Richard Ascough on Psychedelics in Western Religious History

Michael Hoffman 8:18 p.m. January 21, 2026

Crop by Michael Hoffman

Contents:

Links work on desktop Edge/Chrome:

Mosurinjohn/Ascough Assert Two Contradictory Positions

A couple pairs of scholars contacted the Journal of Psychedelic History, and the Journal of Religious Anything-but-Drugs Studies.

One pair of scholars is named Mosurinjohn & Ascough.  Their position is that:

There are no psychedelics in mystery religions; Ruck is wrong and foolish and needs fundamental correction.

I flagged in bold red, around 10 phrases that assert this, and that send this signal or message.

The other pair of scholars is also named Mosurinjohn & Ascough.  Their position is that:

Psychedelics might have been used in mystery religions, but we only have a little evidence for that, and cannot draw a conclusion, and the field of entheogen scholarship badly needs our input to caution them that a hypothesis is not a fact.

I will do my 4th close reading of their article that’s been rejected by both camps: “anything but drugs” academics, and entheogen scholars:

  • One highlighter color on phrases that assert and signal “There were no psychedelics in Mystery Religions.”  (Aggressive, bailey position.)
  • Other highlighter color on phrases that pander to entheogen scholars, saying “We’re on your side, don’t be pissed off at us, alls we’re saying is merely that you guys need to gather more data before any conclusion is possible.”  (Feeble, motte position.)

If Ruck turns mere possibility (maybe there were psychedelics in mystery religions) into as-if fact (we can be certain the engine of mystery religion was psychedelics),

Mosurinjohn & Ascough do the same, in the other valence direction: they turn mere possibility (maybe there were no psychedelics in mystery religions, because eg. contemplative drama in a cave can/ could/ might/ may produce same effect as 10g of Cubensis) into as-if fact (we disproved the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis).

This way, both camps will love and accept Mosurinjohn & Ascough — or, both camps reject and are pissed off at Mosurinjohn & Ascough, the double agents who skew negative, unlike Ruck who skews positive.

They wrote an article that’s about how that selfsame article got rejected for publication by both camps, for years.

Their strategy of selling to one camp with one message, and also selling to the other camp with the opposite message, has been a terrible struggle for them, and we should feel sorry for Mosurinjohn and the dead weight of Ascough she’s dragging along with her while she avoids journal publication and instead writes a book about entheogens in esotericism, that has:

* One chapter on “the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis is false and foolish, and urgently needs correction by me”.

* Another chapter on — not contributing any new research to add substance to the field, but rather — cautioning the misguided and weak-minded entheogen scholars to remember that a hypothesis is not a fact.

Should be a great leap forward for the field.  Just pick which one chapter you agree with, and read that one.

By the time the book comes out, she hopes to figure out how to pander to both opposed camps, without them continuing to both shun her and her alter ego;

Dr. Jekyll: “We must be nuanced, balanced, reasonable, and cautiously gather more data, before we can draw any conclusions”,

and Mr. Hyde: “Entheogen scholars are fools and have BEEN DEBUNKED!”

Psychedelics, Eleusis, and the Invention of Religious Experience (Mosurinjohn & Ascough, 2025)
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/08/08/psychedelics-eleusis-and-the-invention-of-religious-experience-mosurinjohn-ascough-2025/

Richard Ascough on Psychedelics in Western Religious History
https://egodeaththeory.org/2026/01/22/richard-ascough-on-psychedelics-in-western-religious-history/

Video: The Sweetest Taboo: Psychedelics and the Invention of Religious Experiences (Mosurinjohn, Sep. 2025)
https://egodeaththeory.org/2026/01/20/the-sweetest-taboo-psychedelics-and-the-invention-of-religious-experiences-mosurinjohn-2025/

Search EgodeathTheory.WordPress.com for: mosurinjohn
https://egodeaththeory.org/?s=mosurinjohn

In idea development page 30:

Book: Entheogenics: Psychedelic Experiences as Revelatory Events in the History of Western Esotericism (Mosurinjohn, in progress)
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/06/11/idea-development-page-30/#book-entheogenics-psychedelic-experiences-as-revelatory-events-in-the-history-of-western-esotericism-mosurinjohn-in-progress-per-2022

