyb & Max [May 22, 2025, 11:06 am]

Teaching a policy reform expert to read Great Canterbury Psalter today, to leverage for Repeal and to rewrite Christian / European history, and NOT in the f’d up Ruck narrative.

Then I will be able to teach my church how to read Great Canterbury Psalter; mushroom-trees genre.  

The immature lure, the attraction, the reward: massive shipment of “spot the mushrm”.  Rewrite history.

Amanita Experts Reject Amanita as Mixed Wine

mixed wine means Liberty Cap wine in antiquity for funeral banquets, Mystery Religion sacred meals, and symposium religious drinking parties
mwl

mixed wine
mw

Amanita experts concluded mixed wine was likely Psilocybin eg Liberty Cap,, far more likely than Amanita.

Amanita experts disbelieve mixed wine was Amanita.

Liberty Cap = mixed wine, the preferred engine.

Example of Liberty Cap in Mystery Religions: Liberty Cap on Reverse Side of Tauroctony

Against the book by Ruck asserting Mithraism’s engine was Amanita.

I don’t know how to revise the theory that Ruck’s book and entheos issue 3 2002 article about — tauroctony is reversed on the cover, loudly signalling incomprehension, and is forced from blue to red, thus giving me restricted confidence in that book/theory.

Similarly, I doubt ergot played much role in Mystery Religions & Christianity, given that Psilocybin potentially fits the bill in classic form. Must admit though, Psilocybin …. flipping that point:

Eating dried Psilocybin mushrooms can be non-ergonomic, therefore, mixed wine based on Psilocybin mushrooms makes more sense.

Compare Amanita mixed wine vs. the potential of Psilocybin mixed wine, as the engine of:

  • Mystery Religions
  • Old Testament religious experience
  • New Testament religious experience
  • Gnosticism religious experience
  • Hermetic religious experience
  • funerary banquets
  • Banquets
  • symposium

If there was a technology of grape juice plus Psilocybin mushrooms, with rounds of mixed wine, THAT WOULD WORK PERFECT.

Grape juice with Amanita would not. Throw in some cannabis, herbs, datura, kitchen sink, opium…. that WILL make you dizzy — but would it deliver classic religious myth experience? Doubt. Abstract conjecture.

Psilocybin mushrooms in grape wine would DEFINITELY work PERFECTLY; ergonomic form, classic effects.

How to take 1st-generation entheogen scholarship (the Secret Amanita paradigm) — eg Ruck’s Mithraism book — and convert it to 2nd-generation entheogen scholarship (the Explicit Psilocybin paradigm)?

I showed an Amanita expert the reversible colorized tauroctony bull-sacrifice scene: the back side shows the killed bull (local control agency of you & of the mythic god), Sol is brought to dine by Mithras, and shows a Liberty Cap formed by sword/blade, with Phrygian cap, with a sun-rays crown on the cap.

https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/22/reversible-tauroctony-mithraism-bull-sacrifice-scene/#banquet-scene-on-reverse-side-angle —

Church Plant by Frog

An awful inspired church plant [spiritual founding of a church]. A church pastor received this source of inspiration decades ago.  It was a major inspiration to start a church.

The symposium is blown away and requires integration for a long time afterward.

Cybernetic Dynamics of {surrender}

The bad: the mind is was made to think dreadful threatening actions.

The good: confirms and validates mythemes: the {threat} {cowering} {angels throwing spears & arrows & sword down} {demons applying fire}

In {surrender}, the sense of local control agency was forced and overpowered, violated by the God, in the {bridal chamber}. 

They died, were defeated, and were reborn and instructed by the angels and demons.

They mystic hardly survived, but the outcome is, the mind brings back the treasure stolen from the dragon.

I can’t exactly recommend that anyone be subjected to this threat that kills and torments and reshapes and forces a surrender like shown in the tauroctony bull-sacrifice scene & in the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}.  

But it’s up to the god to pull the followers up to him.  

My job is just to clearly document the dynamic, and to show that IF we can ever achieve stable control in loose cognition, it will be via well-formed mature mental model, including themes of “gentle benevolent powerful god”; dove; donkey, “do not harm the boy”.  

The personal control system receives the “no harm” doctrine: the worshipper is saved from the threat, and in exchange, the god gets to be honored by a civilization honoring the god, a thriving people, the sons of Abraham.  

If God harms the person, there can be no sons of Abraham to honor God.

God violated and smashed the follower with threats, zapped him into a pile of ash, and then gave him the treasure.

Depicted in the mushroom-tree set of motifs in the Great Canterbury Psalter. The medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}.

Discuss (analyze, model) the dynamics of surrender.  and limits; forming a relationship around that LIMIT for the blessed egoic personal control agent/ agency.  

The personal control system is brought through the gate into the city and given the right to enter this bridal chamber but NOT bringing egoic …. “pollution” (but do not disparage egoic personal control system).

The mind, the person is brought again into bridal chamber to be overpowered and lose control in some way, that’s good, but, the egoic personal control system cannot enter that space.

The mind’s “I” can re-enter, but “I” am pushed down to kneel and that lower “I” cannot enter that space.

“Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city.” – Revelation 22:14 (the last page of the Bible), NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=rev%2022%3A14&version=NIV

After the excessive, too-frightening experience, the personal control system is gently made to slightly re-enter the space: good for reconciliation.  Knocked down hard, threatened to death, but “stay away” can’t possibly be the lesson!

There would be no honoring of Transcendent Knowledge, of God, if the lesson/ message from the {angels of death & the fire-applying demons} is: “Too dangerous; stay away from God’s inner temple chamber.“

To get this benefit, this treasure/ boon, the personal control system is made limp like douris’ Jason kylix: the sacrificed golden ram robe/coat/ fleece limp in the tree where it branches; and Jason is limp coming out of the snake, with Athena boundary spear dividing the scene.

https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/02/16/branching-message-mushroom-trees-psychedelic-eternalism-depicted-in-medieval-art-as-branching-mushrooms-handedness-and-non-branching/#Jason-Douris —

Ladon, Jason, Athena, golden fleece of Zeus’ ram hiding the non-existent branching of the vine tree. Kylix by Douris. Photo from Wikipedia user Daderot, xyz public use license.

“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?”

Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering.”

“Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him.

“Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”

Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns.

He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son.

“Because you have done this and have not withheld your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky.

Through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.”

— Gen 22:7-18
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%2022%3A7-18&version=NIV

“Loss of control” is the threat, but what does that even mean; “control restabilization” is more precise.

Honoring of God is not acting out but God threatens the personal control system with that. 

Honor God is to clearly write up the danger, the cybernetic death and violation, that traumatic bridal chamber overpowering.

Control instability then control stability in the non-branching/ eternalism model.

A problem with focusing on eternalism / time / branching: it completely omits the more important part, cybernetics.

Thus recently my construction (not entirely new): cybernetic eternalism.

The mind is made better at being in the lightning-washed, threatened, purified-by-fire mindset to read Eadwine images in Great Canterbury Psalter, and the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}.

Every time the priest sacrifices at the altar at the temple entryway the priest must wash hands again – purification prior to entering the inner chamber where God the source of control thoughts demonstrates threat, and scares to death again, and… the Teacher of Righteousness:

Crop by Michael Hoffman

I wondered if, after mental model transformation, you can’t experience ego death again?

Or does the godman dyad have this climax multiple times?  

Seems that the mind can undergo ego death seizure panic death surrender multiple times, becoming more apprehensive and reverent and reshaped, more and more made to stand balanced on Right foot (and kneeling halfway down using some Left foot, blessed, as well.

HEALTHY WELL FORMED MENTAL MODEL transformed, is the resulting confiiguration.  

God brings some people to continue entering the bridal chamber to terrorize and reshape us again.

My given role cast in stone turns out to be to document this, and preach “no harm”; Dove; harmless donkey not warhorse; well-formed relationship.  

We are placed in the “bus” (inner temple) shelter, after dying.

On this (eventual) side of the ossuary path, [is he balancing?] [I think figured out the hand shape displayed w/ fingers held together & thumb out], there is no Left limbs.

Do not belittle possibilism-thinking; egoic personal control system; immature child-thinking.  Requires subtle refined fine-tuning of attitude about possibilism-thinking.

Folio image f109 – this temple is the destination:
https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/06/07/eadwine-images-great-canterbury-psalter-catalog-gallery/#f109 —

f109: Caught in Hell-Mouth Furnace Net, Summoned to City Gate Entrance Past Ossuary Corpse, Stable Building Protected by Cloth Washed Clean:

Crop by Michael Hoffman

We are purified and transformed and probably threatened again, and made again to stand on right foot (and bless stand on left foot too).

YouTube channel: “We Are Being Transformed“
https://www.youtube.com/@WABTpodcast

The effect is like classic peak experience of loose cognition, instantly go straight to the peak experience.   

New Pages Created: 6 Days + Eden; Image f109; Tauroctonies; Color Reversible Tauroctony

{raven} Motif Mytheme [May 24, 2025]

[May 24, 2025]

Funny – what triggered me (most distinctly) on May 24, 2025 to decode {raven} is the TOC of the book Springer Handbook of Model-Based Science, which mentions “the raven paradox”.

Raven = attracted to dead bodies to eat meat. Raven = death psychopomp. a guide that leads you quickly up to God, higher controller, the lifting causes loss of control / cybernetic death and Transcendent Knowledge; higher stability.

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22raven+paradox%22 –

“The Raven Paradox, also known as Hempel’s Paradox, is a philosophical problem that challenges our intuitive understanding of evidence and confirmation. 

“It arises from the fact that

“observing a non-black, non-raven object (like a red apple) can, in a logically sound way, be considered as evidence for the hypothesis that all ravens are black.”

In tauroctony instances, the raven is placed near Sol; between Sol and the heimarmene fixed stars cape of Mithras.

The transcendent message about death, as awareness is elevated and pulled out from the egoic personal control system.

The Traditional Model of Stable No-Harm Control and Transcendent Knowledge

You are made to ingest then made to participate in mythic-realm representative sacrifice (eg of bull, piglet, ram, Christ). This is how the mature mind is transformed.

God could make my control cause harm, and God gives me the idea of harming an idea in idea-space to represent the ability to make me will harm.

I am made to participate in that mythic-realm sacrifice of control power, and am not harmed and have Transcendent Knowledge. This is the theory of stable no-harm control and Transcendent Knowledge.

Springer Handbook of Model-Based Science (2017)

Springer Handbook of Model-Based Science
Lorenzo Magnani (Editor), Tommaso Bertolotti (Editor), 2017
Part of: Springer Handbooks (45 books)
https://www.amazon.com/Springer-Handbook-Model-Based-Science-Handbooks/dp/3319305255/ —

Mentions Paul Thagard 40 times; author of Conceptual Revolutions.

Blurb:

“This handbook offers the first comprehensive reference guide to the interdisciplinary field of model-based reasoning.

“It highlights the role of models as mediators between theory and experimentation, and as educational devices, as well as their relevance in testing hypotheses and explanatory functions.

“The Springer Handbook merges philosophical, cognitive and epistemological perspectives on models with the more practical needs related to the application of this tool across various disciplines and practices.

“The result is a unique, reliable source of information that guides readers toward an understanding of different aspects of model-based science, such as the theoretical and cognitive nature of models, as well as their practical and logical aspects.

“The inferential role of models in hypothetical reasoning, abduction and creativity once they are constructed, adopted, and manipulated for different scientific and technological purposes is also discussed.

“Written by a group of internationally renowned experts in philosophy, the history of science, general epistemology, mathematics, cognitive and computer science, physics and life sciences, as well as engineering, architecture, and economics, this Handbook uses numerous diagrams, schemes and other visual representations to promote a better understanding of the concepts.

“This also makes it highly accessible to an audience of scholars and students with different scientific backgrounds.

“All in all, the Springer Handbook of Model-Based Science represents the definitive application-oriented reference guide to the interdisciplinary field of model-based reasoning.”

Noah Sends Death-Raven, Receives No-Harm Dove

Crop by Michael Hoffman. Canterbury window near other mushroom windows.

Noah releases a raven (death psychopomp), a dove comes back (vs eagle; peace; lamb vs ram; donkey vs. warhorse; good shepherd). Noah raven: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gen.%208%3A6%E2%80%937&version=NIV

Raven research:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_depictions_of_ravens

When a the tauroctony bull-sacrifice scene​ shows up-pointed torch-light held by R twin, here that up direction points to / reveals, makes perceptible, the snake vs tree; fire (light) = (touches) snake.

There is distinct lack of consistency whether the torch light is pointed up or down on L & R.

The Left twin usually has weight on Right foot, bent Left leg, like the bull’s rear legs and like Mithras.

On the left, the torch can illuminate Right foot (when pointed down) or heimarmene fixed stars (when pointed up).

On the right-hand twin, the torch can illuminate snake in tree (when pointed up) (in the case of the reversible tauroctony) or “weight on left foot” (when pointed down).

{torch up|down on Left|Right}: summarized May 24, 2025, based on analysis since Nov. 2025 (and possibly earlier eg 2023).

90% consistent: L twin = stand on right leg (L leg bent), matching Mithras.

A color example against that: the L twin has bent R leg, contradicting nearby Mithras: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tauroctony#/media/File:Santa_Maria_Capua_Vetere_Mithraeum_Tauroctony.jpg
Conclusion: the contrast between the two models is expressed by the twins.

Mithras always has weight on R leg; L leg bent.

Front of bull always has weight on L leg; R leg bent.

{kneel} Posture Motif Mytheme [May 24, 2025]

  • {raven}
  • cut left limb = {blade touching left limb}
  • decoded {kneeling posture}
  • {Judas kneeling given the psychedelic sacrament at Last Supper then handing over king Jesus to be crucified for him to have unharmed life + Transcendent Knowledge}; we learned this by studying illum ms psalters art related to the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}: this scene, occurring several times, DEMANDS that we (ie, I) MUST decode the {kneeling posture}. done May 23 2025 last night, on tape, after discussing center of f109 w/ S. & N.

Search the present site for “posture” (to track my history of initial work trying to identify and then decode this mytheme), because I used that word specifically for early (2020-2025) decoding work re: the {kneeling} motif: https://egodeaththeory.org/?s=posture – eg in https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/06/11/eadwine-images-in-great-canterbury-psalter-commentary-interpretation/#f16 , Find “kneel”: March 26, 2023. 10:41 am May 24 2025: significant connecting of insights & experiences including super epic Sunday May 18 2025 experience:

In a mental experiment, I was given the Eucharist by – see Judas kneeling at Last Supper (3rd instance; Great Canterbury Psalter ; Golden ps, Saint Martin) – https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/02/11/saint-martin-frescos-%e2%9e%b3%f0%9f%96%96%f0%9f%8c%b4%f0%9f%94%aa%f0%9f%8d%84%f0%9f%96%bc%f0%9f%94%8d%f0%9f%94%ac%f0%9f%a7%90/#Image-4-Last-Supper — I (as local control agent) was shown my helpless lack of control and being threatened, and I was “in” Jesus the crucified king on a cross, I handed over [the idea of; in idea-space] king Jesus to represent my vulnerability of control per 2-level, dependent control — like Abraham’s “place”; the location of the sacrifice of Isaac: “God will provide”, in the place where God provides the sacrifice [in mythic analogy idea-space] to substitute for harming me.

Mentally, you gather rock, and flame, and blade, and sacrifice [the root of “religious ritual”] – a mental religious ritual – …. if I give physical form to my undergoing threat and then my pointing to king Jesus on the cross as fulfilling demonstration of Transcendent Knowledge of control vulneratbility, that would be the paradigm of “religious ritual sacrifice offering”; we offer king Jesus crucified (and resurrected) in our mind, to represent that God can harm us but can instruct and reshape us to have the holy combination:

  • I live my life as unharmed prosperous control agent AND
  • I have Transcendent Knowledge.

New Posts/Pages Needed

[copied to above] The lightning-rod dynamic: the high transcendent mind receives the threat of loss of control, and then receives the holy saving idea of idea of fulfillment in idea-space and no-harm participation (a collective aspect; a vicarious atonement; subst sacr. eg in myth-space, the bull of Sol is made to lose control and we the followers of Mithras are “in” that fulfillment): gentle dove not eagle; gentle donkey not warhorse; gentle lamb not ram.

I created a dedicated page about f11:
f11 Great Canterbury Psalter: 6 Days of Creation, Eden
I previously tried a page just covering top half 6 Days of Creation, but two reasons to have just a single page: 1) everyone treats Day 3 & tree of knowledge panels usually together; 2) fits design pattern for pages eg f134, f145, f177.

I copied the initial first-attempt page
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/01/18/the-six-days-of-creation-in-great-canterbury-psalter/
into the new, more comprehensive page.

I created a dedicate page about f109:
f109 – sucks that none of these 5 pics (11, 109, 134, 145, 177) have angels throwing blades at mystics. Angels assaulting mystics with blades. There is one panel that has a version of that: f11 row 4 left: gate of Eden, angel w/ flaming sword driving out Adam & Eve.
f109 Great Canterbury Psalter: Hellmouth, Net, Ossuary, Cloth, Looking Out from Temple

That breakout of pages implies making a page for each picture in Great Canterbury Psalter.

The alternative is to make the “commentary” page REALLY REALLY LONG, as has happened.

A better design would be – I already hate the Golden Commentary page and the Great Canterbury Psalter Commentary page, a stupid parallel structure w/ the Gallery page.

A pain! Use a star design instead:

1 page: Gallery of all images in Great Canterbury Psalter. (or in Golden).

Each image folio image should have its own webpage, linked from the gallery.

Do I have a main page about Tauroctony? I created now that page:

Mithraism; the tauroctony bull-sacrifice scene ? no, it sucks [before creating that page]:

I have little topical pages about Mithraism enough for a Site Map section, but no main page about Mithraism / The tauroctony bull-sacrifice scene​.

done: Step 1: Make site map section gathering my topical Mithraism-related pages.

done: Step 2: Make official main page about Mithraism/Tauroctony.

God Please Don’t Harm Us, and Do Bring Tree of Life Ingesting Psychedelics

The grand wish and prayer and aspiration: I have stable control and am immortal, nondying, stable in altered state of loose cognition, insofar as I can mentally do the ritual acknowledgement, the ultimate kneeling (standing but not standing, both legs bent, R leg forward, being given by God angel the sacrament, I hand over the piglet (Eleusis) king Jesus for sacrifice on the tree, and I am thus “covered” and “protected” so that I walk with God and am threatened but LIGHTNING ROD JESUS idea.

Judas, Lightning Rod, Substitute Sacrifice, Religious Ritual [May 24, 2025]

This motif is poor for trad myth, but useful: {lightning rod vicarious representative: the branching-caught ram; the savior on the cross = lightning rod: strike Jesus as God’s child-thinking, in place of harming MY child-thinking; my egoic personal control system. Do not do anything to your child self,

the keyboard shortcut for SoI is: gen22 — it’s f’d up. fail to diff what Abr says vs what Angel/God says:

“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering. Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son. Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son. Because you have done this and have not withheld your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky. Through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.” Gen 22:7-18 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%2022%3A7-18&version=NIV

Fixing the keyboard shortcut expan: should be: (damnit, gonna have to re-do the excerpt from the Bible original passage):

This passage claims that the angel does not tell Abraham to sacr the ram.

This passage gives Abr the initiative for subst’g the ram for Isaac, tho God provides the ram according to Abr.

todo: make post/page about the sacrifice of Isaac.

the sacrifice of Isaac
asoi

The sacrifice of Isaac is SUPER important, and key for understanding the Crucifixion.

We participate in vicarious sacrifice, how we are saved in Christ, as Abr/Isaac was saved by the branch-caught ram that God provided.

Could Abr/Isaac have been saved were there no ram?

“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering.” [angel of god said:]: “Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.” Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its [branching pair of] horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son. [angel of God said] “Because you have done this and have not withheld your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants [through Isaac] as numerous as the stars in the sky. Through your offspring [mystical not bodily] all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.” [that is active voice; passive voice: the higher controller forced you to cyber-die and provided the lightning rod that covered you by isomorphism, and saved you from harm] Gen 22:7-18 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%2022%3A7-18&version=NIV
[11:12 am May 24, 2025]

You are made to kneel not able to stand on L or R leg, but you receive the R leg, and you are given the sacrament of loose cognition, you are threatened to death w cybernetic vulnerability threat as you are lifted to the edge of stable control.

A portion of you (the local control agent) goes outside the domain of stable control, and you are threatened with harmful control thoughts, but you receive [the dynamic of salvation is] the idea of wanting to be covered by a representative figure of taking the lightning hit: the idea of {ram caught in branching by its pair of horns}, and idea of {king on cross} (and resurrected).