The search accurately returns also, long misc pages containing research and evidence for the above, Find “mosur” in them:
https://egodeaththeory.org/2026/01/24/idea-development-page-32/
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/08/21/idea-development-page-31/

Concise recent summary article for publication in a church reader:
Recognizing Mushroom Imagery in Medieval Art
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/08/08/recognizing-mushroom-imagery-in-medieval-art/

— Michael Hoffman, Egodeath.com, the Egodeath theory (analogical psychedelic eternalism with dependent control)

Ascough Definitively Proclaims “They Weren’t Using Psychedelics in Mystery Religions”

Video title:
Psychedelics, and the Birth of Christianity – Dr. Richard Ascough
YouTube channel: Ayush Prakash
Dec. 25, 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8GcCjja74M&t=2730s (45:30)

“She [Sharday Mosurinjohn] texted me and she said:
Richard, you knew I was working on psychedelics,
Why didn’t you tell me that [at] the root of the Eleusinian mystery religions, one of the oldest, on their very core, they were doing psychedelics?

And I would text her back: “uh, because they weren’t.”

What happened to Ascough’s nuance, his “I agree that maybe”, “we need to be cautious”, “Be a nuanced, cautiuous scholar, like wonderful me, the perfect model”?

Jekyll & Hyde:

  • Dr. Jekyll says “Maybe psychedelics in mystery religions, we need to investigate w/ caution and nuance. Follow my wise, cautious lead.”
  • Mr. Hyde says “It’s a myth, psychedelics in mystery religions. There were no psychedelics in mystery religions.”

The motte-and-bailey argumentation, slip-n-slide, what is your position?

Ascough oscillates and prevaricates between two self-contradictory positions, back and forth.

Here, he SLAMS his cards down on the table, and definitively asserts NO.

I don’t think Christian Greer waffles and contradicts himself this way.

Mosurinjohn & Ascough (When Holding Their Aggressive, Bailey Position) Present as if Fact, the Mere Possibility that There Were No Psychedelics in Mystery Religions

Abstract of Article “Psychedelics, Eleusis, and the Invention of Religious Experience”: Mosurinjohn & Ascough Assert No Psychedelics in Mystery Religions

From the Abstract of the article Psychedelics, Eleusis, and the Invention of Religious Experience (Mosurinjohn & Ascough, 2025):

“This article corrects an idea in psychedelic science and culture that the ancient Eleusynian Mysteries used psychedelics“

“the dogged pursuit of evidentiary mirages“

“the writers of this pseudo-history“

“the psychedelic hypothesis is fundamentally flawed in its study of antiquity”

“Instead of committing to a specific (and erroneous) view of history,”

Conference Schedule: Mosurinjohn Asserts no Psychedelics in Mystery Religions

From the conference schedule’s description of Sharday Mosurinjohn’s talk:

“these writers’ dogged pursuit of evidentiary mirages“

From the video’s description of Mosurinjohn’s talk:

“the belief that ancient Western religions were fundamentally psychedelic [is] less a historical hypothesis but a myth“

“Why is the psychedelic discourse so intent on hanging on to this narrative?”

Hu Weblog Interview: Ascough Asserts No psychedelics in mystery religions

From the Hu weblog interview with M&A:

I shred this contradiction, below in this page, in detail.

Ascough said to Hu:

“And my response[citation?] is, no, it has been considered, [yeah ok but was it published, when, where, by who?] and it’s so wrong that we don’t need to keep repeating it! [repeating what? which articles? citation needed]

“I work on the Mystery religions, but psychedelics never show up in the academic literature about them. [Reporter’s note: Mystery religions are secret religious groups or cults from Greco-Roman times.] 

“[re: psychedelics in Mystery Religions] It’s very rare [in classicists’ publications] and if it comes up at all, it’s something like, “There is this fringe element that talks about psychedelics but they have no evidence.”

And yet, at these psychedelics conferences, it keeps coming up again and again. There’s a disconnect between what has been said by biblical scholars and classists [citations needed!], and what’s being promoted within the psychedelics community. That forced us, then, to dig deeper: Where does this disconnect come from? Why is there this disjuncture?”