We believe in the future life in heaven city gates with tree of life after we are cybernetically killed upon seeing higher controller.

{conversion}

Conversion from possibilism w/ monolithic, autonomous control, to eternalism w/ 2-level, dependent control.

2-level, dependent control [May 24, 2025]

lower control: egoic personal control system in branching world.

higher control: rock block universe containing snake-shaped worldline, created by the Creator.

Judas hands over Jesus to be crucified, and Judas participates in that crucifixion, is covered by it, is kept from harm yet also receives Transcendent Knowledge and a viable life.

We (like Judas receiving the sacrament of enlightenment [Transcendent Knowledge] at the Last Supper) want Jesus to be crucified [in mythic-experiencing idea-space] so that we can be saved and protected from harm by God the higher controller.

The experiential reasoning about control transformation (Psilocybin transformation) is hard to comprehend and hard to depict, but we CAN be made to comprehend it (this transcendent control dynamic) and we CAN depict it in art.

We are well on our way, I am well on the way toward that, using university course engineering Control Systems engineering eg domain of stability.

Control Systems engineering stability:
https://www.google.com/search?q=Control+Systems+engineering+stability

mytheme decoding: Friday, May 23, 2025, in voice recording VOX_TK_6490.wav: f109 Great Canterbury Psalter when explaining to a policy reform expert in a 1-hour teaching meeting on Thurs May 22 2025:

There are kneeling motifs in the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees} , and I have mentioned this motif but have not seriously tried to decode it. https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/06/07/eadwine-images-great-canterbury-psalter-catalog-gallery/#f109 —

Crop by Michael Hoffman, April 4, 2023

I created a new page dedicated to image f109, including crops:
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/25/f109-great-canterbury-psalter-hellmouth-net-ossuary-cloth-looking-out-from-temple/

Mytheme Decoding: {cut left limb} = Possibilism-Thinking, in {shrouded corpse} Motif in f109 & f177 [May 24, 2025]

May 24, 2025

announcement – i figured out last night may 23 2025 in voice recording:

ossuary does not have correct “{cut right branch/limb}”; has instead incorrect {cut left branch/limb} which – , must mean possibilism-thinking. {cut right branch} means eternalism-thinking THEREFORE in both shroud-corpses: f109, f177 — {cut left branch} means possibilism-thinking. therefore mytheme decoding: {cut left limb} = possibilism-thinking. Q.E.D.

cut left limb = {blade touching left limb} as in f134. also matches guys who have {empty left sleeve}.

Equivalent motifs:

  • {empty left sleeve}
  • {shrouded corpse with cut left limb}
  • {blade touching left limb}
  • related: hand sign throughout f109: thumb out, four fingers together.
    {hand displayed with thumb out, four fingers together}

In the meeting where a policy reform expert helped interpret f109, I broke through to recognize at 3-4 pm that day, the fact that the guy is BALANCING and falling off losing balance and being caught passively by the net, the net (to catch you when you are made to cybernetically fall and lose control) is tied by the kneeling guy, the guy pulled up from the net is making the hand sign: thumb out, 4 fingers together straight (non-branching). Elements that I grasped that I did not grasp before:

  • guy is balancing and implicitly he falls but is caught by net.
  • little guy kneeling — I didn’t figure this out during the teaching meeting but the following evening (Friday May 23 2023 voice recording): puts Right foot forward meaning using eternalism-thinking, and also, some weight on L leg – both legs bent.
  • kneerling posture and often laying down robe under incoming emperor per Otto illum ms and others in the (Saint Martin church) Entry into Jeru scene.
  • {laying robe under Jesus/donkey}
  • search this site for kneel or kneeling: https://egodeaththeory.org/?s=kneel
    eg: https://egodeaththeory.org/2020/12/13/images-of-mushrooms-in-christian-art/#Conversion-of-Placidas-Saint-Eustace-Window-Chartres-Cathedral – 10:24 am May 24, 2025: blade touches left leg at the non-branching, exact mushroom; branching antlers = death of king on cross while mind is controlled/ inspired by God during CONVERSION (mental model transformation from possibilism to eternalism – to have both legs, as in kneeling; to integrate both ways of thinking).
  • Although right bent leg is forward, this is not to entirely disparage Left leg – he bends both legs, in the {kneel} motif.
  • Placidas (10:29 am May 24 2025) is not on his saddle, he is holding reins as a steersman, the saddle and back of deer each have a branching mushroom-tree.
  • On Left side of picture is a branching and a non-branching mushroom-tree, same on Right side of picture.
  • Middle of picture has a mushroom-tree that I read as a YI tree, where the I branch touches his Right leg. copy of pics from that page:

Conversion of Placidas, Saint Eustace Window, Chartres Cathedral

Conversion of Placidas, Saint Eustace Window. Chartres Cathedral, France, early 12th century (photo by Julie M. Brown)
Citation: Journal of Psychedelic Studies 3, 2; 10.1556/2054.2019.019
“the Conversion of Placidas to Saint Eustace. Flanked by sacred mushrooms, he kneels and prays before the crucifix, which appears between the antlers of a stag standing regally before him.”

YI hand shape ✋ 😶 🤚 in f109 [May 17, 2025]

YI hand shape means YI comprehension. Studied:

re: ✋ in https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f109.item.zoom

Crop by Michael Hoffman
9:48 a.m. April 4, 2023

10:45 pm May 17, 2025 figured/ got more confirmation. Left mushroom-tree sets a pattern mapped to YI hand; groups of 4 guys + 1 guy, check all hand shapes, and claw shapes –

search present site on “claw”

I have written along these dedocding lines before, Otto two pictures.

recently wrote about guy w/ YI hand behind Jesus in Saint Martin church – Entry into Jerusalem, where Jesus does splayed left fingers on L hand & held-together two fingers on R hand.

search site for “Julie M. Brown”
https://egodeaththeory.org/?s=%22Julie+M.+Brown%22

Photo Credit: Julie M. Brown.
“Brown Entry pdf fullscreen screencap best res.png” 4.8 MB, stamp: [10:31 a.m. February 11, 2023]
https://www.academia.edu/40412411/Entheogens_in_Christian_art_Wasson_Allegro_and_the_Psychedelic_Gospels

popular
elite

Everyone was looking for YI everywhere:

branching
non-branching

possibilism
eternalism

monolithic, autonomous control
2-level, dependent control

branching possibilism
4D spacetime block universe eternalism

Quantum Mysticism
4D Spacetime Mysticism

Quantum Mysticism – possibilism; branching Everett manyworlds; branching possibilities – monolithic, autonomous steering control

4D Spacetime Mysticism – Minkowski non-branching frozen block universe – 2-level, dependent control

Publish or Perish (Joe Welker, May 2025) – Hopkins “Religious Professionals Study”

In Moving Past Mysticism in Psychedelic Science” page, I have only minimal info:

https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/15/moving-past-mysticism-in-psychedelic-science-article-debate-series/#Publish-or-Perish —

Channel? PSYCHEDELIC CANDOR
Article title: Publish or Perish
Joe Welker
May 10, 2025
https://substack.com/home/post/p-162917659

Desc:
“Despite failing human subjects protections, a Johns Hopkins psychedelic clergy study driven to influence the public appears set to be published.”

Not sure how relevant the article is

The archons are pushing a fake (or at best a low-grade, low-quality), global watered-down religion, like Joseph Atwill accused Roman rulers of inventing Christianity to control the populace. I have not studied his theory.

I am interested in the Religious Professionals Study, brand new in: see:
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/04/21/idea-development-page-28/#Religious-Professionals-Study-Trial —
Actual Study Completion Date: 2024/05/31 (a year ago)

I should have printed and marked up on paper before starting this page. I only care about some points in this article.

Ann Taves:
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/15/moving-past-mysticism-in-psychedelic-science-article-debate-series/#mystical-and-other-alterations-in-sense-of-self-an-expanded-framework-for-studying-nonordinary-experiences-taves-2020 — Sets a really high bar, she reaches exact same objections and wording that I did, re: the dubious construct, “unity = mysticism”.

Everyone Is Skeptically Interrogating & Critically Re-Examining Mysticism Claims and Nonduality Claims

Everyone has suspended their belief in assertions about mysticism or nonduality. The mood in the air is skepticism and agnosticism.

The Enterprise top-down Bob Jesse CSP dubious claims and NARRATIVES are all in question, they have all been exposed and revealed:

Andy Letcher 2006, Thomas Hatsis 2013, & Michael Hoffman 2020 Debunking the Secret Amanita Paradigm

The Secret Amanita paradigm, pushed by Allegro and then amplified by Ruck. Letcher 2006 debunked it w/ a single picture from the Explicit Cubensis paradigm.

Cyberdisciple Critique of Narrowing Motive of The Immortality Key

Cyberdisciple’s critique of The Immortality Key by Brian Muraresku, 2020:

Did Cyberdisciple summarize the points of agreement & disagreement?

That’s an excellent format that I used with Wouter Hanegraaff re: astral ascent mysticism.

Cyberdisciple agrees with the general idea that Muraresku sort of overlaps with: the important aspect of religions comes from psychedelics.

Cyberdisciple disagrees with the agenda purpose narrowing use of Eleusis narrative to support the Big Pharma Astroturf Psychedelic Renaissance psychedelics-assisted psychotherapy model.

Alan Houot Against the Therapy & Mysticism Approaches, Calling for a Science-Based Approach to Exploring Psychedelics

Alan Houot noticed two objectionable agendas: combining of therapy approach & “mystical = pleasant boundaryless unity” approach

Justin Sledge: Critical Mysticism

Dr. Justin Sledge, ESOTERICA YouTube channel, is making a video on “Critical Mysticism“.

Vervake: Zen & Neoplatonism Require Update & Correction

Cog Scientist John Vervake is correcting the weaknesses of Zen and of Neoplatonism.

Tim Freke and Jessica Nathanson: Advaita Vedanta Is Malformed and Causing Insanity

Tim Freke and Jessica Nathanson report people going insane from poorly formed Advaita Vedanta, warped selective version fabricated in 1893 for ulterior motives agenda by:

  1. Swami Vivekananda, taken up by
  2. Wm James, then
  3. Walter Stace,
    Next add psychedelics to that unicorns & rainbows fake mysticism model:
  4. Tim Leary & Walter Pahnke (Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ))
  5. Wm Richards 1975/2015 book that now I know why I hate that book Sacred Knowledge: it pushes psychedelic “Transcendent Knowledge = nondual unity oneness boundary-suspension. (vs. cybernetic eternalism per the Egodeath theory), like Ken Wilber’s 1979 book No Boundary (his 6 main books 1977-1984).
  6. Ralph Hood’s Mysticism Scale (M Scale) 1975;
  7. Bob Jesse: CSP; Council for Spiritual Practices.
  8. Roland Griffiths 2006.

All of the psychedelic mystical experience = Unity writers aim for the wrong target, missing the mark: they all construct altered-state “mysticism” around nondual unity oneness boundary-suspension.

That mystical experience is not wrong, but it’s a mere lightweight beginners sideshow, according to:

  • The mushroom-tree artists.
  • The best myth eg Buddhist {demon-threat guarded gates}.
  • The best lyrics.
  • The Egodeath theory.

… instead of hitting the main, potent target, cybernetic eternalism.

Cybernetic eternalism actually collapses ego altogether, and successfully explains panic freakout challenging experiencing.

The Egodeath Theory of Cybernetic Eternalism

Given that everyone agrees “altered state” is key, and more people say altered state via psychedelics, this means, I do not need to highlight:

psychedelic eternalism

but I instead need to highlight:

cybernetic eternalism

the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism –>

[7:59 pm May 17, 2025]
the Egodeath theory of cybernetic eternalism
edtce

The “psychedelics” part no longer needs emphasis, in some contexts of writing/ theorizing.

Thus the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism solves the biggest barrier, by intelligibly theorizing and modelling the guarded gate of threat of loss of control.

Thus the Egodeath theory of cybernetic eternalism solves the biggest barrier, by intelligibly theorizing and modelling the guarded gate of threat of loss of control.

The bad fake explanation of panic freakout challenging experiencing provided by the Unity paradigm (nondual unity oneness boundary-suspension):

“The bad trip was caused by your resisting ego dissolution; ie resisting nondual unity oneness boundary-suspension.”

The good useful relevant helpful explanation of panic freakout challenging experiencing provided by the cybernetic eternalism paradigm:

The bad trip was caused by relying too much on possibilism-thinking (branching possibilities + monolithic, autonomous control); need to rely instead (also) on eternalism-thinking (non-branching possibilities + 2-level, dependent control).

Your near-future control-thoughts already exist, cast in stone.

  • stand on left foot = possibilism-thinking (branching possibilities + monolithic, autonomous control)
  • stand on right foot = eternalism-thinking (non-branching possibilities + 2-level, dependent control)
Crop by Michael Hoffman, March 17, 2023

Moving Past Mysticism in Psychedelic Science (Article Debate Series)

Hot Topic In the Air: Deep Questioning of What Mystical Experience Is; What Ego Transcendence Is

Upon discovering cybernetic eternalism in Jan 1988, my dispute against Wilber’s model was not mainly A, B, or C; but rather, D.

D: boundary change vs. cybernetic eternalism.

The boundary change model of ego transcendence isn’t bad b/c it’s specifically boundary change; the real problem is that it’s NOT cybernetic eternalism.

Every model of ego transcendence that’s something other than cybernetic eternalism is bad and wrong, not b/c of what it is, but because of what it’s not. Boundary change model of ego transcendence might be really great in 8 substantial ways, but it is stil WRONG and BAD, FAILURE, fails to be relevant; useful; helpful

(also: a different kind of objection, probably smaller and unimportant: the boundary-change model fails to be clear and simple.)

i HAVE critcized Ken Wilber for a model that is long-delayed development/ gradual change model; I HAVE criticized his model as over-articulated [like when I ritually insulted and dishonored a representative set of 12 books] – but none of those complaints are important.

Ken Wilber model 1984 (6th of 6 regular books) – I thought about … in 1986 I read wilber 1977-1984, then Jan 1988, critcized Ken Wilber of 1984 saying I have a better model of what the altered state delivers for ego transcendence: not boundary change, but cybernetic eternalism.

boundary change
b-c

not b-c, but ce

Mystical experience is not boundary change, but cybernetic eternalism.

The “boundary change” vs. “cybernetic eternalism” model of ego transcendence

The main point of dispute is not altered state, psychedelics, or speed of transformation, or word-count.

I am not bragging that as opposed to Ken Wilber, the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence has altered state, psychedelics, or low word count (high summarizability).

Actually, I am bragging that as opposed to Ken Wilber’s model, the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence brings cybernetic eternalism rather than boundary change as a successful explanatory framework.

The problem with his model is not that it is boundary change, but that it is not cybernetic eternalism;

The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence (cybernetic eternalism) is strong, at delivering and explaining a relevant helpful useful model of ego transcendence.

The Cybernetic Eternalism Theory of Ego Transcendence is strong, at delivering and explaining a relevant helpful useful model of ego transcendence.

The boundary change model of ego transcendence is weak, at delivering and explaining a relevant helpful useful model of ego transcendence.

In 1988 my titles were:

transcendent eternalism-thinking

the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence

but better is:

omit “Psychedelic”, b/c Ken Wilber agrees altered state – this is a minor detail…. not as super important as:

GIVEN altered state, what is the kind of ego transcendence that results?

One attempted answer to “what kind of ego transcendence” is, off the mark, the guess is: boundary change.

Wrong answer.

This is one wrong answer among potentially many wrong answers –

Perhaps it is a “better wrong answer” than some other wrong answers; maybe outside the bullseye target several bands.

A terrible answer = literalist “the nature of ego transcendence, i speculate, is alien literal angels and aliens and demons”.

  • One terrible answer (among others) to “What is the nature of ego transcendence?” is: literal angels and demons; or, alien machine entities. Alan Houot 2025. This general low-quality kind of answer = tyupical of (or, representative of; or, an instance of) lowest tier of religion.
  • One mediocre answer (among others) to “What is the nature of ego transcendence?” is: boundary change. Ken Wilber 1977-1984. Instance of “mediocre tier of religion; pseudo-esoteric; a lower but claims to be the higher.
  • The best and only correct answer to “What is the nature of ego transcendence?” is: cybernetic eternalism. Michael Hoffman Jan 1988.

Search this site for the phrase “coined” yesterday, Friday May 16 2025:
cybernetic eternalism – found Dec 2020, keyboard shortcut = cybetm.
Found on 25 pages.
https://egodeaththeory.org/?s=%22cybernetic+eternalism%22

cybernetic eternalism
cybetm
ce

Ultimately the specific actual problem of Ken Wilber model 1984 (6th of 6 regular books) is that it is something (boundary change) OTHER THAN cybernetic eternalism.

In theory, the false, fall-short, miss-the-mark “boundary change” theory of Transcendent Knowledge is only one among many possible false theories, like “shed skin” is not the ONLY false explanation of why {snake} is #1 mytheme.

The “boundary change” theory of mysticism (or ego transcendence, or Transcendent Knowledge) is only one among many possible wrong, failed theories of mysticism.

The “boundary change” theory of mysticism covers/ delivers a false explanation of panic challenging trips, by explaining from within paradigm of the boundary change theory/paradigm.

According to the “boundary change” paradigm of mysticism or ego transcendence or Transcendent Knowledge, panic/ freakout/ challenging experiencing is caused by resisting boundary change; and the solution is: trust [random word] and surrender to [random word].

Surrender to what????? THEY GIVE A DIFFERENT ANSWER EVERY SINGLE TIME THEY SAY TO SURRENDER! RED FLAG!

best answer: boundary change …. surrender to boundary change. trust boundary change.

surrender to nondual unity oneness ego dissolution non-boundary (boundary cessation).

That explains panic freakout challenging experiencing.

Popular but false proposal:

panic freakout challenging experiencing [add: THREAT]
pfce

panic freakout threatened challenging experiencing
pftce

{shadow dragon monster}

experience of the threat of catastrophic loss of control
etcloc

Panic freakout threatened challenging experiencing is caused by resisting boundary change.

by resisting nondual unity oneness boundary-suspension.

key phrases:

  • nondual unity oneness boundary-suspension
  • cybernetic eternalism
  • panic freakout threatened challenging experiencing

Cybernetic eternalism includes 2-level, dependent control – stand on right foot held upright by God:

The only thing stopping loss of control (“falling over”; “falling down”) is God:

Crop and annotations by Michael Hoffman, Jan. 3, 2025

f134 row 1 l > hanging guy: {right foot down}? R foot on cloud; he stands on the cloud of God. Not on the ground.

  • sitting guy: does not use possibilism-thinking to keep balance / to avoid falling. R foot on cut branch. mere basic simplified immature eternalism-thinking.
  • hanging guy: R foot touches cloud of God. (R knee on tree branch). = detailed, refined, integrated, mature eternalism-thinking.
  1. immature possibilism-thinking.
    • failed student 2 & 4; L-foot youth.
  2. immature eternalism-thinking.
    • red R-foot youth; sitting guy in tree. passing “C” student 3.
  3. mature integration of possibilism-thinking & eternalism-thinking.
    • hanging guy in tree; floating sage. ideal fully passing student 1.

“The solution is to trust boundary change and surrender to boundary change.”

The solution is to trust cybernetic eternalism and surrender to cybernetic eternalism. 2-level, dependent control.
not rely on monolithic, autonomous control. Fine detail: You do not “stop using possibilism-thinking”.

You actually always use possibilism-thinking – but now, you rely on also using eternalism-thinking.

The mind ends up with an integrated combination of distinctly perceived possibilism-thinking & eternalism-thinking

The (loose cognition) mature mind ends up with integrated qualified possibilism-thinking with qualified eternalism-thinking.

Crop by Michael Hoffman, March 20, 2023
Crop by Michael Hoffman, Apr. 16, 2025
  1. basic possibilism-thinking
  2. basic eternalism-thinking
  3. advanced integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking
  1. basic possibilism-thinking
  2. basic eternalism-thinking
  3. integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking

advanced integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking
aipet

next, change “boundary change” to: nondual unity oneness boundary-suspension:

nondual unity oneness boundary-suspension
nuobs

nondual unity oneness awareness
nuoa

nondual unity oneness
nuo

The solution is to trust nondual unity oneness boundary-suspension, and surrender to nondual unity oneness boundary-suspension.

That is the currently dominant, most widespread, false, pseudo-explanation of __, based in a false explanatory framework:
the boundary change model of mysticism/ ego transcendence/ Transcendent Knowledge.

the true explanation of panic … is based in the true expw:
the cybernetic eternalism model of mysticism/ ego transcendence/ Transcendent Knowledge.

singular: challenging experiences …. THE one and only, challenging experience.

challenging experiencing
c-e

  • challenging experiences
  • the challenging experience
  • challenging experiencing <– fav

What if Ken Wilber 1977-1984 model of ego transcendence were climaxed in cybernetic eternalism?

What if his model said the essence of ego transcendence is cybernetic eternalism?

Then in 1988 I would have had only minor disputes with Ken Wilber.

a Core Concepts entry
cce

Book Club Singh Email (May 14, 2025)

My church book club picked for next book after Joe Tafur (author who joined us a few minutes ago), the forthcoming book by Singh.

Cool coincidence, my colleagues brought up Singh and that March 30 video, and book, a few days ago. 

I posted about the video at my site, & linked to book,  I’ll re-watch, and maybe pre-order book:
Kindle ebook 
Audiobook 🤔
Hardcover

Shamanism, Human Culture & the Evolution of Religion | Manvir Singh | 219
ch: Mind & Matter Podcast
Mar 30, 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrAZTd9rlVk —

Shamanism: The Timeless Religion,” comes out on May 20, 2025. https://www.amazon.com/Shamanism-Timeless-Religion-Manvir-Singh/dp/0593537548

(Find Singh below)

Hot topic for readers: Article debate series: “Moving Past Mysticism in Psychedelic Science”

[May 14, 2025] – from book club email

Non-book, though some of the articles are book chapters.

The Egodeath community might meet again with Alan Houot (author of Rise of the Psychonaut), developing/ defining a high-quality, upward-convergent Science approach that can include Transcendent Knowledge aka Mysticism, in some framing.

The past few days, I re-read the article debate “Moving Past Mysticism in Psychedelic Science” – that review strongly confirmed:

The Walter Stace 1960 model of so-called “mysticism” is specifically, narrowly, emphatically the experience of positive-experienced boundaryless unity.  

The Stace model of “common core mysticism” is rooted in Advaita Vedanta ever since Swami Vivekananda in 1893, who met with William James.

That’s the historical origin of the dubious model of “a complete mystical experience” per Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ), Hood Mysticism Scale, & Hopkins group.

Writers following the Stace model of “mysticism” narrowly claim that mystical experience excludes any negative experience, such as what they call “ego dissolution“, by which they narrowly mean negatively experienced boundaryless unity — like reported in Michael Pollan’s book, re: Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ)), pp. 276-284, How to Change Your Mind; 5-MeO chapter: Pollan says the MEQ failed to match his terrifying experience, because too positive a framing to be applicable.

But now in psychedelic science (psych. assisted therapy) there are many influential & compelling calls to broaden and open up, from that narrow model of what “mysticism” allegedly is, re: the alleged “common core” of mysticism, by which the writers meant, specifically, positive-experienced boundaryless unity.

My new streamlined page:
Moving Past Mysticism in Psychedelic Science (Article Debate Series)
Has only the citations links for the 18 articles, without my own commentary; in order of publishing.

My verbose orig page w/ confusing custom title:
Moving Past Mysticism: Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism Provides Scientific Basis, Superseding “Mysticism, Meditation, & Psychotherapy” Framework
https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/01/15/the-theory-of-psychedelic-eternalism-provides-a-scientific-explanatory-basis-for-mystic-state-experiencing/

Mystical and Other Alterations in Sense of Self: An Expanded Framework for Studying Nonordinary Experiences (Taves 2020)

Mystical and Other Alterations in Sense of Self: An Expanded Framework for Studying Nonordinary Experiences
Ann Taves, 2020
Perspect Psychol Sci
2020 May;15(3):669-690
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32053465/
doi: 10.1177/1745691619895047. Epub 2020 Feb 13.
PMID: 32053465 DOI: 10.1177/1745691619895047
Free article at: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/86r3f75j

Erratum in: Corrigendum: Mystical and Other Alterations in Sense of Self: An Expanded Framework for Studying Nonordinary Experiences.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2022 Mar;17(2):614. doi: 10.1177/17456916221076158. Epub 2022 Jan 24.
PMID: 35073216

Travis Kitchens links to this Taves article in his article
https://www.psymposia.com/magazine/a-channel-for-magic-ralph-hoods-mysticism-scale-and-the-occult-roots-of-the-johns-hopkins-psychedelic-research-program/ – that article has some great sections needing copy/paste/ commentary per the Egodeath theory.

https://independent.academia.edu/AnnTaves

Abstract:

“Although many researchers in psychology, religious studies, and psychiatry recognize that there is overlap in the experiences their subjects recount, disciplinary silos and challenges involved in comparing reported experiences have left us with little understanding of the mechanisms, whether biological, psychological, and/or sociocultural, through which these experiences are represented and differentiated.

“So-called mystical experiences, which some psychologists view as potentially sui generis, provide a test case for assessing whether we can develop an expanded framework for studying unusual experiences across disciplines and cultures.

“Evidence for the special nature of “mystical experience” [boundaryless unity? or, control-model transformation?] rests on the operationalization of a metaphysically untestable construct in two widely used self-report scales: the Mysticism Scale [M Scale] and the Mystical Experiences Questionnaire [MEQ].

“Consideration of the construct in light of research on alterations in sense of self [sense of self as boundaryless unity? or, sense of self as control-agency/ control-model transformation?] induced by psychoactive drugs and meditation practices suggests that “positive experiences of undifferentiated unity” are not sui generis, but rather a type of “ego dissolution.”

“To better understand the nature and effects of unusual experiences, such as alterations in the sense of self [regarding unity? or control transformation?], we need self-report measures that distinguish between generically worded experiences and the way they are appraised in terms of valence, significance, cause, and long-term effects in different contexts.

Keywords: consciousness; ego dissolution; psychoactive drugs; psychopathology; scale development.

See also: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32053465/ – the “Similar articles” list there.

‘self’ or ‘ego dissolution’ re: non-boundary unity?
(like “two models in Phil of Time” but omitting any consideration of personal control system implications)

or,

‘self’ or ‘ego dissolution’ re: cybernetic control-model transformation?
(like possibilism vs eternalism but with emphasis explicitly on cybernetic personal control system model modification/ transformation)

Taves Quotes: Unity, Positive, Narrow, Advaita, common core

No need to do this. I thoroughly read the long, good article.

Summary of Findings, Conclusions, Observations about the False, Pleasant Unity Model of “Mysticism”: Smashing the Pleasant Unity Paradigm of Mysticism

Having re-read the debate, it is easiest and a fine strategy to concede dismissively:

LOWER COMMON CORE MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE IS POSITIVE EXPERIENCE OF BOUNDARYLESS UNITY.

“Common” as in, hoi poloi; unsophisticated; vulgar; beginner; commonplace and as worthless.

HIGHER COMMON CORE MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE IS CYBERNETIC ETERNALISM.

ONLY THE BEST MYSTICS, WITH THE STRONGEST Psilocybin, ACCESS THIS SUPERIOR POTENTIAL.

The positive unity model of mysticism is worse than merely a beginner narrative; that model was just MADE UP.

Purely fabricated and selected from Advaita.

Sw Vivek/ Wm James/ Walter Stace/ Tim Leary/ Walter Pahnke/ Wm Richards/ Ralph Hood/ Bob Jesse/ Roland Griffiths: they simply MADE UP the “positive unity” model of mysticism.

The Stace “positive unity” model of mysticism is as phony as Wasson, SOMA, p. 180, his call to “consult” art historians in the same paragraph where he censors the Brinckmann book citation, while meeting with the Pope, as the Pope’s banker: 100% maximum extreme conflict of interest.

https://egodeaththeory.org/2024/12/27/ceq-challenging-experiences-questionnaire/#Pollan —

Pollan reports the extreme, total mismatch between so-called the Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ) framing vs. the actual mystical experience:

Pure made-up bullsh!t, quoted not critically enough via Pollan:

“mental phenomena– thoughts, images, and sensations that psychologies and philosophers regard as typical of a mystical experience. The questionnaire draws on the work of William James, W. T. Stace, and Walter Pahnke.”

Translation: A certain group of confused scholars fabricated a lot of fantasy nonsense based on Swami Vivekananda’s 1893 trojan-horse pretend model of mysticism selectively plucked from Advaita Vendanta, to push a political agenda of international political unity by selectively abusing and ignoring actual mystical experience.

It is utterly misleading to write as Pollan got suckered into:

Mental phenomena of positive boundaryless unity that psychologies and philosophers regard as typical of a mystical experience, such as James, Stace, Pahnke.

That statement fails to point out 2018-1893 = 125 years (not just “over 50” per Erik Davis) of pushback against this BOGUS MODEL OF MYSTICISM drawn from a quirky Swami’s portrayal, “Advaita positive Unity experience = the true essense of mystical experience”.

Against Mr. Swami, as much as against Zen Master Brad and against the pope’s banker fraud fake academic Wasson, the Salvation Salesmen, the Meditation Hucksters,

I support Psilocybin based meditation.

I’m against meditation that tells lies to diminish Psilocybin and to deny the Psilocybin origin of meditation.

Real, authentic, Reference gold standard meditation is defined by Psilocybin meditation. Imitation, avoidance-tactic meditation is non-psychedelic meditation.

Non-psychedelic meditation is as phony as Wasson: fraudulent, imitation, avoidance-tactic meditation. Not to say anyone must use psychedelics in meditation

It is a LIE to claim meditation doesn’t come from Psychedelics, yet, every book in the field all tells this lie.

I can’t stand reading them, they ALL say the same false biased lies to diminish and steal credit from Psilocybin. None of these books ever considers the possibility that (as Nichols David said) meditation must have come from Psilocybin.

Any transformative or revelatory experience of positive boundaryless unity mystical experience came from Psilocybin, typically accompanied by wrestling with gate guard demons; negative altered sense of self.

Meditation that denies the Psilocybin origin of Meditation is FAKE PHONY PSEUDO MEDITATION and it is an AVOIDANCE TACTIC.

James, Stace, Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ), M Scale – all are PURE NOTHING BUT IMAGINED PUERILE JUNK MADE-UP NOTION OF Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ).

Selective, arbitrary, positive-only, unity-only –

The entire conception of “mystical experience” used in the field of psychedelic pseudo science is PURE FANTASY.

My condemnations since like 2022 were TOO GENEROUS.

It turns out, I was right, even understated, when saying: psychedelic pseudo science.

I am suddenly more sympathetic to the naysayers Matt Johnson who call for – even filing claims of ethics violations at Hopkins — “Moving Past Mysticism in Psychedelic Science”. the key is, whose ‘mysticism’ are we talking about?

‘mysticism ‘ – What’s that supposed to mean?

You don’t want to know the answer, it’s awful; it’s WORST-CASE SITUATION.

I am glad that I so liked the Sanders & Zijilmans article about Moving Past Mysticism in Psychedelic Science.
https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/01/15/the-theory-of-psychedelic-eternalism-provides-a-scientific-explanatory-basis-for-mystic-state-experiencing/#Moving-Past-Mysticism-in-Psychedelic-Science
The article is anti-mysticism of this bad sort. (Must refresh my mem)

What they all mean by ‘ mysticism’ is, made-up, positive-only, Advaita based.

I am mad at Ken Wilber the past few years, since around 2022, I figured out that Wilber is nothing but non-drug Advaita meditation.

I was correct in Jan 1988: my Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence contradicts the self-assured, entrenched, dominant, made-up, Eastern meditation philosophy model that:

The Old Theory:

ego transcendence = positively experienced boundaryless unity nondual unity oneness awareness.

The New Theory:

The only, definitive, authentic way of zapping and eliminating ego in a sense, in a deep sense, yet harmlessly, is by block-universe eternalism experienced through high-dose psychedelics repeatedly.

‘Trust’ and ‘surrender’ seemed utterly pathetic in this category 5 mental storm. Terror seized me. The terror didn’t disappear with with extinction of my “I”, in the flames of terror. Pure and terrible sensation. No time or space. It was just horrible. The dimensions of time and space returned. The leaves had blown off the great tree of being and scattered to the four winds, find their way back, fly up into the welcoming limbs of reality, and reattach. The terror I had just endured, died, reborn. I had tied myself up in a philosophical knot, constructed a paradox or koan I was clearly not smart enough or sufficiently enlightened to untangle. One of the most shattering experiences of my life. The MEQ asked me to rank a list of thirty mental phenomena– thoughts, images, and sensations that psychologies and philosophers regard as typical of a mystical experience. The questionnaire draws on the work of William James, W. T. Stace, and Walter Pahnke. “Looking back on the entirety of your session, please rate the degree of which at any time you experienced the following phenomena” using a six-point scale. “From zero, for “none at all,” to five, for extreme: “more than any other time in my life.” But I was unsure what to do with this one: “Feeling that you experienced eternity or infinity.” The language implies something more positive than what I felt when time vanished and terror took hold: NA, I decided. The “experience of the fusion of your personal self into a larger whole” also seemed like an overly nice way to put the sensation of becoming one with a nuclear blast.

Michael Pollan, How to Change Your Mind, pp. 277-284

Stace’s 1960 model of “mystical experience” is more brittle, more cartoonish, more arb’y, more fake, and even less of a merited “science foundation” than I realized.

the dominant definition of common core and mystical is far worse and far more narrow than I realized.

Just like ‘determinism’ is defined far more specifically than I realized. It’s an exact synonym of domino-chain causality.

‘mysticism’ as it is used in the field, is an exact synonym for the firm, narrow, specific, entirely self-assured emphasis: THE COMMON CORE MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE IS (positively experienced ie pleasant) BOUNDARYLESS UNITY.

All of my criticisms of Stace as bunk have been proved, other critics especially Taves reached same conclusion, and I was if anything, TOO EASY ON STACE.

Everyone in that Popular Paradigm says “Item 54: I was afraid to lose my self-control” is not mystical because it is not positive and it is not about boundaryless unity.

per Pop paradigm: “Mystical” only, exclusively, specifically means:
positively experienced boundaryless unity.

I hate and completely reject the notion of “mystical experience” that EVERYONE uses; all late-modern scholars since 1893-2025.

They all (except critics)….

There is a certain dominant model of “mystical”, “common core”, and sometimes “perennialism”, used by a certain community/ group/ paradigm.

Critics make a few same objections that I do: eg, Stace is too narrow and too exclusively positive.

OTOH I agree with aspects of Stace and common core, or, “best case” mysticism, normative.

The best mystics should use psychedelics and should experience transformed control in transformed world.

The best lyrics and myth should depict that, via analogy.

My concept of “common core” is more normative and selective.

I’m picking out a certain potential experience as “the best” and “the authentic”.

Many mystics lack that.

Many myths lack that.

Many lyrics lack that.

Those are inferior.

My concept of “common core” is more like, I like the word “classic” or “epic” or “archetypal”.

I like astral ascent mysticism and

I like Hero’s Journey, though with Science explanation, the 2nd gen n/a.

1st gen discoverers do the Hero Journey, then add to Science, then 2nd gen does not do hero journey; they do merely mystery-religion initiation like everyone else.

My model of common-core mysticism and perennialism is normative: If you are tuned into what’s best, you experience transformed control in transformed world; you experience…

Strangeloop found my practical method failed.

Ideal mystical experience is not “unity”, but better: it should cause cybernetic control transformation per sequence:

  1. naive possibilism-thinking. then series of Psilocybin sessions, giving:
  2. basic eternalism-thinking. come down 10th time to the ordinary state of consciousness, end up with:
  3. eternalism-modified possibilism-thinking.

Especially Ann Taves article cleared this up (that “ego dissolution” really means Unity per the Unity Paradigm of mysticism, but with negative valence), but I also got unanimous, overwhelming, extremely consistent indicators May 11-13 2025 from every writer that I checked – wiki, Kitchens, Strassman.

Taves omits transformed world, over-focuses on “sense of self”, fails to consider concom. “sense of world”.

I didn’t realize how pointedly and emphatically Stace & everyone – even Dittrich! — specifically urged, “mystical = positive boundaryless unity” (as Taves clarified). Makes my job easy: black and white contrast:

  • Everyone says mystical = boundaryless unity per Advaita. A cheap, inarticulate equivalent of eternalism-thinking, without reconciling possibilism-thinking.
  • These writers waffle, re: psychedelics as the cause of historical mystical experience.
  • THESE WRITERS DENY THAT HISTORICAL MYSTICS GOT THEIR MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE VIA PSYCHEDELICS. EVEN Even Lundborg writes usual anti-psychedelics assumption: “can Psilocybin simulate genuine traditional methods of the mystics?” I can’t stand to read any of these books asking if meditation hucksters are allowed to use novel innovative new thing, psychedelics.
  • the Egodeath theory says, and myth, rock lyrics, trippers, Mystery Religions, mushroom-trees says: mystical = cybernetic control transformation; transformed control in transformed world. from branching possibilism with monolithic, autonomous control, to non-branching eternalism with 2-level, dependent control. end up with stable control in both states. end up knowing and perceiving both mental models: possibilism & eternalism.
  • “ego dissolution” is directly tied to the false, Unity model of mystical experience: like every term used by the bad paradigm, every construct is soaked with the framing; they mean “ego dissolution a la non-boundary unity”. NOT cybernetic control transformation; not control-agency phen’y.
  • every time they say “mystical”, they always means specifically and narrowly, boundaryless unity.
  • negative experience of boundaryless unity gets categorized as “non-mystical”.
  • People challenged the Stace model, though you wouldn’t know it from page 1 of 11-F the 11-Factors questionnaire article.
  • Stace model is arbitrary and narrow and positive-balanced (selective).
  • Everyone in psychedelic pseudo science and all fields defines mystical experience specifically as Unity, per specifically Advaita.
  • The James/Stace false unity model is lifted from Advaita per Swami Vivekananda 1893.
  • Everyo Critics agree positive
  • Stace omits negative unity experience.
  • Dittrich’s OAV’s Ocean dimension means positive unity. (discovered in Taves article).
  • OAV’s Angst dimension means negative unity, called “ego dissolution“.
  • “ego dissolution” means negative equiv of Oceanic unity. Vision dim is not related to Unity.
  • Ocean = positive unity exp.
  • Angst = negative unity exp.

When they all say “ego dissolution“:

  • they do NOT mean loose cognition;
  • they do NOT mean transformed control in transformed world.
  • All of the writers about “mysticism” merely, always, exclusively, narrowly mean: boundaryless unity (experienced as negative).

Thanks to Taves for shining light on this mostly surprising realization though this was noted when I noticed that Dread is allegedly of what? of “ego dissolution”.

Translation: Dittrich means DREAD OF the boundaryless unity EXPERIENCE.

Dread of Ego Dissolution doesn’t mean Item 54: I was afraid to lose my self-control.

Yesterday May 11 or 12 2025 i noticed that v1 1985-1993 OAV lacked item 54, “anxiety about control”!

During 1975-1993, Dittrich failed to realize that psychedelics cause fear of loss of control.

Only in 1994 OAV did Ditt finally add Item 54: I was afraid to lose my self-control.

  • Vision != unity exp.

Item 54: I was afraid to lose my self-control.
i54

item 54, “anxiety about control” (“I was afraid to lose my self-control”), from OAV’s Angst/Dread dimension
i54l

Item 54, “anxiety about control”

Item 54 was dropped from the fancy stupid overcomplicated failed-in-execution low-level factors in the 11-Factors questionnaire, because 54 fit equally in both poor factors:

  • their misconceived “Anxiety” factor.
  • their misconceived “Impaired control and cognition” (poor scoped factor).

Shadow Factor 13 is where Item 54: I was afraid to lose my self-control ends up, to be ignored.

This is the history of Item 54: I was afraid to lose my self-control:

  1. Failed to think of it until 1994, not 1975, Dittrich.
  2. Got placed in the 11-Factors questionnaire only in the Unpl hi-lev dim, not in any low-level factor other than my Shadow Factor 13.
  3. When the Challenging Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) should have copied all 21 items from OAV Angst 1994, they instead copied only the two negative factors in the 11-Factors questionnaire – thus ignoring 8 of the 21 items, for no reason.

My Comment on Freke Podbook Chapter 4 (Why the Universe is Like a Learning AI system)

4 Why the Universe is Like a Learning AI system
Tim Freke
May 12, 2025
This is a chapter from ‘Why Your Life Really Matters: The Podbook‘.

podbook YouTube playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9oOm-3dG-W_GmO0l8NW14xR-gwyjAdvX – “A chapter by chapter exposition of a new ‘post-scientific’ spirituality“

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OK8ao410koU —

My Comment, minutes after the episode posted:

Tim Freke and Jessica Nathanson have brought a useful critique of nondual unity oneness Advaita.

I look forward to hearing Freke’s critique of how to integrate eternalism (extremely closed future) with our experience of possibilism branching into an open future.