Ruck Sometimes Changes the Possibility of Psychedelics in Mystery Religions into a Fact

Ascough Sometimes Changes the Possibility of No Psychedelics in Mystery Religions into a Fact

Hypocrites Sharday Mosurinjohn & Richard Ascough, in their self-promotional posturing, try to draw all attention to Ruck’s shifting from possibility to fact — while at the same time, they themselves do the same, just in the opposite direction:

  • Ruck’s feeble, motte position:
    “There might be psychedelics in mystery religions.”
  • Ruck’s aggressive, bailey position:
    “There certainly were psychedelics in mystery religions.”
  • Ascough’s feeble, motte position:
    “There might not be psychedelics in mystery religions.”
    Ascough’s aggressive, bailey position:
    “There certainly were not psychedelics in mystery religions.”

Everyone get ready, now Shift! Shift back! Shift back again!

Motte is a bad-sounding word; the undesired position of no consequence, to retreat to:

“I’m merely saying, quite unobjectionably, X.”

Bailey is a good-sounding word; the position you WISH you could defend, but can’t:

  • Ruck (when he shifts to his aggressive, bailey position): “There definitely were psychedelics in mystery religions; that’s a fact.”
  • Ascough (when he shifts to his aggressive, bailey position): “There definitely were no psychedelics in mystery religions; that’s a myth.”

Both Ruck and Ascough, when pressed, and retreat to the feeble, undisputed, motte position, have the SAME POSITION:

  • Ruck’s & Ascough’s feeble, motte position:
    “There might be psychedelics in mystery religions.”

The above is simplified, depending on which variant of the question is under dispute. There is certain evidence for certain presence of some plants in some contexts; no one disputes that.

The hardest thing in dirty entheogen scholarship debate:
What exactly is the point under dispute? It shifts in shell-game fashion.

Ascough has disproved Ruck. What exactly did Ascough disprove? Nothing of any consequence:

At most, Ascough proved that WHEN Ruck asserts that we have certainty that psychedelics were in in mystery religions, Ruck is wrong on that particular point or position.

What Ascough has NOT proved, is there were not psychedelics in mystery religions.

Yet, half the time, Ascough asserts that he has proved”Ruck is wrong”; proved “no psychedelics in Mystery Religions”.

Look at the juicy bad phrases in the Abstract of Mos & Asc Inventing Religion:

These phrases are meant to imply and assert “There definitely were not psychedelics in mystery religions”.

This is the aggressive, indefensible, bailey position that the authors attack from, when they are not retreating into their weak, motte position that no one disputes.

Video: Psychedelics, and the Birth of Christianity – Dr. Richard Ascough (Dec. 25, 2024)

Video title:
Psychedelics, and the Birth of Christianity – Dr. Richard Ascough
YouTube channel: Ayush Prakash
Dec. 25, 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8GcCjja74M —

Gibberish, low credibility:
“the idea of synthesizing the ergot from mushrooms” —
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8GcCjja74M&t=2901s (48:23)

The first 60% of the video is on the Birth of Xy.

The 2nd 40% of the video is on psychedelics in Western religious history, which certainly didn’t exist, and which may have existed to some extent, too early to say, therefore, [loud headline propaganda:] entheogen scholars are WRONG and foolish (ie inferior to me), and we shall analyze why they persist in their wrong folly hypothesis.

Motte –> Bailey –> Motte –> Bailey, slip-n-slide, shifty shell game con artist like all the MICA Deniers – mushroom imagery in Christian art.

Not “Logical Fallacies”; Rather, Propaganda; Narrative Framing Tactics

These are not “logical fallacies”; these are PROPAGANDA TACTICS AGAINST psychedelics in Western religious history.

Kettle logic; Ascough contradicts himself constantly.

What is your claim? It keeps shifting! It’s a contradictory shifting set of claims, elastic.

You can’t rebut his position, b/c he is dancing hard on the dance floor, or skating rink with foul dirty moves.

Ayush Prakash Podcast (YouTube playlist)
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLCgU9D4fIV2pSPDElLqX0l4sxOi_l3e-2
This is episode 111.