Today I got massive confirmation that the entirely dominant model of common-core “mystical experience”, since Swami Vivekananda in 1893, is, specifically, “boundaryless unity”; nondual oneness.

Swami V fabricated this “unity” model as a means to an end, a trojan horse to push political international unity. James, Stace, Pahnke, Richards, then Griffiths took up this “positive unity feeling” mis-conception of the central mystical experience.

Since 1988, I disagree: the actual main dynamic of mystical experience is the “challenging experience” of cybernetic control destabilization and restabilization, upon experiencing 4D spacetime block universe eternalism — especially the problematization of control, not merely the “unity” aspect of eternalism.

I also got a definition of “perennialism”, from the Summary of the article “The Common Core Thesis in the Study of Mysticism” (Ralph Hood, 2016):

Sentence 1 of Hood’s Summary directly equates Mystical Experience with Unity:

“The common core thesis contends that mystical experience is an ultimate non-sensuous experience of unity of all things.”

“Unlike the perennialist thesis, the common core thesis does not assume that any common theology, philosophy, or practice[??] necessarily follows from mystical [ie boundaryless unity] experience.” I don’t know what “theology, philosophy, or practice” is attributed to perennialism.

It is completely clear now why I definitely have to reject “perennialism” and “common core mysticism”. I cannot assert “mysticism” without specifying my model (control destabilization and restabilization) as opposed to the firmly entrenched, false model with misplaced focus (boundaryless unity).

Official Admission: “Common Core Mysticism” Is Sold as “Merely That There Is Something in Common” — but Is Actually, Specifically, Unity

The bait:

The common-core mysticism and perennialism thesis is simply the proposition that:

Religions have a mystical experience in common at their core.

Phony Beginner Mystical Experience: Positive Boundaryless Unity Sensation

The switch:

Religions have unitive mystical experience in common at their core.

The common-core mysticism and perennialism is unitive experience.

= nondual, boundaryless unity, non-boundary unity, oneness, suspension of the self-other boundary; No Boundary –

Unitive experience; suspension of the self-other boundary, is the essential core mystical experience.

In fact, cybernetic control transformation from psychedelics is the essence of Transcendent Knowledge, the important thing that all authentic religion has in common.

Is Mystery Religion about unity experience? No. Mystery-religion initiation is about cybernetic control transformation.

cybernetic control transformation
cct

cybernetic transformation
cyb

egodeath > CybTrans.com = cybernetic transcendence

component-theory
ct

the cybernetic theory
ct

control transformation
cx

THAT is the central essence of religious expeirencing or peak mystical experience across all brands of religion.

(not:)

All paths join at the mountain top, the mountain top is unitive experiencing eg of eternalism per philosophy of time [in which we smartly contrast two metaphysics models: is only the present real, or is past/present & future real?

ie, we contrast Presentism vs. Eternalism, as a Metaphysics debate], and you feel that you = all of space and time, and it is a positive experience.

Authentic Advanced Mystical Experience: Harrowing Cybernetic Control Transformation

In fact:

Myth is about cybernetic control transformation; cybernetic re-stabilization when eternalism is experienced as a POV outside of possibilism-thinking; {shadow dragon monster} driving through the transformation gate]

The relevant cybernetic contrast is the two models of control implied by possibilism vs. eternalism.

branching vs non branching.

open future vs. maximally closed future — on the other extreme end of spectrum from mere domino-chain causality “determinism” with its EXTREMELY WEAKLY “CLOSED” FUTURE, vs eternalism — not the weak half baked grasp of eternalism that Josie Kins effect index has.

  1. Determinism.
  2. Superdeterminism.
  3. Strong determinism.
  4. Phil of Time’s “eternalism” (vs. of course Presentism [facepalm]) – omits control destabilization and restabilization.
  5. Effect index weak eternalism per Josie Kins.
  6. Eternalism per the Egodeath theory; myth; acid lyrics; mushroom-trees, & mystery-religion initiation.

control agency phen’y:
control destabilization and restabilization
cdr

Supposedly:

nondual unity oneness awareness

Religious experiencing has unitive experience in common at their core.

Religious experiencing has unitive experiencing in common as the core of mystical experience.

— That That Unspecified Something Is Specifically Unity ie Boundaryless Nondual Oneness Unity.

But in fact:

The something – the experience that authentic religions have in common, such as:

  • Myth
  • Acid Lyrics
  • actual trippers
  • the Egodeath theory
  • the mushroom-tree artists
  • mystery-religion initiation

is:

The true actual common core mysticism is CYBERNETIC RE-STABILIZATION AFTER ETERNALISM EXPERIENCE INTRUDES INCURSION

Way of the World (Cheap Trick, 1979)

Cheap Trick: Way of the World (1979)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ziqaz9TkkuI&t=102s —

The most extreme example of hardcore acid freakout isolated within a Power Pop upbeat happy song:

  • tape phasing
  • nervous escalating violins
  • 3-4 key freakout words/lines

Lyrics:

Remember
You were at work and then Friday at five
I remember
Felt like a pawn, was I dead or alive?
I remember
Thought no one could hear me,
I was goin’ insane
I remember,
It was a real fine line, now you’ve changed my life around

I’ve been runnin’, I’ve been hidin’, it’s the way of the world
You say it’s over, but the world keeps turnin’ ’round
World goes round, life goes on, and on, and on

I went to this concert tour. This album is my life, in 1980.

Dream Police was a huge album, delayed so as to not harm sales of their hit Live at Budokan album, 1978/1979.

Six years before Back to the Future day (October 26, 1985).

Given the musical cues of tape phasing and nervous escalating violins, I do NOT read this as (positive) unitive experiencing; I read this as (extreme harrowing) cybernetic control reconfiguration/ restabilization.

Mystery Religion initiation mythic peak seizure!

cybernetic control reconfiguration/ restabilization
ccrr

The Common Core Thesis in the Study of Mysticism (Hood 2016): Sentence 1: “Mystical Experience = Unity”

The Common Core Thesis in the Study of Mysticism
Ralph W. Hood Jr.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.013.241
Published online: 07 July 2016
https://oxfordre.com/religion/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-241

Ralph Hood “the expert in religious experiencing”, 2016 article.

Summary:

“The common core thesis contends that mystical experience is an ultimate non-sensuous experience of unity of all things.”

LOL THERE IT IS! “There is a common thing AND SPECIFICALLY THAT THING IS UNITY”

“It can be identified within major faith traditions, whether explicitly religious or not.

“Its roots are in the work of William James who explored mystical [boundaryless unity] experience outside the limits imposed by what he perceived as only a provisional natural science assumption of the newly emerging discipline of empirical psychology.

“Following the explicit phenomenological work of Walter Stace, the phenomenology of a universal core to mystical [boundaryless unity] experience has been operationalized and an explicit psychometric measure developed to allow empirical assessment of the claim to a common core to [boundaryless unity] mysticism. [vs. control restabilization mysticism]

[control destabilization and restabilization mysticism
control destabilization and restabilization
cdr

control restabilization mysticism
crm]

“It is the linkage of psychometric approaches to the work of James and Stace that is now known explicitly as the common core thesis.

“The common core thesis needs to be delineated from the perennialist thesis popularized by Aldous Huxley in which there is postulated not only a common core experience, but also values and practices[??] claimed to be associated with this experience if not directly derived from it.”

[he’s lost me… what “values and practices”? I have NO IDEA what you’re talking about.]

[compare: Eranos religionism as criticized by Wouter Hanegraaff; traditionalism.]

“Psychometric and empirical evidence for the common core thesis is substantial and continues to accumulate.”

[minor detail: the “boundaryless unity” model is a false, fake model invented selectively by Swami V & followers through Roland Roland Griffiths team at Johns Hopkins Dept. of Psychedelic Pseudo Science; NOT THE MAIN DYNAMIC; FAR FROM IT!]

“evidence….” What circular bull sh!t! Same as: Quantum Physics is irrational nonsense, but this is fine, because super duper mega well proven!! I’m not lying, no no no no no! I super swear, rock solid proof!

“The common core thesis is restricted to mystical [non-boundary unity] experience and assumes that this experience seeks to express itself in various faith traditions, whether religious or not, but is not restricted to or defined adequately by the culture or language with which this experience is interpreted.

“Unlike the perennialist thesis, the common core thesis does not assume that any common theology, philosophy, or practice[??] necessarily follows from mystical [ie boundaryless unity] experience.”

This entire article from Ralph Hood is a false, far-off-base model of “mysticism”, ignoring as “challenging therefore non-mystical” the TRUE CORE experience, cybernetic control destabilization and restabilization.

cybernetic control destabilization and restabilization
ccdr

In January 11, 1988, our knowledge of ego transcendence leaps ahead: it’s not actually about Unity like everyone unanimously emphasizes, following Swami V 1893 phony concoction of international political unity-purposed “mystical unity” made-up model.

Keywords

Subjects:

  • Comparative Religions
  • Mysticism and Spirituality
  • Theology and Philosophy of Religion

Mentions of Swami V

Strassman year 2018 review of Wm Richards book Sacred Knowledge, p. 2 mentions Swami Vivekananda.

Ann Taves year mentioning S.V.: 2020

Kitchens year of mentioning S. V. 2022

Dan Merkur Error: Stages of Ascension in Hermetic Rebirth (38 pages,

https://www.scribd.com/document/163517835/Stages-of-Ascension-in-Hermetic-Rebirth

“The document discusses stages of mystical experiences in Hermetic rebirth traditions.

“It describes four specific mystical experiences sought by initiates in a deliberate sequence:

1) Detaching from the senses and material world to achieve intellectual detachment,

2) Ascending through seven planetary zones discarding earthly attachments,

3) Ascending beyond the planetary zones to free the mind from astral determinism,

4) Achieving a rebirth experience associated with a specific celestial region to induce a particular doctrinal orientation.

“The document analyzes differences between Hermetic and Gnostic views of ascension and mystical experiences.”

Critique of Merkur

“Ascending beyond the planetary zones to free the mind from astral determinism” – CITATION NEEDED!

Hermetic writings do NOT say this!

Fowden or someone is MAKING SH!T UP!

No hermetic writing says “when you reach sphere 8 Ogdoad sphere of the 4000 fixed stars above planet spheres 1-7, you are now freed from astral Fate/ heimarmene/ determinism/ eternalism.”

https://www.google.com/search?q=define+astral – of, connected with, or resembling the stars. M-W: : of, relating to, or coming from the stars.

However, hermetic scholars do not use ‘astral’ that way when they write “astral determinism is among the planet spheres” — the 5 moving-star spheres (Mer Ven Mar Jup Sat) vs. the 4000 fixed stars.

Hermetic scholars w/ straight face tell us:

“You rise above the planet zones to be above astral determinism, at the level of the 4000 fixed stars.”

“You reach the 4000 fixed stars, so now you are above astral fate.”

Merkur has a hand-waving passage saying “hermetic cosmos models are a jumbled mess switching from 7 planet spheres to 12 zodiac (= sphere 8 sphere of the fixed stars = Ogdoad) zones.”

Merkur gives no citation to support “above planet zones = free from astral determinism”.

Above planet spheres you are by definition in sphere 8 sphere of the fixed stars, which you must explain how sphere of the fixed stars is free from astral determinism.

When you reach sphere 8 sphere of the 4000 fixed stars, how does that constitute being “free from astral determinism”??

Hermetic scholars once again MAKE NO SENSE, CONTRADICT THEIR own TERM USE from one paragraph to the next, and they cannot provide citations here re: these contradictory, inconsistent term-usages.

Heremetic scholars can’t even handle saying “the fixed stars are immediately above the moving planet spheres.”

Their cosmos model is disjointed.

David Ulansey book & articles: simple coherent, consistent, intelligible, not a mass of inconsistent contradictions.

Why Clueless Blaming of Tripper for “Failing to Surrender”

the fear & threat is not of lifting the boundary between self & world – that’s what the foolish “blame the tripper who failed to surrender” think.

Actually, the ‘surrender’ crude folk advice IS pretty close to seeing the actual threat: control-related.

Surrender your control to [gets 100% hazy here]…

On the ego side of the transformation gate, it looks like you are required to hand over your control to mystery agent X, as is, unchanged.

Actually what happens is your model of control is transformed upon seeing the {snake frozen in rock}.

The king remains on his throne as the emperor episphany reveals his higher power under the king’s throne.

the fear & threat is of catastrophic loss of control

per my sect6ion heading:
The Dimension Name “Dread of Ego Dissolution” Participates in the False, Swami V Model of “Mystical experience”: by “ego dissolution”, Dittrich Merely Means non-boundary unity, not Control Transformation – –

6:02 pm May 12, 2025: This means that the blame-the-tripper explanations, eg at effectindex.com — when they say “your bad trip panic seizure is your fault, for resisting ego dissolution – you should have surrendered to the drug/trip/ demon/ satan/ mystery-threat] – they really are thinking, wrongly, “you were stupid to be afraid of merely non-boundary unity”.

They are oblivious to the real actual threat, experience of the threat of catastrophic loss of control.

The Word “Mystical” Always Means the Fake, “non-boundary unity” model of mysticism

Always Read “Mystical” (since 1893) as Swami Vivekanandean Fake Political Substitute “non-boundary unity” model of mysticism

boundaryless unity

in all writings, globally insert after “mysticism”/ “mystical”:

[boundaryless unity] mysticism

mystical [ie boundaryless unity] experience

as opposed to the authentic, “control-model transformation” model of mystical experience

the Egodeath theory is an explanation of authentic mystical experience – it is NOT a model of that which scholars or psychedelic pseudo science calls “mystical experience”.

When anyone in those communities says “mysticism”, they are instead talking about boundaryless unity experience.

I’ve been using “Stacean” or “Staceanism” pejoratively, to replace “mysticism” or “mystical”. Better say “Vivekanandean” or “Vivekanandeanism”. Thanks to Strassman 2018 then Taves 2020 then Kitchens for tracing back to Swami. Or Jamesian/ism.

Move Over, Zen Master Brad, Make Way for Swami Vivekananda, on the Bench of Unity Spirituality Fabricators

Salvation Salesman

Meditation Hucksters

Unity Mysticism Fabricators

When anyone in those communities says “mystical experience”, they are instead talking about boundaryless unity experience.

Kitchens & Taves Excerpts from Channel for Magic

In article “A Channel for Magic”, Travis Kitchens discusses Ann Taves’ article “Mystical and Other Alterations in Sense of Self”:
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/04/21/idea-development-page-28/#a-channel-for-magic-ralph-hoods-mysticism-scale-and-the-occult-roots-of-the-johns-hopkins-psychedelic-research-program-kitchens-2022

in my page https://egodeaththeory.org/2024/12/27/ceq-challenging-experiences-questionnaire/ I added sections about Taves’ article & Kitchens’ “A Channel for Magic”.

excerpt so I can comment:
https://www.psymposia.com/magazine/a-channel-for-magic-ralph-hoods-mysticism-scale-and-the-occult-roots-of-the-johns-hopkins-psychedelic-research-program/

Ralph Hood’s Mysticism Scale was based on Stace 1960; ie based on James 1902; ie based on Swami Vivekananda 1893 fake reductionist [ie explanandum-replacing] non-boundary unity mysticism trojan horse for international political unity.

search/replace:
mysticism ->
[boundaryless unity] mysticism

search/replace:
mystical experience ->
mystical [ie boundaryless unity] experience

Kitchens wrote about M Scale:

“The paper was published in The Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion in March 1975, solidifying the [sic; non-boundary unity model of; not the control transformation model of] mystical experience as a valid scientific concept.

“Science wasn’t exactly replacing religion, as some would argue, but it was beginning to reformulate it in its own image.

“Mystical [ie boundaryless unity] experience as a measurable phenomena didn’t emerge (or evolve) without its critics.

“Ann Taves, Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at UC Santa Barbara and the recipient of a Guggenheim Fellowship,8 says that the conclusions derived from the research at Johns Hopkins rely heavily on the idea of a universal “mystical [ie boundaryless unity] experience,” a theological concept that functions as a catchall category for a variety of possibly unrelated mental states.”

Including:

  • Pleasant, beginner, barely psychedelic, non-boundary unity experience.
  • Unpleasant, advanced, fully psychedelic, cybernetic control transformation experience (producing eternalism-modified possibilism-thinking).

“Hood’s questionnaire—based on this spiritual belief [trojan horse for international political unity by Swami V 1893] that Taves says was elaborated over the past one hundred years—doesn’t just influence the volunteer into seeing the experience as a positive one, it also suggests and reinforces their assumption that the mystical [ie boundaryless unity] experience is a distinct or sui generis one.

“If scientists fail to make a clear distinction between

  • scientific claims based on empirical evidence
    and
  • theological claims based on revelation or tradition [or on Swami V’s scheme to fabricate a model of “mystical experience” that’s “positive-balanced” and that’s limited to merely non-boundary unity experience, to advance his agenda of international political unity in 1893]

“, they risk setting mystical [ie boundaryless unity] experiences apart from other similar experiences on theological rather than scientific grounds.

“They have no scientific basis for making theological claims regarding the common core of all religions [falsely or feebly taken to be non-boundary unity] or the presence of an ultimate reality that unites them,” Taves wrote.

“These broad [unity, but ignore control transformation] and unstable categories, she says, limit our ability to uncover the mechanics of consciousness and how these experiences actually work.”

The Dimension Name “Dread of Ego Dissolution” Participates in the False, Swami V Model of “Mystical experience”: by “ego dissolution”, Dittrich Merely Means non-boundary unity, not Control Transformation

The Challenging Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) by Roland Griffiths team at Johns Hopkins Dept. of Psychedelic Pseudo Science omits 18 of 21 unpleasant effects (from OAV 1994’s Angst/DED/Dread dim [5:16 pm may 12 2025: here i connect-in, my previous noting that Ditt’s dim name “Dread OF EGO DISSOLUTION” is false], which = the Unpleasant hi-lev dim of 11 Factors questionnaire), replacing them by a giant Grief Therapy factor/subscale, no “Control challenges” subscale.

Kitchens con’t:

“Some believe that these theological premises are being obscured by researchers who have both an ideological (and in some cases: financial) interest in bringing psychedelics to market. Add to this the fact that psychedelics are now being hyped as the answer to all of our problems and a troubling picture emerges. Did the scientists of religion, attempting to model the natural sciences and systematize religions, accidentally synthesize them, creating a new, scientific subgenre of Christianity that they themselves could believe in? What’s really happening at Johns Hopkins might be the flowering of a new psychedelic spirituality, grounded in Jamesian [love it! modifier just like I been doing!] mysticism, with psilocybin “therapy” replacing the ancient initiation ceremony.

“Dr. Rick Strassman calls it “the psychedelic religion of mystical [ie boundaryless unity] consciousness.”

“It’s a messianic movement,” Strassman told me. “They want to bring about a utopia, and in this case, the messiah is the mushroom.”

“Strassman is not just a veteran psychedelic researcher—his investigations into DMT in New Mexico in the late 1980’s were the very first post-prohibition psychedelic trials in the United States—he was also the first person Bob Jesse asked to help initiate the mystical [ie boundaryless unity] experience trials before Roland Griffiths and Johns Hopkins signed on.

“Bob Jesse discovered the rave culture in the Bay Area in the early 1990s and he got bit by the bug big time,” Strassman says.

“He thought that this was a path to utopia.

“He stopped working at Oracle, got a big severance package from Larry Ellison, and just went on this mission.

“And he’s been kind of nonstop since then.”

“Psychedelics, Strassman says, don’t have any inherent mystical [ie boundaryless unity] or spiritual effects—those are caused by set and setting: specific musical playlists, sensory isolation, and filtering the results through questionnaires like the M-Scale.

The current psychedelic movement or “renaissance,” he says, is essentially the emergence of a new mystico-[ie boundaryless unity]-scientific religion—“camouflaged by scientific studies and statistical firepower” [= sloppy 11 Factors paper then dropping 18 of 21 effects in CEQ]—with its own Moses (William James) and cult vocabulary (psychedelics “occasion” effects; adverse effects are now “challenging”; flashbacks are “reactivations”; “and if you read the articles, they all start to borrow the same language.”)

“There’s the philosophy of James, Strassman says, and then there’s his theology, which was inspired by his connection with Swami Vivekananda.

“Vivekananda was preaching [fabricating; inventing] a universal religion—not just anybody’s universal religion, his universal religion—which would promote utopia.

“There would be no more sectarian strife.

The way you could do it was by positing a universal religious [non-boundary unity] experience which all major religions shared and that was biological or “hardwired” so, how could you deny it?

“If you accepted it [DO NOT ACCEPT “PERENNIALISM” OR “MYSTICISM” – TRJOAN HORSE PACKAGE DEAL!], all the sectarian differences would kind of melt away.”

[… along with omitting advanced control transformation mysticism, from strong psychedelics.

What Sw V did wasn’t necessarily abandoning authentic mysticism control transformation; but, the way he did it, that’s what he did:

  • Omit unpleasant;
  • omit high dose psychedelics;
  • omit control transformation.]

“This was consistent with and supported James’ idea of a universal [read: unitive] religious [non-boundary unity] experience that was a formless, content-free, no-self [ie, non-boundary unity] state.”

“Strassman worries specifically about Judaism, which is “particularistic” and therefore incompatible with a universal religion.”

[Actually Rick Strassman’s Jewish religion is incompatible with a merely non-boundary unity mysticism.

Jewish religion would be more compatible with authentic, control transformation mysticism, per my Dec 2, 2013 chalkboard lecture about the true referent of {the Israelites}.

{the Israelites} = those who affirm non-branching possibilities and 2-level, dependent control, like Abraham & Isaac.]

“The Hebrew Bible doesn’t contain any contentless, selfless, ego-loss experiences free of time and space, he says, and as a result, is viewed by researchers as inferior.”

but theologians elevate relational mysticism over unitive mysticism -Michael Hoffman

““The existence of a universal religious experience is a theological solution,” he said.

“Other researchers are moving away from [boundaryless unity] mysticism for their own reasons.

“Matthew Johnson, a professor at Johns Hopkins Center on Psychedelic and Consciousness Research, has warned his colleagues against adopting frameworks “drawn piecemeal from mystical [boundaryless unity] traditions” that might alienate potential customers.

“Ultimately, we want them [insurance companies] to cover this stuff,” Johnson told Vice.

“And there is going to be an issue with covering religious therapy.

“The point is, someone could make an argument against it.”

“It is also inappropriate, he says, to introduce “meta-religious” belief systems such as perennialism (or “the common core”) [always defined as boundaryless unity mysticism, never as control transformation mysticism] into therapeutic practice.

“Johnson is a paid advisor with at least seven different companies developing psychedelics for medicinal use.

“Hood freely acknowledges the limits of language and even his own scale for capturing the sacred. ]

prediction: M Scale questionnaire is weak at covering control transformation effects, and strong at boundaryless unity effects. – Michael Hoffman

“Some things you just have to try for yourself, he says.

“Say you’ve never tasted a lemon before and ask me what one tastes like.

‘Well hell, I say, I don’t know. Have you ever had an orange? It’s like that, but sour.’

“No matter how much I talk, can you walk away saying that now you know what a lemon [he means boundaryless unity, not control transformation experience] is like?

“The answer is no—go taste the goddamn thing.

“Once you taste it [non-boundary unity], all of the words don’t matter.

“There’s no substitute for [non-boundary unity] experience.

“You will know the answer on the basis of your [non-boundary unity] experience, and what that experience has elicited in you.

“We are caught as intellectuals with the notion that it’s [non-boundary unity is] all in the words.”

“One explanation for such widely reported claims of experiencing God and transcendent realities [he doesn’t mean cybernetic control aspects of eternalism; he means only non-boundary unity], he says, “is simply that they do.”

[5:39 pm May 12, 2025: A huge key for critiquing the kind of “Philosophy” positions defined by Chris Letheby: why he wrongly focuses on mere Metaphysics, not on Cybernetic phen’y: b/c he is under delusion that mystical experience = non-boundary unity – oblivious to the control transformation aspects of experiencing eternalism, which invites appropriate Control Agency Phen’y modelling instead of Metaphysics.

Letheby & Timmerman’s MBQ should be instead, not Metaphysical Beliefs [= boundaryless unity] Questionnaire, but rather, Control Agency Phen’y [= control transformation cybernetics] Questionnaire

– Michael Hoffman]

Kitc con’t:

“People don’t just search for the sacred [ie non-boundary unity], they respond to it, and his scale simply and accurately measures that response, whether it’s [non-boundary unity is] occasioned by drugs, isolation, meditation, prayer, or gazing at the sunset.

“Though culture is certainly a factor in how people choose to express these [boundaryless unity] experiences, no mystic [ie, experiencer of boundaryless unity] would mistake the interpretation for the experience [of non-boundary unity] itself.

Those who know [the feeling of non-boundary unity] don’t say, Hood says, and those who say don’t know.

[indeed they do not know control transformation phen’y]

“I never ever said that I measured mystical [ie boundaryless unity] experience.

“I don’t have that much hubris.

“I measured people’s response to an [non-boundary unity] experience.

“Maybe you lied.

“Or, maybe my questions were good enough so that you said, ‘I’m going to mark it this way because there’s something there that rings true.’

“That means it is more than just a mark on that piece of paper.

“One of the arguments that people have made against my [mysticism ie non-boundary unity] scales is that it’s difficult.

“Double negatives.

“My response is that the people who respond to it never have that problem.

“It has high reliability.

“I’m always open to the fact that you lied, but it’s hard to mask that. If you did lie on the other scale, fine, but then that’s just stupid.”

“Despite the shortcomings of experimental science, Hood believes that most drugs could safely be in the marketplace if people are educated about them.

“However, he does worry about the commodification of psychedelics and what may happen if the pharmaceutical industry—prone to baseless hype and deceptive advertising—controls the market.

“Strassman agrees that Johns Hopkins’ approach is too reductive and that there’s a danger of turning psychedelics into “super Prozacs.””

Taves’ Abstract Suggests Groupings: Pleasant Boundary-Unity Mysticism vs. Unpleasant Cybernetic-Control Mysticism

Taves’ Abstract suggests coupling two sets of ideas/ theory-constructs:

  • non-boundary unity vs control-model transformation – two models of mystical experience
  • positive/pleasant therefore mystical, vs. negative/ unpleasant/ challenging therefore unmystical but actually, TRULY KEY-MYSTICAL

Then grouping the associated two items of the old theory vs new theory:

Traits of the old theory (not supported by Religious Myth, Acid Metal lyrics, or the mushroom-tree artists):

  • non-boundary unity; boundaryless unity
  • positive/pleasant therefore mystical

Traits of the new theory (supported by Religious Myth, Acid Metal lyrics, & the mushroom-tree artists):

  • control-model transformation
  • negative/ unpleasant/ challenging; TRULY KEY-MYSTICAL

‘Monism’ vs. ‘Pluralism’ in James Studies Means Bare Eternalism, Lacking the Cybernetic Control Transformation Implications

That’s why it is never sufficient to say eternalism; must say cybernetics word too. (at a certain summary level)

  • pluralism = possibilism = [paired with] monolithic, autonomous control
  • monism = eternalism = [paired with] 2-level, dependent control

‘Monism’ vs. ‘Pluralism’ in James and Bricklin: Illusion of Will Author Book: They Mean Bare Eternalism Lacking the Crucial Implicit Control Transformation Implications of Eternalism Omitted by Only Seeing Time or Space

Myth Supports the Control Transformation Model of Mystical Experience (the new theory), not the Boundaryless Unity Model (the old theory)

boundaryless unity
blu

boundaryless unity mysticism
blum

The Well-“Validated” But False, “Unity” Model of Mystical Experience

The model of mystical experience hasn’t been validated.

Only the questionnaire to measure mystical experience has been “validated”.

‘Validated’ merely means that someone did some specialized calculations; it does not at all imply that the model of mystical experience is valid.

A “validated” questionnaire means NOTHING regarding the truth of the model it’s based on. Even the the Challenging Experience Questionnaire (CEQ-POS has been “validated”.

The word “validated” sounds impressive to the gullible, but is far less impressive really.

Raising suspicion even more, AI’s source says “well-validated”.

The beans I ate were well-validated by my extra-big fart.

The AI summary (its sources) should say SUPER-WELL VALIDATED.

A QUESTIONNAIRE BASED ON A TOTALLY FALSE MODEL OF MYSTICISM IS “VALIDATED” — YET REMAINS FALSE.

Quantum Physics has been super duper ultra confirmed [suspiciously strenuous emphasis] by experiment (even if insane, false interpretations).

Did Hopkins Use Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ 32) (Single Session) or Hood M-Scale 30 (Lifetime)?

todo: correct my pages if needed – this might explain why index of Pollan How C Mind says Mystical Experience Questionnaires; =

  • M Scale, Mystical Scale, 1975 from Ralph Hood (the “expert” about religious experience, who is oblivious to transformed control in transformed world).
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_W._Hood
  • MEQ 1975 (William Richards, from Walter Pahnke).

Criticism/Debunking of Hood’s Mysticism Model (from Stace) at Wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_W._Hood#Criticism —

“Stace’s work in mystical experience has received strong criticisms for its lack of methodological rigor and its perennialist pre-assumptions.[6]

“Major criticism came from Steven T. Katz in his influential series of publications on mysticism and philosophy[a] and from Wayne Proudfoot in his Religious Experience (1985).[7]

“In defense of Stace, Hood (2001) cites Robert K. C. Forman, who argues that introverted mysticism is correctly conceptualized as a common core, since it lacks all content, and is the correct basis for a perennial philosophy.[8][b]

“Hood notes that Stace’s work is a conceptual approach, based on textual studies.[7]

“He posits his own work as a parallel approach, based on an empirical approach, thereby placing the conceptual claims in an empirical framework,[10] assuming that Stace is correct in his approach.[11]

“Jacob van Belzen criticized Hood, noting that Hood validated the existence of a common core in mystical experiences, but based on a conceptual framework which presupposes the existence of such a common core: “

“[T]he instrument used to verify Stace’s conceptualization of Stace is not independent of Stace, but based on him.”[12]

“Belzen also notes that religion does not stand on its own, but is embedded in a cultural context, which should be taken into account.[13]

“To this criticism Hood et al. answer that universalistic tendencies in religious research “are rooted first in inductive generalizations from cross-cultural consideration of either faith or [non-boundary unity] mysticism”,[14]

“stating that Stace sought out texts which he recognized as an expression of [non-boundary unity] mystical expression, from which he created his universal core.

“Hood therefore concludes that Belzen “is incorrect when he claims that items were presupposed.”[14][c]”

My Commentary on Wiki Critique of Hood

religious experience
r-e

There IS a common core, but it is NOT what EVERYONE assumes, boundary lifting.

In fact common core BEST mystical experience is transformed control in transformed world – NOT unity; not non-boundary unity dissolution of self-other boundary.

The best, most authentic mystical experience was refined; the analogies describing were most refined in the superior and best brands that most fully developed and honed in on this specific dynamic.

These superior recognitions of ultimate mystical experience ignore inferior mystical experience, and commit all focus to the very best mystical experience:

  • Acid Rock Music Lyrics
  • mystery-religion initiation
  • religious myth
  • astral ascent mysticism
  • the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}
  • reports of 1950-2025 transformed control in transformed world by psychedelics users

In the acid song Heaven Can Wait, does Iron Maiden sing
“To see the truth: non-boundary unity“?
No, they sing:
“To see the truth: the path for you is decided“.

Does myth or mushroom-trees exclaim:
“OMG, non-boundary unity!”?
NO! Myth & mushroom-trees exclaim:
“OMG, tctw

transformed control in transformed world
tctw

Wiki page about criticism/debunking of Stace’s mysticism model

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Terence_Stace#Criticism

Wm James, Walter Stace, Ken Wilber, etc. Get Their Model of “Mystical” Experience from Advaita’s “Unity” Religious Philosophy

Theory of psychedelic transformation needs to weed out bad alien models based in rumor and Orientalism or Nativism. Overlooked: religious myth, imagery, art, mushroom-trees, mystery religion, acid Rock lyrics, tripper reports, the Egodeath theory.

The main source of evidence for ideal cases, for the Egodeath theory, is the Egodeath theory. The Egodeath theory the best source for generating evidence that the Egodeath theory needs.

Note that both “science founders of mysticism”, consistently:

  • Wm James 1893: Mainly influenced by Swami V’s Advaita Vendanta.
  • Walter Stace 1960: Mainly influenced by Advaita Vendanta.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Terence_Stace#Criticism

Stace advocates freewill:

“He concluded that the spirit of scientific enquiry … has furthered religious scepticism by undermining the teleological presumption of an ultimate ‘final cause’. Concern with divine purpose of events had been replaced by investigation into what had caused them; the new imaginative picture of the world was dominated by the idea that life is purposeless and meaningless. The effects of this change included moral relativity, the individualisation of morality, and the loss of belief in free will.”

Excerpts about non-boundary unity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Terence_Stace#Criticism

“his idea that mysticism is everywhere “the apprehension of an ultimate nonsensuous unity in all things“.”

“the mystic perceives the unity in “the multiplicity of external material objects”, while in the latter the mystic perceives the One … “as the wholly naked One devoid of any plurality whatever”.”

“the psychological qualities of mystical experience, which he roots in a passage from the Mandukya Upanishad:

  1. Undifferentiated unity
  2. Dissolution of the self [Does that mean control agency? Hell no! As always, all words are packaged within a heavy framework of “unity boundaryless”, so, “the self” means suspending the boundary between self vs. everything.]
  3. Feeling of revelation or veracity of the event
  4. Feeling of blessedness and peace [cybernetic control transformation aspects are not typically tranquil/serene]
  5. Feeling of serenity
  6. …

“for his definition of mysticism, and identifies the realisation the personal self is identical with the infinite Self at the core of the experience. … there are three causes for this:

  • loss of individuality [ie non-boundary unity]
  • transcending space and time
  • feeling of peace and bliss“

“Professor Stace seems to have no knowledge of any Indian language and his examples are drawn from what is most monistic in the Upanishads and other sacred writings”

“Stace’s list of characteristics hardly represents the broad variety of mystical experiences described by mystics. His “unitary consciousness” is only one characteristic, and not necessarily connected to illuminating insight.”

“Stace is also normative in his preference for monistic mysticism and his rejection of theistic mysticism.

“Stace fails to understand the difference between phenomenology and metaphysics“

“‘constructivism’, this position holds that all states of mind are in some degree constructed by social and cultural factors, so that we cannot speak of a unitary consciousness.”

“It is the pure unitary consciousness, wherein awareness of the world and of multiplicity is completely obliterated. It is ineffable peace. It is the Supreme good. It is One without a second. It is the Self.””

Overemphasis on Advaita by James, Stace, Wilber, Everyone

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Terence_Stace#Criticism

“King, Richard (1999), Orientalism and Religion: Post-Colonial Theory, India and “The Mystic East”, Routledge, who describe how Western preferences for monotheism influenced the Western perception of Indian religions, and the influence of their Brahmana informants, lead to a favoring of Advaita Vedanta as the quintessential Indian philosophy.

“This Advaitic preference, together with the influence of Unitarian missionaries, shaped the worldview of Swami Vivekananda [influenced Wm James 1893], arguably one of the strongest forces in the shaping of the Western popular understanding of Indian “mysticism.”

“His [Vivekananda’s] Ramakrishna Mission spread his idiosyncratic understanding on Advaita Vedanta in the West, and popularized Ramakrishna, one of Stace’s examples of genuine mystics, as an exemplary Indian saint.”

Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ) vs. Mysticism Scale (M Scale)

What’s the relationship between the Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ) vs. the Hood Mysticism Scale (M scale)?
https://www.google.com/search?q=What%27s+the+relationship+between+the+Mystical+Experience+Questionnaire+(MEQ)+vs.+the+Hood+Mysticism+Scale+(M+scale)%3F

AI summary:

The Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ) and the Hood Mysticism Scale (M-Scale) are both well-validated instruments used to measure mystical experiences, but they differ in some key aspects: 

Similarities:

  • Theoretical Basis: Both scales are rooted in the same theoretical framework, particularly drawing upon W.T. Stace‘s [VILLAIN follower of Swami Vivekananda] conceptualization of the “core” characteristics of mystical [read: positive-balanced, boundaryless unity] experiences.
  • Content Domains: Both instruments assess similar underlying content domains, such as unity, transcendence of time and space, and ineffability, which are central to mystical experiences.
  • Convergent Validity: Studies have shown a strong correlation between scores on the MEQ and the Hood Mysticism Scale, demonstrating convergent validity. 

Differences:

  • Time Frame:
    • MEQ: The MEQ is typically used to assess phenomena occurring during a single, discrete mystical experience, often in the context of studies involving classic hallucinogens like psilocybin.
    • Hood Mysticism Scale: The Hood Mysticism Scale (M-Scale) has been applied as a measure of phenomena occurring over a lifetime or retrospectively, assessing mystical experiences more broadly.
  • Factor Structure:
    • MEQ: The MEQ, particularly the 30-item revised version (MEQ30), has a validated four-factor structure consisting of mystical, positive mood, transcendence of time/space, and ineffability.
    • Hood Mysticism Scale: The Hood Mysticism Scale (M-Scale) typically demonstrates a three-factor structure, such as introvertive, extrovertive mysticism, and interpretation.
  • Specific Items: While both scales address similar themes, they differ in the specific items used to measure mystical experiences. 

In summary:

Both the MEQ and Hood Mysticism Scale are valuable tools for studying mystical experiences.

The MEQ is often preferred for examining the features of a single, hallucinogen-occasioned mystical experience, while

the M-Scale is better suited for assessing mystical experiences more broadly across an individual’s lifetime. 

/ end of AI summary

Mysticism Scale (M scale) Psychedelics Effects Questionnaire (Ralph Hood, 1975) (32 items, based on Stace’s “Boundaryless Unity” Model of Mysticism, 1960)

The Construction and Preliminary Validation of a Measure of Reported Mystical Experience
Ralph W. Hood, Jr.
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion
Vol. 14, No. 1 (Mar., 1975), pp. 29-41 (13 pages)
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1384454

Abstract:

“A measure of reported mystical experience is presented.

“This “Mysticism Scale, Research Form D (M scale),” has 32 items, four for each of 8 categories of mysticism initially conceptualized by Stace (1960).

“Items on this scale are both positively and negatively expressed to avoid problems of response set.

“A factor analysis of the M Scale indicated two major factors, a general mystical experience factor (20 items) and a religious interpretation factor (12 items).

“Preliminary evidence indicates that those high on the M Scale

  • have more intrinsic religious motivation as defined by Hoge’s (1972) scale,
  • are more open to experience as defined by Taft’s (1970) ego permissiveness scale,
  • have more intense religious experience as defined by Hood’s (1970) scale,
  • and have moderately higher scores on the L, Hs, and Hy scales of the MMPI .”

William James and Swami Vivekananda: Religious Experience and Vedanta/Yoga in America (Frederick 2012)

William James and Swami Vivekananda: Religious Experience and Vedanta/Yoga in America
Norris Frederick, 2012
William James Studies, 2012, Vol. 9, pp. 37-55
https://williamjamesstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/frederick.pdf

Relevant to the Egodeath theory: Everyone wrongly models mystical experience as non-boundary unity; the “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience.

Where did this false, fabricated, “positive-balanced” model of mystical experience come from? It was invented by Swami Vivekananda for the World 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions, per Frederick 2012, per Kitchens 2022, “A Channel for Magic”:
https://www.psymposia.com/magazine/a-channel-for-magic-ralph-hoods-mysticism-scale-and-the-occult-roots-of-the-johns-hopkins-psychedelic-research-program/

Only the Way of Zen by Alan Watts & the Egodeath theory (reflecting acid Metal lyrics & Myth & mushroom-trees) model mystical experience as the “control-model transformation” model of mystical experience; the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence 1988.

Late Antiquity (Astral Ascent Mysticism) Asserts that Possibilism-Thinking Is Used Coherently and Validly as a Personal Control System Mental Model, Not as a Metaphysical Reality

Ken Wilber “trans-rational” = the way in which the Psilocybin-matured mind uses possibilism-thinking. Our virtual world we exist in is structured in the shape of possibilism, though Psilocybin reveals that at the substrate level, eternalism is the case.

The alien Psilocybin incursion of eternalism truth into virtual possibilism world.

The alien transmitted message of Hermes from the gods to immortals is that at the substrate level, eternalism is the case, and at the virtual experienced level, possibilism is effectively the case.

Entry into Jeru: Jesus head = knowing eternalism is the case metaphysically. Donkey head = experiencing virtual possibilism world & control-agency; the practical personal control system (bulk of it).

Exception: during peak state, use possibilism-thinking but also use / rely on eternalism-thinking.

Late Antiquity astral ascent mysticism is only semi-guilty of lying, claiming that you transcend Fatedness/ eternalism: The Psilocybin-Transformed Mind Ends up Using the “eternalism-modified possibilism-thinking” mental model/ personal control system

Late Antiquity Doesn’t Claim Possibilism Is the Case Metaphysically; It States that Possibilism-thinking Is Used Coherently and Validly as a Personal control system / mental model (not as a metaphysical reality)

Coherent Viable Integrity Requires Using eternalism-modified possibilism-thinking.