Richard S. Ascough is Professor of Religion Queen’s University in Kingston, Canada.

Motivation of this Page

Need to examine transcript of 2nd part of his talk in this interview.

Found timestamp in vid where he says “we haven’t gathered the .. we’re still collecting the evidence to see if psychedelics — ie THE EXTENT TO WHICH psychedelics in Western religious history.”

Insanely flip-flops contradicting the F out of himself. Motte & Bailey Fest.

Xn Greer has a viable, stable, coherent, consistent position he puts forth. It’s minimal/moderate, but consistent!

  • Ascough: “There was no psychedelics in Western religious history. Entheogen scholars are blundering fools, they are WRONG. Why do these stupid entheogen scholars persist in their folly and false wishful theories?
  • Also Ascough: “There MIGHT be some amount of psychedelics in Western religious history and evidence, we don’t know.”

THEN WHY DO YOU PERSECUTE, INSULT, DISRESPECT, AND TELL ENTHEOGEN SCHOLARS THEY ARE DEFINITELY WRONG?

You can’t write your abstract’s PROPAGANDA-type NARRATIVE assertions “there were no psychedelics in Mystery Religions”, yet then say “We don’t know; absense of evidence isn’t ev of ab; still collecting data, not done yet; cannot draw conclusion” — and,

“CONCLUSION: ANNOUNCEMENT IN ABSTRACT OF ARTICLE: HEADLINE: ENTHEOGEN SCHOLARS ARE IDIOTS, AND THERE IS NO EVIDENCE, AND THERE WERE NO PSYCHEDELICS IN Western religious history“

5 min later, footnote, ENDNOTE, “Look how reasonable and balanced of a thinker I am: There might have been some amount of use of psychedelics, too soon to say.”

Greer doesn’t do that sh!t. He holds a moderate position, CONSISTENTLY; artic’d w/ nuance; a defensible actual position.

Ascough’s “position” is that of a waffle.
https://www.google.com/search?q=waffle+%22motte+and+bailey%22

Animation of the Motte-and-Bailey Fallacy

A copy of this section is in my Sharday Mosurinjohn page (“Invention of Religious Experience”) and in my Ascough page.

Video: What is the difference between science and pseudoscience? (Strange Loop, Dec. 2025)

Video title:
What is the difference between science and pseudoscience?
Dec. 4, 2025
YouTube Channel: The Strange Loop
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTpxICN-O1U&t=442s [7:22]

  • Animation of the motte-and-bailey fallacy at 7:22:
    Aggressive, bailey position: “Your mind controls reality.”
    Feeble, motte position: “How you think can have some effect on what happens.”
  • There’s no hard line between Science vs. Pseudoscience.
  • Summarizes the book about how after cold war, Physics was defunded, then Marketed by Woo scientists successfully:

How the Hippies Saved Physics: Science, Counterculture, and the Quantum Revival
David Kaiser, 2011
https://www.amazon.com/How-Hippies-Saved-Physics-Counterculture/dp/0393076369/

Article: The Vacuity of Postmodernist Methodology (Shakel, 2005): Defines the Motte & Bailey Fallacy

Web search:
“The Vacuity of Postmodernist Methodology”
Nicholas Shakel, 2005
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22The+Vacuity+of+Postmodernist+Methodology%22

Transcript of Video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”

Video title:
Psychedelics, and the Birth of Christianity – Dr. Richard Ascough
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8GcCjja74M&t=2670s [44:30, start of psychedelics topic]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8GcCjja74M&t=2670s

44:30 = cal

[The end of vid is 1:13:39 = 1:14:00 = 60 + 14 = 74 minutes. This is 44/74 = 60% into the vid before he talks about the psychedelics topic promised by the vid title.

First 60% of vid is good, summary of history of Christianity, not at all psychedelics. -mh]

I guess we should turn to psychedelics now.