That is what’s practically relevant, not what’s the case metaphysically; only the suitable type of functional, in-practice “coherence” or “integrity” is required.

May 10, 2025 all-day voice recording, I switched from “Late Antiquity lies, pretends possibilism is legit” per epistemology, ontology, metaphysics – to saying instead, POV: possibilism (eternalism-modified possibilism-thinking) is indeed how the mental model of control ends up, just as claimed by astral ascent mysticism”

the way i arrived at that favorable framing of qualified possibilism-thinking – instead of saying “possibilism is merely virtual illusory, not really the case” – is because this huge benefit of having for 3 years reviewed, analyzed, and corrected the book Hermetic Spirituality and the Historical Imagination: Altered States of Knowledge in Late Antiquity (Wouter Hanegraaff, 2022).

Friend said ignore Wouter Hanegraaff, he’s confused and wrong.

Instead, I followed through and wrote and posted the review correcting Hanegraaff – the huge payoff for me – for the Egodeath theory — was that wriing the review and explaining his error, required me to get super clear on my model of mental model transformation:

  1. naive possibilism-thinking (resulting from the personal control phen’y of the tight cognitive binding state)
  2. basic eternalism-thinking (resulting from the personal control phen’y of the loose cognitive binding state)
  3. eternalism-modified possibilism-thinking

Nowhere in those 3 phases does the model of mental model transformation focus on the question of whether eternalism or possibilism or eternalism is the case metaphysically.

Unlike the Letheby & Timmerman questionnaire, we don’t aren’t focusing on Metaphysics (MBQ); we are instead relevantly focusing on phen’y driven mental model transformation about control-model transformation.

MBQ – “Metaphysical Beliefs Questionnaire” (Timmermann & Letheby 2021) – semi-focused on psychedelics, and even then, merely psychedelics specifically for medical-model “therapy”; mere psyhcedelics-assisted therapy. Not full-spectrum entheogens

Hermetic Spirituality and the Historical Imagination: Altered States of Knowledge in Late Antiquity (Hanegraaff, 2022)

In April 21 2025 for me to compose finally the book review – in context of conversations w/ Houot — just after I posted the Houot Rise of the Psychonaut book review — reviewing Wouter Hanegraaff book and straightening out his cosmic mess so as to bring fixed stars back in, I had to keep referreing to my model OF WHAT? WHAT POV?

Answer: My model of mental model personal control system t control transformation.

Did I say my model of “what is actually the case metaphysically/ epist’y / ontol’y”? No.

I said, CONTROL AGENCY PHEN’Y MAY 10 2025, AFTER my successful Wouter Hanegraaff book review April 21 2025.

To write my Wouter Hanegraaff review, to fix his cosmos mess, I had to keep referring to my model of mental model transformation.

NOT my Phil department position per Letheby, re: epis’ly “what is the case” – not Metaphysics; not Epis’y, not Ontol’y. Basically, cognitive control agency phen’y.

From the POV of cognitive control agency phen’y, it is irrelevvant what is the case metaphysically. astral ascent mysticism accepts Mewtaphysics sphere 8 = eternalism is the case, and combinees sphere 9 cognitive control agency phen’y: end up with rebirth into / as, eternalism-modified possibilism-thinking.

The mind IN FACT ends up with eternalism-modified possibilism-thinking, in the personal control system.

Even though metaphysically, eternalism is the case.

This is the sense in which:

  • On the Metaphysical level, eternalism is privileged and possibilism is irrelevant.
  • On the mental model Phen’y level, possibilism is privileged and eternalism is irrelevant.

Switched from “Eternalism is the case, metaphysically” to “Possibilism is the final, mature personal control system mental model”

more a Phenomenology basis of valuation & judgment, than Metaphysics:

on May 10, 2025, and while writing book review Wouter Hanegraaff April 21, 2025

Are we describing what’s metaphysically the case?

Or are we describing mental model transformation driven by loose cognition phen’y? To make sense of Late Antiquity hermetic astral ascent mysticism, required my model of mental model transformation driven by loose cognition phen’y — NOT my model of what’s the case metaphysically.

This is how on May 10, 2025 I finally dropped all traces or hints of disparaging possibilism-thinking.

It is irrelevant that eternalism, not possibilism, is the case metaphysically. (So, possibilism-thinking is fake and illegit; dirty.)

What’s relevant (for the Egodeath theory & astral ascent mysticism) is that the personal control system mental model transforms to qualified possibilism-thinking. (So, possibilism-thinking is washed clean, so we have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city.)

Fake Mysticism Agenda: Non-boundary unity vs. control transformation; Fake Unity Mysticism vs. Authentic Cybernetic Mysticism

This realization and spot-on summary was developed as outcome of all-day Sat May 10 2025 voice recording idea development [eg VOX_TK_6469.wav] and Mon May 12 2025 idea development within page https://egodeaththeory.org/2024/11/20/cubensis-driven-entheogen-scholarship-the-most-productive-relevant-and-rewarding-approach/ – see article sections in that page, capturing May 10/ May 12 2025 ideas:

I joined a May 10 distinction w/ a May 12 (today) 2025 IDENTIFYING specifically what all the bad models have in common:

May 10 2025: Myth confirms the Egodeath theory AND DISPROVES ALL OTHER MODELS, “the old theory”. Myth matches the Egodeath theory far better than myth matches the old theory.

But what’s the hallmark essence of the false theory? Answer from May 12: non-boundary unity (instead of control-model transformation).

May 10 I mocked “I experienced my boundary (self vs world) moving from here to there — from A to B — or lifting/suspending. Therefore, I have Transcendent Knowledge.”

That’s the stupid model of mystical experience or ego transcendence or Transcendent Knowledge that everyone pushes, except for the Egodeath theory; the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence 1988.

The best religious myth & the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees} confirms the latter, not the former.

May 12 2025: the essence of the old theory (the non-boundary unity model of mystical experience), seen everywhere, eg:

  • the 1987 the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology model.
  • The Ken Wilber model; integral theory; model of psycho-spiritual dev’mt: “you do non-drug Adv meditation for 30 (ie 60) years, to gain non-boundary unity awareness.”
  • the James positive-balnaced model of mystical experience, from Swami Viv.
  • Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ)
  • the lopsided whitewashing of the Challenging Experience Questionnaire (CEQ).

My Jan 1988 model is instead, the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence; ie, the control transformation model of mystical experience. Use a few loose cognition sessions and study block-universe eternalism and mental model transformation about control, to readily (1 semester class) do control-model transformation, become a completed initiate (Classical Antiquity’s 2-phase model of Transcendent Knowledge) or transcend Fate (Late Antiquity’s 3-phase model of Transcendent Knowledge/ spiritual transcendence/ redemption/ rescue/ emancipation/ salvation).

Scholars claim that:

  • Classical Antiquity = communal Mystery Religions
  • Late Antiquity = indiv Mystery Religions

perhaps, but more important is:

Classical Antiquity = 2-phase model: possibilism-thinking, then eternalism-thinking. basic possibilism-thinking, then basic eternalism-thinking. [a charitable wording; Classical Antiquity was not wrong, but was too limited/ basic]

basic possibilism-thinking
bpt

basic eternalism-thinking
be-t

Late Antiquity = 3-phase model: naive possibilism-thinking; basic eternalism-thinking; eternalism-modified possibilism-thinking:

Crop by Michael Hoffman

the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees} is typically limited to depicting basic possibilism-thinking then basic eternalism-thinking.

Eadwine in Great Canterbury Psalter elaborates and develops the genre refining it, to depict the limitation of merely basic eternalism-thinking; to go on all the way to final mental model: the final model of personal control system produced by Psilocybin indefinite endless series of Psilocybin sessions:

the end result mental model (personal control system) is eternalism-modified possibilism-thinking. Not basic eternalism-thinking.

eternalism-modified possibilism-thinking
empt

I discovered the the “control transformation” model of mystical experience (as opposed to the dominant, wrong, “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience) on Jan 11, 1988, and immediately contrasted it against the non-boundary unity model of mystical experience (as I put my finger on that contrast, today, May 12, 2025).

Classic Ken Wilber Books for my 1988 Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence

No Boundary (Ken Wilber 1979) pushes the “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience

the “control-model transformation” model of mystical experience
cmtmme

Before Jan 1988, I was definitely reading the 1979 book No Boundary by Ken Wilber. eg likely Jan 1986-March 1987. The book is probably in my small library photographed in dorm/ cottage room. On my gtr spk iso box table in cottage.

1985-1987, the “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience was pushed by everyone, and it did not provide value for my needs of fixing my dysfunctional cross-time control/ self-conflict.

I did not need to experience non-boundary unity.

I needed to experience what the Way of Zen by Alan Watts pushed: a sudden revised model of self-control cybernetics.

Does No Boundary push the “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience? YES! Totally 100%, explicitly, emphatically!

https://www.amazon.com/No-Boundary-Eastern-Approaches-Personal/dp/1570627436/ — blurb:

“No Boundary: Eastern and Western Approaches to Personal Growth
Ken Wilber

“A straightforward and accessible study of personal development and human consciousness, as seen through the lens of Eastern and Western therapeutic traditions.

[the “therapy = non-boundary unity” claim/ model/ paradigm/ attempted explanatory framework]

“In No Boundary, Ken Wilber masterfully bridges Eastern and Western philosophies to explore the intricate relationship between consciousness and identity. [read that verbiage as: non-boundary unity]

“Through an inquiry into the essence of self [as boundary within a branching world? or as a transformed-model control agent in a revealed-non-branching world?], Wilber challenges readers to question the boundaries that define their identities, illustrating how these self-imposed limits shape our perceptions and experiences.

[Tim Leary & Alan Watts also – like everyone else – casts Transcendent Knowledge as “skin encapsulated ego: realizing unity; illusory boundary” – ie, non-boundary unity]

“The book examines the concept of unity consciousness, a state where boundaries dissolve, revealing the interconnectedness of all existence.

“By weaving together insight from psychology, spirituality, and modern physics [Everett manyworlds branching Quantum Mysticism — not the other, passed-by potential model, Minkowski 4D spacetime block-universe mysticism], Wilber offers a comprehensive view of human potential [within branching possibilities world] and the path to enlightenment [re: non-boundary unity — not re: control-model transformation]

“Readers will gain a valuable understanding of the nature of identity and the illusion of separateness that pervades our understanding of reality.

“No Boundary serves as a guide to personal transformation, encouraging individuals to engage with psychological and spiritual practices that awaken them to their true nature. [ie, non-boundary unity]

“Through this journey, readers can embrace a more integrated and harmonious existence, free from the constraints of dualistic thinking.

[we can see / smell/ detect here, Swami Viv poking through: political agenda: fabricate a model of mystical experience that pushes the agenda of international political unity – if the Strassman/Kitchens lead is valid]

“Wilber’s exploration provides practical tools for self-discovery, inviting readers to transcend their limitations and experience a deeper connection with the cosmos. [read: connection between all nations, all religions]

“For those seeking a transformative exploration of consciousness, No Boundary offers a compelling invitation to rethink the boundaries that define our lives.

“Wilber’s insightful narrative not only challenges conventional wisdom

[like my 1988 Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence puts forth the “control transformation” model of mystical experience , challenging the dominant “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience]

“but also inspires readers to embark on a journey toward unity consciousness.

“This book is a must-read for anyone interested in personal growth, spirituality, and the profound interconnectedness of all life.”

/ end blurb of No Boundary

Ken Wilber (1984) pushes the “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience

I read the 1970s/1980s Ken Wilber books prior to my Jan. 1988 breakthrough that ego transcendence is actually a matter of control-model transformation, not non-boundary unity.

I re-referenced / re-read these books immediately after the breakthrough, in 1988-1990:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilber#Books —

  • The Spectrum of Consciousness, 1977
  • No Boundary: Eastern and Western Approaches to Personal Growth, 1979
  • The Atman Project: A Transpersonal View of Human Development, 1980
  • Up from Eden: A Transpersonal View of Human Evolution, 1981
  • The Holographic Paradigm and Other Paradoxes: Exploring the Leading Edge of Science (editor), 1982
  • A Sociable God: A Brief Introduction to a Transcendental Sociology, 1983: Toward a New Understanding of Religion
  • Eye to Eye: The Quest for the New Paradigm, 1984
  • Quantum Questions: Mystical Writings of the World’s Great Physicists (editor), 1984
  • Transformations of Consciousness: Conventional and Contemplative Perspectives on Development (co-authors: Jack Engler, Daniel Brown), 1986
  • Spiritual Choices: The Problem of Recognizing Authentic Paths to Inner Transformation (co-authors: Dick Anthony, Bruce Ecker), 1987

Only the monographs, not about Q P, in 1970s/1980s:

  • The Spectrum of Consciousness, 1977
  • No Boundary: Eastern and Western Approaches to Personal Growth, 1979
  • The Atman Project: A Transpersonal View of Human Development, 1980
  • Up from Eden: A Transpersonal View of Human Evolution, 1981
  • A Sociable God: A Brief Introduction to a Transcendental Sociology, 1983: Toward a New Understanding of Religion
  • Eye to Eye: The Quest for the New Paradigm, 1984

Those six books were “the Wilber books”, for me in Jan 1988.

Tim Freke Parrots Non-boundary unity: “oneness” 3x in his Glossary

[how much is the forthcoming Tim Freke theory — emergent spir’y — limited to that false, deluded, limited grasp of control-model transformation?
https://timfreke.com/glossary-2/ — home page about podbook May 2025 doesn’t name the theory. Glossary reveals name of theory:

Emergent Spirituality   The view that spirituality is concerned with an emergent level of the evolving universes, rather than anything supernatural.

Field of Being   The undifferentiated oneness ….

Freke presents the trojan horse lying incomplete fake definition of:
Perennial Philosophy   The idea that there are universal experiences and beliefs underlying diverse spiritual traditions. — censored covertly: “and the nature of these universal common core mystical experiences is: non-boundary unity (certainly not about control-model transformation)”

Hit counts:

  • 6 unividual
  • 3 universe
  • 3 oneness
  • 2 universal
  • 1 unity
  • 0 boundary
  • 1 duali (unividualism)
  • 0 separat

12:53 Noon May 12, 2025: found it! spotted it! Freke glossary is rife with “uni”, “universe” – read that as: non-boundary unity.

Here’s the key to the expose of Tim Freke pushing the “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience just like everyone else:

“Unividual   An individual becoming conscious of unity with the universe.”]

The Way of Zen by Alan Watts (1955) uniquely pushes the “control-model transformation” model of mystical experience

The Way of Zen uniquely pushes the “control-model transformation” model of mystical experience. Even if Watts also pushes non-boundary unity.

The Way of Zen by Alan Watts is an exception: Watts pushes non-boundary unity like everyone, but, he also pushes control-model transformation.

Given that EVERYONE is wrong about Psilocybin in European history

Given that EVERYONE is wrong about the essence of mystical experience

It’s justified that I (like Jan Irvin) don’t have any reason to trust Quantum Physics.

Why should I trust the debate-riddled field of Q P., given that everyone ni the in the field of mystical experience is wrong, and field of entheogen scholarship re: … most of the field of entheogen scholarship is wrong re: … that field is garbled.

The theory of mystical experience is wrong, fundamentally off-base, in 2025.

The model of Psilocybin in Europe is wrong, fundamentally off-base, in 2025.

The model of Psilocybin in Mesoamerica is wrong, fundamentally off-base, in 1915. as Wasson 1957 book-pair ridiculed: An Aztec Narcotic (Safford 1915)

The Way of Zen by Alan Watts (1955):

  • Pushes the “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience.
  • Pushes the “control transformation” model of mystical experience.

Hofstadter: Godel, Escher, Bach (1979)

GEB is 1979:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%2C_Escher%2C_Bach
I read it after the Jan. 1988 breakthrough, roommate (music grad student) told me about it in Fall 1987, months before the breakthrough. eg Sep-Dec 1987. When I was reading the Way of Zen by Alan Watts.

It’s not necessary to fully specify my 1988 model as the cybernetic psychedelic eternalism block-universe eternalism model, vs. the Ken Wilber model or James model.

It’s sufficient to contrast just these key words:

  • the “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience (tepid waffles re: psychedelics)
  • the “control transformation” model of mystical experience (firmly psychedelics based)

Non-drug meditation only gives “non-boundary unity” mystical experience, not “control-model transformation” mystical experience: Myth concerns the latter

Non-psychedelics based feeling of non-boundary unity is caused by many ways; but control-model transformation requires specifically — only psychedelics are strong enough to force control-model transformation.

Weak, non-psychedelics ways are enough to give non-boundary unity, but are not strong enough to give control-model transformation.

the “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience
nbumme

the “control transformation” model of mystical experience
ctmme

to come up w/ the concept-label May 12, 2025, “non-boundary unity“, thanks to Kitchens, after Strassman, pointing out Wm James’ motivation by Swami Viv 1890 to invent a model of mystical experience as agenda trojan horse to achieve political unity.

political agenda corrupted scholars’ model of what “mystical experience” is about. “It’s about non-boundary unity.”

Actually, mystical experience is about control-model transformation, not non-boundary unity.

Myth corroborates the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence; the “control transformation” model of mystical experience.

Myth disproves the “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience.

also the actual effects of Psilocybin (OAV 1994: item 54: item 54, “anxiety about control”; item 54, “anxiety about control” (“I was afraid to lose my self-control”), from OAV’s Angst/Dread dimension – proves that the Egodeath theory , not the pop model of mysticism held by EVERYONE ELSE, is correct.

Goal: political unity.
Strategy: claim that the universal mystical experience is non-boundary unity. Cover-up the reality that mystical experience is actually about control transformation. (control-model transformation)

False model of mystical experience. Yes, mystical experience includes non-boundary unity, but that’s a sideshow, not the core common essence and definitive Psilocybin-distinctive transformation.

Myth and the mushroom-tree genre have little concern with non-boundary unity; they are intensely concerned with control-model transformation.

Strassman’s Jewish criticism pays off here, his RELATIONAL MYSTICISM.

Psilocybin critics or perennialism (a hot debate topic) critics also point out, eg I am leveraging Zaehner against Huxley. Deistic mysticism; relational mysticism; 2-level, dependent control. vs. unitive nature mysticism or unitive [Zae’s type 2 of 3]. panentheist mysticism:

  1. unity with nature – nature mysticism version of unitive mysticism.
  2. unity with everything – unitive mysticism.
  3. relation with God – relational mysticism <– advocated by Zaehner & Strassman (roughly/ comparatively).

Depict pleasant mystical experience = non-boundary unity.

Frame psychedelics as if they give pleasant mystical experience = non-boundary unity, per APZ’s Oceanic dimension.

Depict unpleasant, challenging mystical experience about control transformation as “non-mystical”.

A big tip is through a Travis Kitchens article at the parasite site, but then, as Jan Irvin found, the entire field of entheogen scholarship is fake and false motives.

Calling this group “hidden agenda distorting the field” is true of the entire field. Corrupt psychedelic pseudo science; corrupt James model of mystical experience; … leads to corrupt Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ) & corrupt the Challenging Experience Questionnaire (CEQ).

Not only whitewashing mystical experience; replacing mystical experience by political non-boundary unity agenda.

Kitchens is not the source, Jewish Rick Strassman persepective as outsider is the source.

I’m currently reading Strassman book on Old Testament DMT phen’y that’s an inventory of isolated DMT effects side by side w/ isolated Bible verses.

I read Strass article complaining about the dominant Christian model of mystical experience: ness (Strassman 2018):

The Psychedelic Religion of Mystical Consciousness
Rick Strassman 2018: book review of William Richards’ book Sacred Knowledge, a book which I pre-ordered but was underwhelming, perhaps b/c it, like everyone else, pushes the “non-boundary unity” model of mystical experience – instead of the “control transformation” model of mystical experience. (control-model transformation)
https://www.rickstrassman.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/JPS_Strassman.pdf

Strassman’s short article is praised by Davis 2020 https://techgnosis.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Davis-Gnosis-5.1.pdf

Moving Past Mysticism in Psychedelic Science (Sanders & Zijlmans 2021)
https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/01/15/the-theory-of-psychedelic-eternalism-provides-a-scientific-explanatory-basis-for-mystic-state-experiencing/#Moving-Past-Mysticism-in-Psychedelic-Science
mpmps

Moving Past Mysticism in Psychedelic Science
mpm

the Moving Past Mysticism debate in Psychedelic Science aka the Mysticism Wars
mpmd

Email to Ulansey May 7, 2025

Hi Professor Ulansey,

Here’s my new book review of Hanegraaff’s book, that took almost 3 years of analysis to write.  