This is this a new place for me but sure

I think it’s a new place for all of us

I think like religion psychedelics have

like

if there’s religion; there’s spirituality; psychedelics are kind of a third rail topic

there’s an incorporation of all of these tenants but it’s also I guess more science-backed, because there’s Neuroscience research, psychology, psychology research

all of this how

is there a history of religion and psychedelics that we should talk about

Ascough Is Not Self-Motivated Interest in Entheogen Scholarship: Mosurinjohn Pushed Him into “Psychedelics in Mystery Religions”

certainly I’m I’m happy to and this is it’s new to me because it’s my colleagues that’s pushed me

so I’ll give a shout out to Sharday Mosurinjohn who teaches religion and contemporary culture here

um and so

A colleague but also a friend

and

She was starting to investigate religion and psychedelics, and she’d be at conferences and she would

you know

We’ve worked on papers, published papers, a couple of different papers together.

below is con’t: Transcript of Video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”…

Myth-busting psychedelics in ancient Greece: 5 Questions for religious studies professors Sharday Mosurinjohn and Richard Ascough (Hu, Sep. 2025)

This is just a minor copy of this citation info; see longer entry further down below.

Myth-busting psychedelics in ancient Greece: 5 Questions for religious studies professors Sharday Mosurinjohn and Richard Ascough
“The professors discuss the scant evidence for the idea that the Eleusinian Mysteries used psychedelics, and why it persists anyway.”
Jane Hu, Sep. 15, 2025
https://themicrodose.substack.com/p/myth-busting-psychedelics-in-ancient
My page:
https://egodeaththeory.org/2026/01/20/psychedelics-eleusis-and-the-invention-of-religious-experience-mosurinjohn-2025/#Myth-busting-psychedelics-in-ancient-Greece

Ascough Is Storytelling an Inaccurate Narrative, According to Mosur; Not Trustworthy (nor Consistent)

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

And so she [Sharday Mosurinjohn] texted me and she said [or not -mh]:

Richard, you knew I was working on psychedelics,

Why didn’t you tell me that the root of the Eleusinian mystery religions, one of the oldest, on their very core, they were doing psychedelics?

[Sharday disputes that. That’s Ascough’s imaginative telling of what she texted him; a docu-drama fictionalized; see Hu: Myth-busting psychedelics in ancient Greece: 5 Questions for religious studies professors Sharday Mosurinjohn and Richard Ascough]

[she says b.s. she did not say that. She *ASKED* his opinion. -mh]

and I would text her back uh because they weren’t

and she’d say well no no no

I’m at this conference and they just I’ve just heard all these papers on it

[by the loaded, negative word “narrative”, he means it’s false – but that is Not Proven, as he sometimes says -mh]

I’m like yeah nobody in the religious studies Fields thinks that, but in the study of psychedelics, they have this narrative that the ancient mystery religions were all about psychedelics

and and

part of their narrative is, it’s so controversial that people working on ancient history can’t face it

it’s it’s they

they’re afraid of it, so they buried it

uh and

that’s a very different argument

rhetorically it’s very clever, but it’s different than

no it’s just wrong because there’s no evidence for it

[“wrong” is not the same as “no evidence”! as Ascough says, sometimes: absense of evidence != evidence of absence -mh]

so

she and I spent last couple of years back and forth and when writing a paper now on psychedelics and the ancient Mysteries and what– where the evidence isn’t there

neither of us would say they didn’t– it didn’t involve psychedelics

[but half the time, in your sprinting between Motte & Bailey, you DO say exactly that.

it is a mere tedious, and amusing, exercise, to gather adjacently, your directly contradictory statements, and tone-soaked insinuations

WE ARE NOT SAYING IT WASN’T PSYCHEDELICS
next page:
IT WASN’T PSYCHEDELICS
-mh]

“There Is Some Evidence” (Yet Blaring Headline: “Entheogen scholars are fools, there is no evidence; there were no psychedelics in Mystery Religions”)

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

but both of us agree that that there’s very very little evidence for it and what evidence is there is it has to be nuanced and played out carefully

[that is what Greer says UP FRONT. more consistent and honest than Ascough -mh]

and there’s two books one from the 70s the road to elus and one more recently The Immortality Key by Brian Muraresku.