It’s a night and day contrast between your book’s clear consistency (sphere 8 = fixed stars = heimarmene/ Fate) and Hanegraaff’s confused, star-free cosmos:

“Whether the fixed stars should be included [with Saturn, sphere 7] or should rather be associated with the Ogdoad [sphere 8] remains an open question for me.” – p. 294, footnote 114, Hermetic Spirituality, Darth Wouter “Star Destroyer” Hanegraaff

Book citation:

Hermetic Spirituality and the Historical Imagination: Altered States of Knowledge in Late Antiquity

Wouter Hanegraaff, 2022

My page about the book, with my copy of my review:

https://egodeaththeory.org/2022/07/14/hermetic-spirituality-and-the-historical-imagination-altered-states-of-knowledge-in-late-antiquity-hanegraaff/#amazon-book-review

________________________________

The Review

Michael Hoffman, April 21, 2025
4 out of 5 stars
https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R1MP0AF4OLZT3
Title of book review:
Rebirth into cosmos sphere 8 (Heimarmene) and 9 (above Heimarmene)

[copy of review; end of email]

email to Hanegraaff April 25, 2025

Hello Professor Hanegraaff,

My book review of Hermetic Spirituality is finally live at Amazon!

https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R1MP0AF4OLZT3

My site map: https://egodeaththeory.org/nav/#Hanegraaff

I’d be interested in any ancient text that implies that the cosmos has only 7, not 8 spheres, or that says sphere 8 (fixed stars) is outside the cosmos.  

Look at the sky, see 5000 visible dots, that’s sphere 8, the cosmos; the main visible thing that you see in the sky.  That’s the cosmos.

I’ve been modelling astral ascent mysticism in relation to Heimarmene at sphere 8 since 2001, when I got David Ulansey’s book about Mithraism.

Video Summary of Hanegraaff Book Hermetic Altered States (Angela’s Symposium)

Great video summary (of the book) you did with Angela’s Symposium, back when I had had your new book for a couple weeks.

Hermetic Spirituality with Prof Wouter Hanegraaff

Cyberdisciple’s Site Map

Cyberdisciple (cc’d) is a Classics scholar who knows my theory of transcending (& integrating) Heimarmene in the intense altered state.  

Today he finally made a Site Map 🎉, which you should find relevant:

https://cyberdisciple.wordpress.com/site-map/

Due to the distorting conditions of Prohibition that you pointed out in “Entheogenic Esotericism”, Cyberdisciple has been carefully revealing his name.  

Is this not the Psyched*lic RenaissanceTM now?  Or is Science still forbidden from looking through the telescope?

My Instructive Comment on Announcement of Site Map

A well-written, enlightening joke comment on Cyberdisciple’s Site Map Announcement:

https://cyberdisciple.wordpress.com/2025/04/25/announcement-site-map-of-cyberdisciple-wordpress-com-published/#comment-2739 —

“Your comment made me slightly dizzy. Therefore… 😄 [it’s “an entheogenic practice”, by the too-easy standards of the Entheogenic Esotericism article]

because of the potency of your comment, 

I have not merely discovered ego-cancelling Heimarmene, [in my university’s School of Electrical Engineering in Jan. 1988], but have fully integrated the Heimarmene and non-Heimarmene ways of thinking, 

same as 2 bowls filled with Golden Teacher of Righteousness [Psilo.], for 9 sessions, 

ascending through the cosmos spheres to my soul reaching pure Heimarmene resting in sphere 8 

and also my spirit reaching hyper-Heimarmene sphere 9, 

perceiving even the Pege at level 10 — the hidden, uncontrollable Source of control-thoughts.

🤵‍♂️👑💍💒👰‍♀️🏆👶👶🙏🙌🐍🪨🔥“

[The emojis show harmoniously wedding the two different ways of thinking, and 

worship of “{snake frozen in rock}” Agathos Daimon serpent carved in rock altar, giving prosperity.]

Strategy of Late Book Review

It took almost 3 years of analyzing your book, Hermetic Spirituality & Altered States in Late Antiquity, to write a technically adequate, critical analysis of its cosmos-rebirth model in relation to Heimarmene = fixed stars.

Advantages of the late date of composing the book review:

* I was able to remove 1 star – [joke: poetic-justly, seeing as you remove all 5000 stars from the sky] – without seeming unappreciative, because (ignoring 1 badly written 3-star review) all 20 reviews give 5 of 5 stars.

So my review stands out effectively.

* I realized just in time for composing the final review, the theme of marrying and embracing both the Heimarmene way of thinking and the non-Heimarmene way of thinking, for mature completion of initiation.

* 1 week ago, I read David Litwa’s new book Hermetica I, and found no ancient text implying that sphere 8 is somehow “outside the cosmos”.

* Recently I watched videos by Dr. Justin Sledge and others, about affirming while also transcending Fate in Late Antiquity; 

I inspected the transcriptions & marked them up re: sphere # 8 & cosmos-rebirth: they waffle, inconsistently, when discussing transcend Heimarmene.

* Emily Adlam 2 weeks ago claims that Minkowski 4D spacetime block universe eternalism (Heimarmene, experienced in the altered state per https://www.effectindex.com/effects/perception-of-eternalism) unifies the two ways of thinking in Physics: 

Relativity (non-branching block-universe) & Quantum Physics (branching manyworlds).

The “All At Once” Universe Shatters Our View of Time

My Star Wars “Star Destroyer” skit came out well:

https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/03/18/hanegraaffs-inability-to-place-fixed-stars-in-sphere-7-or-8-proves-rebirth-is-into-fate-not-freedom/#Darth-Hanegraaffs-Alderaanization-of-the-Fixed-Stars

Cheers, 

— Michael Hoffman, theorist of ego transcendence in the altered state

_____________________________

Copy of the review:

Michael Hoffman

Title of review: Rebirth into cosmos sphere 8 (Heimarmene) and 9 (above Heimarmene)
Reviewed on April 21, 2025
Verified Purchase [orig hardcover + ebook]

Wouter Hanegraaff’s book Hermetic Spirituality and the Historical Imagination: Altered States of Knowledge in Late Antiquity advances the field of Hermetic studies, especially after the error is corrected in his cosmos-ascent model, per astral ascent mysticism, so that the Fate-soaked fixed stars are no longer excluded entirely from his sky, but are allowed into his cosmos model, where they belong: sphere 8, the Ogdoad.

Hanegraaff’s model of the so-called “cosmos” doesn’t have any fixed stars. Look up into his sky: there are no stars, only 5 planets + sun & moon. This is not a model of the cosmos, nor of cosmos rebirth, because his visible sky cannot have any stars, per his admission in footnote 114, page 294: “Whether the fixed stars should be included [with Saturn, sphere 7] or should rather be associated with the Ogdoad [sphere 8] remains an open question for me.” This is the most closed question in the cosmos; it is a basic, simple given that the Fate-soaked fixed stars are what defines sphere 8, called “the Ogdoad”.

The initiate Tat asks Hermes to be brought into the Ogdoad (Heimarmene; Fatedness; fixed stars; sphere 8; the soul) and also into the Ennead (above heimarmene, above the cosmos; sphere 9; the spirit). Since Hanegraaff omits fixed stars from their sphere 8 (which they define), there’s no functional difference in his model between rebirth phase 1 into the Ogdoad, and rebirth phase 2 into the Ennead.

The end result of entheogenic mental model transformation is not the repression of fixed stars (Fatedness) as Hanegraaff attempts; the end result is a coordinated, harmonious combination of first affirming Heimarmene, and then affirming transcending Heimarmene, honoring both ways of thinking, together.

Hanegraaff cannot place the fate-soaked fixed stars in sphere 8, because he wrongly says “the Ogdoad above the heimarmene”. The Ogdoad is not above heimarmene. The cosmos does not consist of 7 spheres, as Hanegraaff writes. Per looking up at the sky, the cosmos consists of 8 spheres. All ancient writings agree; no Hermetic text says the cosmos consists of 7 spheres, or that sphere 8 is outside the cosmos. The cosmos consists of 7 planetary spheres and also the sphere of the fixed stars. Sphere 8 is not “hypercosmic”, as he writes. Sphere 9 is actually hypercosmic.

I have read his book multiple times in hardcover and ebook format, and David Litwa’s book Hermetica I, to confirm that no Hermetic writing says the cosmos has 7 spheres, and that sphere 8 (defined by the fixed stars) is somehow “outside the cosmos”. The main visible thing you see in the sky that is the cosmos, is the fixed stars, defining sphere 8 of the cosmos.

Per Hanegraaff’s own writings in this book and elsewhere, sphere 8 = the Demiurge = the zodiac = Heimarmene headquarters.

Hanegraaff spreads the following equations separated apart to hide the self-contradiction: Ogdoad = sphere 8 = fixed stars = heimarmene = Fate = cosmos. By spreading the equations into separate pages, he writes inconsistently: Heimarmene = Fate = fixed stars = sphere 8 = Ogdoad = above Heimarmene.

Other hermetic scholars follow suit, waffling in self-contradictory fashion: in one paragraph, Ogdoad is above heimarmene; in alternating paragraphs, sphere 8 is the Fate-soaked fixed stars.

Switching between saying “sphere 8” and “Ogdoad” tries to hide the self-contradiction, in order to misguidedly purify the Ogdoad of heimarmene by making the stars go missing in every other paragraph, inconsistently.

The solution is to always give the sphere number (7, 8, or 9) and equate Heimarmene consistently with the fixed stars and sphere 8 and the name “Ogdoad”, and understand that rebirth is initially into conformity with pure Heimarmene – not yet above Heimarmene.

My other correction of this book is its claim that anything you can think of is entheogenic, as if to propose “non-drug entheogens”, a contradiction in terms. Entheogenic practices in the broad sense actually means combining visionary plants with mental model formation and observation and various techniques – not omitting visionary plants. In 2004, I posted in Egodeath Yahoo Group about that point, a post titled “Entheogenic Esotericism”, 8 years before Hanegraaff’s keynote article speech titled “Entheogenic Esotericism”.

To summarize, as the million stars to steer by in the cosmos rebirth model that Hermetic scholars struggle to coherently present:

The mind starts with naive possibilism-thinking (level 0), becomes increasingly attuned to Heimarmene (Fate; eternalism) in entheogenic sessions 1-7, becomes fully reshaped and aligned harmoniously with Heimarmene (Fatedness; 4D spacetime block universe eternalism) in sphere 8 (the fixed stars); and then reconciles and marries the two ways of thinking together in sphere 9: embrace and include Heimarmene coordinated with the transcending of Heimarmene; marry qualified possibilism-thinking and qualified eternalism-thinking, to reach completion of initiation, per all brands of religion in Late Antiquity, flourishing starting around 150 CE.

— Michael Hoffman, theorist of ego death and transcendence

/ end of review, end of email to Hanegraaff

Colorized Revolving Tauroctony

The master copy of the below sections is now the new page: https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/22/reversible-tauroctony-mithraism-bull-sacrifice-scene/

{billowing cape} = the eternalism state of consciousness

{billowing cape} instances: row 1 L; row 2 M; row 4 L

number of trees (Y trees): 3 + 4 + 1 = 8 trees.

cape = billowing = wind = pneuma = heimarmene fixed stars state of consciousness; the eternalism state of consciousness.

the eternalism state of consciousness
esoc

the possibilism state of consciousness
psoc

possibilism-branching steering control

Features:

  • wind blowing beard on R in top row, on L in bottom row. bottom row: beard is near Mithra’s R foot.
  • which leg bent on L, on R. Consistent. stand on right foot vs. stand on left foot; ie, the leg which is not bent. Forget “crossed” legs; which leg is bent and thus not bent?
  • L side: 3 bent L legs = 3 stand on right foot. Most tauroctony scenes have bent L leg, on L twin.
  • R side: 2 bent R legs = 2 stand on right foot.
  • random art choice re: L torch light up or down: if you choose to show torch down on L, that points to {stand on right foot}, above that snake.
  • wheat tail against heimarmene fixed stars: affirming heimarmene gives fecundity reward. Sol is higher personal control system after blade the vulnerable bull which is lower personal control system, especially egoic naive possibilism-thinking “monolithic, autonomous control” is repudiated, specifically.
from cover of German David Ulansey book 1998

https://www.amazon.com/Urspr%C3%BCnge-Mithraskults-Kosmologie-Erl%C3%B6sung-Antike/dp/3806213100/ —

Features:

  • Lib Cap has sword blade revealing Psilocybin transformation about steering; crown = steering ability authorized by the standard of Psilocybin. Mithras showing palm = threatened & mercy pleading, apprehension. Apprehending the blade – Psilocybe semi-lanceata; spear-blade-mushroom.
  • Steering rod is non-branching.
  • Blade goes into bull near shoulder.
  • Seeing how steering works in non-branching revealed world (an experience).
  • Bull’s right legs are bent, implying bad/unstable {stand on left foot}: belief in stand on left foot is dead, when on Psilocybin. To still use possibilism-thinking (branching possibilities steering), must transcend eternalism-thinking.
  • Drinking horn contains lib cap Psilocybin which is a blade that kills initial monolithic, autonomous control steering in a branching possibilities tree. Cuts off the branching & cuts off the egoic autonomous personal control system of the type that steers in a tree to create the open future to “close” the future by your egoic autonomous control power.
  • grape = Psilocybin lib cap
  • mercy hand: thumb = non-branching; fingers = branching. IY. “display hand” = the capability of finger shapes to represent branching vs non-branching.
  • hunting dogs: Acteon sees Artemis, turns into stag w/ branching antlers, torn to pieces by his own hunting dogs.
  • Cubensis mushroom above bull head. Angle illusion; it’s a right hand above bull ear.
  • wheat tail: bovine dung grows Cubensis.
Crop by Michael Hoffman

When a the tauroctony bull-sacrifice scene​ shows up-pointed torch-light held by R twin, here that up direction points to / reveals, makes perceptible, the snake vs tree; fire (light) = (touches) snake.

No consistency: whether torch light is pointed up or down on L & R.

90% consistent: L twin = stand on right leg (L leg bent), matching Mithras.

Crop by Michael Hoffman
Crop by Michael Hoffman
Crop by Michael Hoffman
Crop by Michael Hoffman
Crop by Michael Hoffman

Features:

  • naked L foot-relying Sol on R: no control power; crown not on head; powerless; Mithras controls Sol’s power; Mithras holds controls your bull muscle, your source of power.
  • left Mithras stand on right foot; left foot floats. Heimarmene cap billowing touches branching part of tree.
Crop by Michael Hoffman

Ulansey Books

https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Mysteria-Ancient-Mysteries-Evolution-Consciousness/dp/1556438818/

Mysteria: The Ancient Mysteries and the Evolution of Consciousness

30 Oct. 2012 (no such)

“David Ulansey’s Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries won wide acclaim for its splendid scholarship and what Gnosis magazine called “an absolutely spell-binding detective story of antique lore.”

“Ulansey returns here with another detective story, this time unearthing the once-flourishing religious movements snuffed out by the arrival of Christianity.

Based on a series of lectures presented at San Francisco’s prestigious Jung Institute, Mysteria employs a wealth of scholarly and investigative tools in this exploration of

the role ancient mystery religions played in the evolution of Western consciousness.

The book reveals how these secret

cults, which centered on rituals and symbols of transformation at the deepest levels, catalyzed the formation of the individual, personal identity that became the core of the Western psyche.

Mysteria also examines the impact of the extraordinary

cultural and intellectual transformations of the Hellenistic Age on consciousness and self-awareness.

Individual chapters describe a rich

spiritual landscape in antiquity that included

  • the Eleusinian Mysteries,
  • the Orphic and Pythagorean Movements,
  • Plato and the Mysteries,
  • the Hellenistic Revolution,
  • Mithraic Mysteries, and
  • Apocalypse and Gnosis.”

David Ulansey Articles/Site

http://www.mysterium.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezr71f2z7po —

Mithras and the Hypercosmic Sun
David Ulansey
http://www.mysterium.com/hypercosmic.html

The Eighth Gate: The Mithraic Lion-Headed Figure and the Platonic World-Soul
David Ulansey
http://www.mysterium.com/eighthgate.html

keyboard shortcuts:

Mithras and the Hypercosmic Sun, David Ulansey, http://www.mysterium.com/hypercosmic.html
duhyp

The Eighth Gate: The Mithraic Lion-Headed Figure and the Platonic World-Soul, David Ulansey, http://www.mysterium.com/eighthgate.html
du8th

David Ulansey
du

David Ulansey’s solution explaining Mithraism
dusem

http://www.mysterium.com/appendices.html —

New Appendices for the German Translation of The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries: Cosmology and Salvation in the Ancient World
David Ulansey —

Appendix I: The Torchbearers’ Crossed Legs

Appendix II: Mithras, the Hypercosmic Sun, and the Rock Birth

Appendix III: Why Not a Mithraic Fish?

fixed stars = the entire cosmic structure; fixed stars = the cosmos

David Ulansey’s use of ‘cosmos’ or ‘cosmic’ does not follow the absurd definitions by Hanegraaff; Hanegraaff says that the fixed stars are “outside the cosmos”, insofar as Hanegraaff keeps the fixed stars at all.

Hanegraaff writes that the Ogdoad (sphere 8) is outside the cosmos, and that the cosmos consists only of planet spheres 1-7, and sphere 8 is “outside the cosmos” (Hanegraaff stays silent on whether Ogdoad contains fixed stars – which of course it does).

Unlike Hanegraaff, Ulansey coherently, sensibly, intelligibly uses the term ‘cosmos’ to include, and even highlight, sphere of the fixed stars. vs Hanegraaff’s admitted confusion that omits fixed stars from Ogdoad and places them nowhere:

“Whether the fixed stars should be included [with Saturn, sphere 7] or should rather be associated with the Ogdoad [sphere 8] remains an open question for me.” – p. 294, footnote 114, Hermetic Spirituality and the Historical Imagination: Altered States of Knowledge in Late Antiquity, by Wouter Hanegraaff, 2022

Appendix IV: Hipparchus’s Understanding of the Precession –

“Hipparchus’s idea that the precession [of the equinoxes] was caused by a previously unknown movement of the entire cosmic structure was not merely one more suggestion in a list of equally valid hypotheses. Rather, this idea was his final, mature conclusion,

… Hipparchus conceived of [the movement of the entire cosmic structure -d.u.] on the basis of the phenomena available to him …

Hipparchus’s final conclusion about the precession [of the fixed stars] was that it was a movement of the entire cosmic structure, for he expresses this conclusion in the very title of the first of his two works on the subject– “On the Displacement of the Solstitial and Equinoctial Points“– a title which can only refer to a motion of the entire cosmic structure.

… about the nature of this cosmic movement.

For Ptolemy tells us explicitly that in “On the Length of the Year” Hipparchus gave a precise estimate of the rate of the movement of the cosmic structure (not less than one degree per century),[12] and explained the exact orientation of this movement as being around the poles of the ecliptic.

“What we call the “precession of the equinoxes” (a term first used by Copernicus) was discovered by Hipparchus (2nd cent. B.C.) as a second motion of the fixed stars, in addition to the diurnal rotation.

“He described it either as an eastward motion of the sphere of the fixed stars about the axis of the ecliptic, thereby shifting the stars in the direction of increasing longitude with respect to the equinoxes, or as a westward motion of the axis of the diurnal rotation in a circle about the axis of the ecliptic, shifting the equinoxes in the direction of decreasing longitude with respect to the fixed stars.[15]

Swerdlow here acknowledges that the final outcome of Hipparchus’s work on the precession was the conclusion that it was a movement of the entire cosmic structure (either a motion of the sphere of the fixed stars or a motion of the axis of rotation of the universe– either of these mathematically equivalent formulations represents a shift of the entire cosmic structure).

Ptolemy says that in concluding that the precession was a movement of the entire cosmic structure Hipparchus was forced “to conjecture rather than to predict, since he had found very few observations of fixed stars before his own time…”), wouldn’t the tentative nature of his conclusion have prevented anyone from taking it seriously enough to believe that it indicated something like the existence of a new god?

in the Mithraic mysteries we are dealing not with a scientific but with a religious phenomenon, and the stuff of religion is not the human intellect but the human imagination.

Hipparchus suggested in his writings the remarkable new idea that the entire cosmic structure might be moving in a previously unknown manner.

Whether Hipparchus presented this as a proven fact or merely as a plausible hypothesis is of no consequence whatsoever for the religious imagination.

his final conclusion about the precession was that it was a motion of the entire cosmic structure.

Hipparchus’s discovery could well have catalyzed the sorts of speculations that led to the origins of the Mithraic mysteries.”

Mithraism concept/idea: we can transcend heimarmene/ fatedness/ eternalism, because the heimarmene sphere 8 sphere of the fixed stars moves. Mithras is outside cosmic rock heimarmene, so is able, from there, to move the sphere of the fixed stars which = Fatedness/ eternalism frozen rock prison enslavement embeddedness.

Evolution of the Egodeath Theory (Email to Max & Cyb May 7, 2025)

>One possible podcast topic: technology vs science:

The Egodeath theory as a Science advances by adding analogy that connects with other systems eg myth, esotericism, Late Antiquity cultic religions, sympos, the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees} w/ {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs.

Crop and annotations by Michael Hoffman, Egodeath.com, Jan. 3, 2025

The Egodeath theory as a Technology advances by adding use-case scenario framing that’s applied and practical in the harrowing climactic peak window of the intense mystic altered state. 

Not the technology of delivery formats, but a level more abstract.

This technology is a body of knowledge structured for relevance to Psilo peak state control transformation.

The content of the Theory is tailored and targeted for high-intensity Psilo loose cognition – as a technology, a practical explanation directly targeting this scenario – application tailored.  

A useful map of Psychedelic Mythemeland, including control vortex and Psilo transformation.  Not surrender and hand over control as is.  

Transformed control model: 

  • able to use POV: non-branching possibilities + 2-level, dependent control, 
  • able to use POV (consciously) branching possibilities + monolithic, autonomous control — as practical a model, as virtual.

Put the focus on the whole 2-model system, not only eternalism w/ 2-level, dependent control.  

Benefits of having both models, in a single overarching model of cybernetic control in branching & non-branching worlds.

Integration of the revelation into practical control model

Finally, the technology and the Science model is designed for Integration of the peak control transformation into practical agency control, in both states – building up the total mental worldmodel w/o disparaging the initial model (branching-steering monolithic control-agent) – our virtual world, though “virtual” has some delegitimization to avoid.

Limited Technology tool applicability: The Egodeath theory does not necessarily produce control-harmony and get rid of self-conflict across time.  

Check the list of benefits promised in 1997 & 2007, or Bubble of Simulation.  

Mostly, more than solving your control problems, this theory explains, to deliver understanding, to make the classic control transformation (climax seizure vortex) a known dynamic, and to comprehend how to gather evidence of ways this control transformation is reflected in history.  

This technology teaches how to read and look and perceive eternalism and the contrastive transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

Psychedelia: An Ancient Culture, A Modern Way of Life (Lundborg 2012, Phenomenology)

Altered state Phen’y book

PSYCHEDEL!A: AN ANCIENT CULTURE, A MODERN WAY OF LIFE

Book by Paul Lundborg is thick (high word count) and not particularly inspired or radical, it is intended as a Phenomenology book.  Has almost NOTHING about Europe 500 B C – 1400 A D.  False advert. title, like “Ancient means the Americas”.  

What little he writes about Europe history, or relation of Psil & meditation & nondual unity mysticism is the conventional views, no more.  

Kykeon = the only instance in Europe history.  

The Kykeon focus is used to accomplish strict containment.  We admit Europe has plant history, but, limited to kykeon, to cover the topic of Europe.

Like Ruck frames every instance of mushroom imagery in Christian art as “heretical” and “closed secret community”, a containment strategy.

/ end of may 7 email

Evolution of the Egodeath Theory (Email to Max & Cyb May 6, 2025)

Max wrote:

>technology vs science: the difference between 

>EDT as a static complete theory, and 

>EDT as something which develops and changes and evolves over time.  

After 1997, in Phase 2 (motivated by confirming the core theory), the Egodeath theory adds myth & history, and relates to other models.

The eventual Theory now has: inner core; outer core; add: inner periphery, outer periphery – then list topics in each layer.  

This date matches Samo’s milestone article marking the start of 2nd-generation entheogen scholarship (the Explicit Psilocybin paradigm):

“Mushroom-Trees” in Christian Art (Giorgio Samorini, 1998) .

Max wrote:

>There is some core set of insights that were present at the beginning conception of EDT, 

1. During the tail end of the Allegro + Ruck-dominated, Pop, 1st-gen entheogen scholarship, during 1985-1996, I developed the Core theory, with no historical focus.  

Exceptions: I read the psychology history book Up From Eden, Ken Wilber, around 1986-1989.  Lyrics.  Gnosis mag, before 1997/1998.

Allegro & Ruck & Pop Sike Cult fixated on the Secret Amanita paradigm.

Reference to represent the early Core theory 1988-1997:

Self-control Cybernetics, Dissociative Cognition, & Mystic Ego Death 

(1997 core theory spec) (Hoffman, 1997) https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/30/self-control-cybernetics-dissociative-cognition-mystic-ego-death/&nbsp;

Max wrote:

>then there has been a change in the way those insights are communicated.

Starting in 1998, added an analogies layer around the Core science model.  

eg art showing L foot youth, then R foot youth, then floating(!) sage, gesturing at pair of guys in tree: simple sitting; vs. complicated hanging. 
Great Canterbury Psalter f134 row 1 L & 2 R.

Crop by Michael Hoffman
Crop by Michael Hoffman

2024, tried to express the Core using “branching vs. non-branching”.

Nov 2024-May 2025, stopped disparaging possibilism-thinking.  In a sense, we repudiate possibilism-thinking — but we only repudiate its root and its certainty of branching possibilities.  Created narrow-sense & broad-sense qualifiers:

naive possibilism-thinking 

basic possibilism-thinking 

qualified possibilism-thinking 

qualified eternalism-thinking 

broad eternalism-thinking includes qualified possibilism-thinking.

2. Starting 1997-1998, while Samorini started 2nd-generation entheogen scholarship (the Explicit Psilocybin paradigm), 

I developed — to corroborate the Core Egodeath theory — the Mytheme theory; 

added an inner periphery and outer periphery of concerns: 

building on Rock Lyrics: added:

esotericism history

visionary plants history

myth, 

the Mytheme theory, 

analogy, 

art motifs, 

the ahistoricity of religious founder figures.

Timothy Freke & Peter Gandy’s book The Jesus Mysteries, 1999.

Negative: the ahistoricity of religious founder figures.

Positive: the esoteric analogicity of religious founder figures.

Reference to represent the Phase 2, build-out, the Mytheme theory 1998-2007-2020-2025:

The Entheogen Theory of Religion and Ego Death 

(Hoffman, 2007 main article) http://egodeath.com/EntheogenTheoryOfReligion.htm & https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/the-entheogen-theory-of-religion-and-ego-death-2006-main-article/

Max wrote:

>The clearest example of the change is 
>the introduction of the tree/snake possibilism/eternalism concept-pairing. 

Nov 2024-Apr 2025: created two named brands of Physics-based mysticism:

popular Everett egoic branching manyworlds, Quantum Mysticism.

unpopular, un-developed alternative:  Minkowski 4D Spacetime Mysticism; 4D spacetime block universe eternalism.

— for the purpose of connecting my Core theory with mytheme: branching vs non-branching.

Max wrote:

>Is there a clearest, simplest most unambiguous statement of the original, central core theory? 

The 1997 spec is designed to be exactly that.  

Broken out into a set of principles, same as my 1988 drafts.  

Lacks “worldline”, says “stream” and “tunnel”.

Max wrote:

>What exactly, precisely is the original core claim of EDT that you were first making when you first had the full theory?

The Jan 1988 coming-together of the Theory, and June 1988 first draft of “the [Cybernetic] Theory of Ego Transcendence”, are preserved with scope intact in my 1997 theory summary spec.

My message of 1988 & 1997:

The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology & Ken Wilber claim that ego transcendence is about 30 (60) years of Advaita meditation to change to nondual unity oneness.

But in Jan 1988, my new view to announce was: 

I disagree.  Found a better model, compact, more potent:

Actually, ego transcendence is about loose cognition to transform from one mental model of control and time to another; to block-universe eternalism, neutralizing egoic control agency (in a certain root way) 100%.

That total quick cancellation is proof of rightness, and that Ken Wilber is lost with an empty engine in his massive model.

In Jan 1988, a few components came together, that summarizes the essence of the core Egodeath theory:

* loose cognition (via, incidentally, theory of psychedelics)

* block-universe eternalism as a model of time (implies a model of control too).  4D spacetime block universe eternalism.

* control-agency focused: focused on transforming mental model of personal control system; cybernetics; Control Systems engineering course.

* mental model transformation from model A to B, per Satori about cybernetics per the Way of Zen by Alan Watts.

1988: Good news!  We now have a compact explanatory model of ego transcendence / Transcendent Knowledge!  

Simply a matter of loose cognition (via psychedelics most definitively) transforming mental model of control-in-world.  

Not per Ken Wilber and the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology; not meditation; not unity nondual oneness; 

rather, control-focused – not Quantum Mysticism with Everett branching manyworlds steering; rather, 4D Spacetime Mysticism with pre-existing future (frozen worldline, not branching) that instantly totally cancels a kind of egoic agency.

2007 article is perfect to represent this Phase 2, the Mytheme theory expansion — but incomplete: shows pictures that contrast branching vs. non-branching, but article doesn’t recognize that — even though at 2001 start of Egodeath Yahoo Group, I posted contrasting the branching vs non-branching models in Physics.  

In 2010, walking forking forest preserve every year photo’ing fungi, I speculated: wouldn’t we expect branching antlers vs. non-branching vine to be major mythemes?  That’s a science Prediction.  Massively confirmed that prediction by 2013, then especially by 2020 and ensuing years.

2007 article is strong re: snake, weak re: tree/branching.

A recent re-framing the theory:

late 2024, I stopped disparaging possibilism-thinking, since I always use possibilism-thinking and that doesn’t change, though root is transformed re: the hidden, uncontrollable source of control-thoughts.

Comparable to Tim Freke 2025 saying “do better than Pop Neo Advaita, too crude and primitive and un-scientific; too un-evolved, un-developed.”  

Essentially same as me re: perennialism: agree there is a common experience, but, that experience is grasped, modelled, and expressed more or less poorly over the years. 

And I dismiss unity nondual oneness as beginners un-earned initial taste, before their impurities and dishonoring the gods gets them kicked out of heaven in fear; the control instability {guarded gate}.  

Shamanism: The Timeless Religion (Manvir Singh, May 20, 2025)

The book Shamanism: The Timeless Religion comes out on May 25 [or 20], 2025. https://www.amazon.com/Shamanism-Timeless-Religion-Manvir-Singh/dp/0593537548 —

“From a brilliant, young, Harvard-trained anthropologist and contributor to The New Yorker comes a fascinating investigation into the spiritual practice of shamanism, from its beginnings to the present moment, for readers disaffected with organized religion who seek a more personal approach to spirituality.

“What are the origins of shamanism, and what is its future?

Do shamans believe in their powers?

What exactly is trance?

What can we learn from indigenous healing practices?

Traveling from Indonesia to the Colombian Amazon, living with shamans and observing music, drug use, and indigenous curing ceremonies, anthropologist Manvir Singh journeys into one of the most mysterious religious traditions.

“Fundamentally, shamans are specialists who use altered states to engage with unseen realms and provide services like healing and divination.

“As Singh shows, shamanism’s appeal stems from its psychological resonance. Its essence is spiritual transformation: a specialist uses initiations, deprivation, and non-ordinary states to seemingly become a different kind of human, one possessed of powers to cure, prophesy, and otherwise tame life’s uncertainties.

Following a fascinating cast of characters, Singh reveals the complexities and vicissitudes of a timeless, always relevant, and ubiquitous phenomenon.

“He argues that biomedicine can learn from shamanic practices and that psychedelic enthusiasts completely misrepresent history.

“He also shows that shamanic traditions will forever re-emerge – and that by contemplating humanity’s oldest spiritual practice, we come to better understand ourselves, our history, and our future.”

Shamanism, Human Culture & the Evolution of Religion (Singh Video & Book)

Video interview:

Shamanism, Human Culture & the Evolution of Religion | Manvir Singh | 219
ch: Mind & Matter Podcast
Mar 30, 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrAZTd9rlVk —

Video Desc:

“shamanism’s role as a universal human practice, exploring its roots in cultural evolution, cognitive tendencies, and persistence across history and modern society. 

“how shamans use altered states to address uncertainty—like healing or divination

“shamanism’s interplay with centralized religion, its psychological benefits, and parallels in today’s world, from tech gurus to medical placebos.

“Shamanism is a widespread cultural practice involving specialists who enter altered states to engage with unseen forces, often for healing or managing uncertainty.

“It’s not an archaic precursor to modern religion but a recurring expression of spiritual beliefs & practices, competing with other forms.

“Techniques vary widely—dance, music, [oven, light bulb, car engine,] psychedelics—but only about half [the good half] of shamans historically used psychoactive substances.

“Modern parallels include tech CEOs and money managers who project exceptionalism to influence others, echoing shamanic charisma without trance.

“rituals alone can [, could, might, may] trigger healing [what about triggering control transformation from possibilism to eternalism?], much like shamanic practices.

“Shamanism as a cognitive technology, shaping how we cope with chaos [eg control instability] across cultures and time.”

April 27 2025 email to Max & Cyb

My 1997 theory spec is a perfect snapshot of early, core Phase 1 theory.  

Not complicated by analogies (myth) or concept of “transcend eternalism”.  

A useful Reference for me. 

principia-cybernetica-1.jpg
Self-Control Cybernetics, Dissociative Cognition, & Mystic Ego Death (1997 core theory spec)egodeaththeory.wordpress.com

Routine Science vs Revolutionary science (Kuhn concepts) – 

a sunny day fan? 

only on board for the period of revolutionary science, not ordinary sci?  

even if i say the core-theory “Revolutionary Science” phase was 1985 to 1988 or 1997 or 2007, and – in contrast – adding the {branching} mytheme/ art motif, & correcting the term from determinism to eternalism, is RELATIVELY mere “Ordinary Science” (Kuhn), 

really the entire period 1985-2025+ is 100% Revolutionary Science.

Sep 2007: main article great, but failed to connect 2001 idea of “Minkowski = non-branching Physics; Bohr/Everett = branching Physics” to non/branching in art & myth.

Next day, found the terms eternalism & super determinism;

then my next step in theory devmt ~ late 2010: formed my hypothesis (AND SCIENTIFIC PREDICTION) of the “branching” mytheme:

aside: people wrongly equate and reduce the scientific method is reduced to and conflated completely with prediction.   I call this fallacy predictionism.

That is an intellectually lazy, crude, simplistic model of “how science works”, which replaces thinking.

It’s a just-so story, a pseudo-explanation, like “the snake is a famous myth because it sheds its skin. ” — says (imagines) every modern writer about myth, because they read it in every other modern writers’ books, and they parrot the same idea, which is relatively unknown in the source materials, afaik.  

Me in 2001 or 2003, to all entheogen scholars & myth scholars: BS! The REAL reason snake #1 mytheme is its shape?? 🤔🤔 bc shape matches Minkowski worldline.  

Another example:  everyone says that the twins around the tauroctony bull-sacrifice scene​ have their “legs crossed”, but nobody notices that their bent vs straight leg matches the bent vs. straight leg of the bull and its Slayer 🎸💀🤘👹

and feel free to reverse the tauroctony image, like Ruck Commitee Entheos issue 3 cover, & the top recomm Mithraism book’s cover by Manfred Klaus, because surely that can’t matter.

Walking in the nature preserve where there are mushrms every Fall in a microcomputer software company, walking the branching paths, looking at trees and fungi, I asked:

“isn’t it reasonable to think that the ancients knew cognitive science, and modern physics of Minkowski Block universe?  🤔🤔

“isn’t it reasonable to think that the ancients understood the difference between the initial, branching model of spacetime, versus the subsequent, revealed, non-branching model??” 

In 2013 Thanksgiving week, when I saw the three layers of branching, triple emphasis in the book the power of myth, Eve tempted by the serpent, while studying liberty cap theory, I was shaking & shaken for over a week, upon getting the confirmation that the ancients understood branching, and non-branching.  

That proves that the 2007 main article was NOT the end of my Revolutionary Science period.

That Nov/Dec 2013 breakthrough was confirmed by Ascelpius’ staff w broken-off branches and healing serpent, and also the good – not the uninspired – versions of Moses’ bronze serpent on a pole, which I had struggled to interpret in the 2007 article.  

(I had no idea yet though in 2013, to perceive the motif of {branching vs non branching} in the pictures in the 2007 article.)

Still yet waiting, long after that: Xmas ’15 Hatsis color Dancing man-> Is {handedness} a thing?? 🤔🤔 

Can we map one leg to possibilism-thinking & one to eternalism-thinking?

That hypoth was massively confirmed Nov 2020 by Eadwine’s leg-hanging mushroom tree image in the Great Canterbury Psalter.  

Years later, elated facepalm to recognize Ariadne hold branch L arm, Dionysus spear in R arm, wedding victory, 

not to mention (re: that picture) in 2020, my 2010 Oct photo proof that the Leopard fountain is an upturned Amanita –  NOT merely the real-world scientific Amanita muscaria; vastly better: 

mythic-realm Amanita, the famous, legendary, well-known super-psych’c.

🤯
🙌
🍄

—–

🚫
👎
🍄‍🟫

Do not say branching is “bad/false” – it is one of the two mental models the psychonaut uses.  

Honor the wedded pair of models; honor both a YI msh tree’s branching Y & non-branching I parts). 

The superpower of youth branching: it is able to climactically be seized by a mental giant in love w the beautiful youth/ maiden. Kore/ Ganymede, beautiful prince Absalom. 

— Michael

email snippet: mythic meeting of the gods & mortals

expressions of enthusiasm, fascination, and awful horror, in this mythical epic greatest meeting of all time – the mother of all high meetings, ill-fated to be lost Somewhere in Time — except in the mythic Amanita super-psychedlic realm, where this not merely epic, but mythic meeting of the gods & mortals was held

email snippet: the changing value of Mythicism: Positive Analogicity vs. Negative Mythicism

posted at MythVision livestream: 

After adopting mythicism, the value of mythicist scholarship changes. 

Then, look for positive mythicism (comprehending) vs. negative mythicism (mere debunking)

Half done thinking: negative mythicism; debunking historicity genre.  

Fully done thinking: positive mythicism; when comprehend myth describing the peak altered state

email Apr. 28, 2025 to Max & Cyb

“If the History doesn’t match the Theory, too bad for the History; the Theory is correct.”  

😑

Before Hanegraaff’s Hermetic Spirituality book, I wrote in defense of academic study of Theory or Interp. of Esotericism, which Hanegraaff demonizes; wholly dismisses.  

In advocating a purely scientific historiography methodology, Hanegraaff contrasts the bad approach: timeless Theory.

OMG a perennialist approach! 😨 
Maybe even a Religionist approach OMG! 😱

Hanegraaff’s lopsided dread of the academic sin of “perennialism” & “religionism” handicaps him.

Hanegraaff’s result is incoherent and nonsensical garbage, re: the engine core of what it means to be reborn into sphere 8 in relation to heimarmene.

He can have his model that rebirth = above heimarmene, but can’t place fixed stars, and, doesn’t match any brand of Late Antiquity religion.  

A massive misrepresentation, and mostly incoherent.

Historiography without Theory is blind and ends up inventing, despite claims of “empirical, accurate reporting what the author means.”  

Does Hanegraaff report what the author means?  

No, Hanegraaff  invents a fantasy that the author means “rebirth means reach sphere 8 then 9, which means transcend heimarmene & then transcend heimarmene“.  

The author actually meant “reach pure heimarmene and then also transcend heimarmene – that’s rebirth.”

Hanegraaff’s subsquent book, Herm. Spir., proves me right and him wrong on that lopsided advocacy.  

Hanegraaff claims to do scientific historiography, non-judgmental, and yet, he fabricates incoherent nonsense with no citations, “the Ogdoad above the Heimarmene”. 

What ancient text says sphere 8 is outside of heimarmene?  None, b/c it’s sheer nonsense on stilts.

Hanegraaff made it up.  

INSTEAD OF DOING GOOD THEORY, Hanegraaff delivers bad theory + semi-valid history.

If your Theory / interpretation is shiite, your History is false and corrupt, no matter how much ink you spill lecturing against the perils of Theory and pushing the doctrine of Scientific Historicity.  

Incoherent invention is the result.  

The Hermetic writers would wince at Hanegraaff’s astrophobia, fear of divine heimarmene.  

Nice try, but broken engine, like Ken Wilber.  

The airplane doesn’t fly.

Recent posts after started last idea development page

omits older pages where I added info.

Photo: Michael Hoffman
Photo: Michael Hoffman
Photo: Michael Hoffman
Photo: Michael Hoffman, Egodeath Mystery Show
David Ulansey uses this mic setup in video above, SM57+A2WS
Unknown's avatar

Author: egodeaththeory

http://egodeath.com

Leave a comment