  • [The Road to Eleusis – Ruck, along with academic fraud Gordon . . . .🔍🧐🤔 Wasson
  • The Immortality Key by Brian Muraresku, 2020
    -mh]

For Better or Worse, Entheogen scholarship is now in the age of Muraresku-Centered Debate

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

so

Both of those report [purport?] to present a lot of historical evidence and a lot of scientific evidence

Ascough’s Argumentation: When you Dig Past the Rhetoric, There’s Not Much Substance to It

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

when you dig past the rhetoric there’s not much substance to it

there’s

there’s

a lot it it plays well to be honest

it reads well, but there’s a lot of

For example, the use of of words in Greek that sound like other words, and so this proves points, but they don’t emologic like linguistically it doesn’t work

sort of the

the conjecture on one page becomes fact on the next page

[science model adoption is fair, Ascough’s criticism doesn’t nece. hold water -mh]

so we

we traced it through to kind of say this is problematic

it just means their arguments are problematic so going back to you

“Students, You Are Not Wrong, But Need More Evidence”

Self-Promotional Headline: “YOU’RE WRONG!! I’m Right and Disproved, DESTROYED, the Psychedelic Mysteries Hypothesis!”

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

what I say to my students:

not saying you’re wrong, but you’d have to give me evidence, and if I can poke holes in the evidence then we have to go back and reexamine the evidence

Poke Holes in the Ascough Wall of Fallacies

5th-Grade Just-So Story about “The Scientific Method”; “If Disconfirm a Theory, Means Instantly Must Discard It”

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

any scientific experiment you test the hypothesis again and again again each time you might Nuance the hypothesis a little bit bit so you know

logically is it conceivable that for 5 600 years or even more you have thousands of people going through these Mysteries all doing psychedelics to have the experience and not one of them not one ever put on record that this is what happened

it seems like something would slip out somewhere

um and and the you know

“Synthesizing the Ergot from Mushrooms into an LSD Type of Substance” – Ascough’s Level of Credibility

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

the idea of of synthesizing the airut from mushrooms into an LSD type of substance there just very weak basic you know we can do it now in highly technical Labs but could priests do it back then

not saying they couldn’t but I’m saying where’s it’s conjecture but it has to be proven

so we have a lot of fun kind of going back and forth on on this um

What Motivates Idiot Entheogen scholars in Their Error, Folly, and Wrongness? I Explain Their Inner, Incorrect Thoughts

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

what’s actually more interesting to me and so this is now getting to your real question I think what’s more interesting to to Professor Moz and John and myself is not

“did they or didn’t they involve psychedelics”

They Have These Strategic Motives, for their Wrongness and Error

[“i can list some actual motives of Ruck correctly, to discredit him”;
“to explain his motives, is to reveal that he’s false”.

The TONE, the framing, of Ascough’s explanation of / listing of motives, is delivered as if it is therefore disproof of psychedelics in Western religious history.

“Proof of no psychedelics in Western religious history: The motive of the entheogen scholars is to legalize psychedelics. Therefore, no psychedelics in Western religious history. Q.E.D.” -mh]

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

But why is it so important to the Psychedelic Community today that they did and part of it is they want legalization and we know that in South America they were using iasa [aya] in what we would call religious rituals long before Christianity

Indigenous Shams Are Known for a Fact to Use Aya in 3000 B.C., therefore, Entheogen scholars [think “Muraresku”] are wrong, only looking back to 30 A.D.

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

and they know this as well but that’s not where they want to find their evidence they want to find it in Greece and in Rome and where the evidence is big barely discernible and I in part of me thinks that’s because they know in North America we you know especially in the United States which has grounded itself in Roman republicanism I mean their Senate Building look exactly like the Roman senate they just want to be Roman and now probably want to be more of an Empire so that’s a whole different topic uh you might want to cut that one out um but uh they need the antecedent to be Greek and Rome not Inca

Looking for Psychedelics in Western religious history is Impermissible and False, because It Is Racism, which is the Worst Sin that Moses Listed in the 10 Commandments (Colonialist Violence!)

Redeem Yourself by Only Studying Indig Shams on Ayahuasca in 3000 B.C.

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

not my end Mayan sort of an almost an implicit racism there right that that you’ve got it right in your backyard but for it to sort of support the kind of legal arguments they’re making for for for the um wider use medicalization but even broader social use of psychedelics they they keep looking to Western history and and that’s fascinating to me absolutely they have Alternatives so that’s so this is where we’re going with this so a lot of work being done it’s it’s just so so since Professor Moz John has started working on this and sort of pulled me in a few years ago more and more work is just exploding in terms of of psychedelics and religion so it’s really exciting lots more to learn and and lots of arguments coming along but but again my question is just is the evidence there yeah we can look at that but why why does it matter to me why does it matter to me that we get a historically right because it doesn’t matter to me whether the substances are legalized or not I I have no skin in the game that way I haven’t invested in any kind of pharmaceutical companies or anything um but but I’m fascinated as the story both what they do at the ancient times but what they’re trying to do now using that evidence

Host (Ayush Prakash) Pushes Back Against Full of Sh!t Ascough

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

yeah I I do want to kind of go back and forth in this and if I might push back just a little bit yeah absolutely it it does seem kind of it would be strange that the church has this intense scrubbing of anything that goes against like directly what they want but they would include psychedelics that does that does seem to calculate that if they didn’t want these their their disciples or the working class to undergo these um sessions of spiritual enlightenment to see that there’s so much more um you know we always see you know people that undergo DMT or even high doses of LSD and pilosyan and even um what’s it even Molly I forget of ecstasy when they undergo these high doses there’s an incredibly religious experience um yeah where they they see we’re all one they interact with sentient beings if they’re on DMT or engaging in the iasa ceremonies and so all of these tenants of religion without the oppression come into being and you get a a Oneness you get a sense of unity and it would make sense that all of these oppressive authoritative dare I say totalitarian um regimes um religions would kind of hold off and say no no no those are the devil’s lettuce

Drunkenness Means Alcohol, in the Bible, No Trace of Psychedelics in the Bible

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

let’s say you know those are the devil’s compounds and not want anybody to take them to see that there’s something so much more than what they’re being offered well so to start with that then that’s exactly what they’ve done as they become aware of these kinds of of hucog genics [hallucinogens?]

right so so

we do see that

you’re right what we find and you do find that all the way back so you do find warnings in let’s stick with Christianity you do find warnings in the texts against drunkenness

They knew people were getting drunk and they were saying don’t.

What you don’t find is warnings against people getting high.

so

The absence of evidence is not evidence, but it’s

it’s

they

you are right:

they are trying to control people and people’s experiences, but that they never explicitly ban it suggests to me that maybe they’re not aware of it

[everyone knew flesh of gods

it may be happening but they’re not aware of it because if they were they would they they didn’t hold back on explicitly Banning things sure right and and so it’s like how and and it’s not that they wouldn’t have I think they would have it’s just how accessible were these things to people that that’s so for me that’s the bottom line is it’s not that these things wouldn’t have done exactly what you said and don’t do exactly what you said it’s just how accessible were they and and in the absence of evidence of their accessibility do we find are there other ways of explaining those kinds of experiences so you know I I joke with my students the guy that wrote the Book of Revelation he had to be doing something it’s just such a weird a wacky bar on the one hand I could totally see he’s on an LSD trip on the other hand we know

so maybe I should jump back to a more concrete example the elosan Myst the one the the psychedelics argument is they they take these psychedelics and they have this experience but these are people that have marched over three days from Athens to ucus they’ve had to sa sacrifice a pulet on the way they’ve been deprived of sleep deprived of food they’ve been dancing in an ecstasy they’re putting in a small closed room full of smoke and shown revealed this

do they have a altered state of consciousness

[weasel-word spotting: “AN” altered state — but is it a CLASSIC altered state that’s transformative in the classic way? -mh]

yes yeah

do they need psychedelics to get that?

not necessarily

we know enough physiologically and psychologically that people could have these kinds of experiences without alcohol or or psych doesn’t mean they didn’t but but psychedelics aren’t the only experience and so

our problem with the books like the ones I mentioned is not that they’re saying psychedelics were there;

it’s [my problem with them is] just they’re saying it was only psychedelics

and that legitimates psychedelics

as opposed to saying there are other ways of explaining it

[“Hyperventilating can/ could/ might/ may produce the same effect as 10g of Cubensis” -mh]

so you know we have have to take those into account

Snake Handling “Can” Produce the Same Transformative Effect as 10g of Cubensis

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

The modern example would be snake handlers you know in the in the Deep South they don’t need any alcohol or drugs to do the crazy things they’re doing

with playing with things

The Alien Psychology Theory: Primitive People Have Ritual to Be in the Intense Non-Drug Psychedelic State

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

but they do need rituals that put them into an altered state of consciousness that allow them to do that so I don’t I I don’t think the I think the evidence is still being collected and explored and I think it’s absolutely the case as you said what these different psychedelics can do in terms of human experiences the

the question sort of as a historian is did they right not not do they do they absolutely but did they or are there other explanations or were they working together you know were some people doing those and part of that goes to the marginalized voices were the groups that were using psychedelics have they been locked out of the dominant narrative and so I have to be open to that too and so say where’s the evidence let’s see let’s uncover it let’s let’s let those voices go through and not just believe the dominant narrative yeah absolutely and and thank you for that thank you for being open to you know um differences in and perspectives you know oh yeah like like I say I mean U and we we’ve gone in print saying the same thing like our agenda is not to say no like to the whole people the people that want to um um legalize psychedelics I mean and in some ways quite supportive of that um and and you know being Canada you know um you know

we’ve had Marana [cannabis?] at least legalized for some time now and other things that could be done um but that’s that’s different than the his so let me let back we I don’t think we need the historical argument to do that but if we get a historical argument that’s based on flimsy evidence then it’ll make it easier for those who don’t want the legalization of drugs to tear down our argument right so so you don’t want to say oh the religion is grounded in psychedelics and then have it torn down from under you because it’s historically suspect realize my light is getting very bad here so a little bit the sun is moving

um Shin you

I hope to make that clear

it’s not like psychedelics are bad or didn’t do it

it’s just if you’re going to make a very important argument on the legalization of these substances, let’s make sure it’s grounded in the best possible evidence is there and get rid of the spous [spurious] ones because the spirous ones will kill us in court

yeah there there is a kind of and I I’ll speak very carefully because I don’t want to piss off two communities at once even though we just went against the [Taylor] swifties which I’m still scared I might cut out that part

but there there is this again there’s there’s always

Captain Condescension Calls Others Sanctimonious

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

when you’re talking about religion and when you’re talking about these belief systems there’s always a sense of condescension

right being

being incredibly sanctimonious with with arguments

and I feel like

with psychedelics there is kind of like

oh your religion doesn’t matter

like this

The same arguments with atheism happen with psychedelics, where as soon as we pinpoint that a religion or Religion capital R is predicated on psychedelics, it automatically has no meaning, or the meaning is lost, and I don’t like that.

It would be interesting if there was a history, like a very blatant history of psychedelics in these major religions, and so we could explore that

We could see exactly how Altered States Of Consciousness again change history

but it’s also like

is it

just again as you were saying

The legalization

like they need that precedent in order to legalize it now

and saying

oh

“We’ve existed with these things for thousands of of years; it doesn’t make sense to ban it now”

or is there something more of like

I want to make sure that you are wrong

I think it depends on who you’re talking to in the community

and

I think there’s a bit of both of that

and and this so

the conspiracy theory that comes up through the books like Ro particularly road to eleusis of how this is so radical that we’ve been ignored

That’s an easy default, and when you have a very small community or at least early on, it’s it’s nice to feel marginalized.

what we noticed in the literature is there’s they have a bit of a bind because, on the one hand, there there is this rhetoric of classicist so people that study the classical world or ancient history like me don’t take us seriously because they’re so afraid of these arguments and so we’re A persecuted minority

but then up just up until it didn’t go through but they looked like they were going to get FDA approval for stage four testing on on on um LSD with with PST um uh veterans then all of a sudden it was becoming mainstream and it’s it’s it’s hard to say nobody takes us seriously oh but the FDA is giving us approval

right you you’re in a bit of a bind and you can’t have it both ways and and there was a tension in the rhetoric of you know again these are two different groups but of saying you know scientists and religion people and um and ancient historians don’t take us seriously when they wanted to but then when they were taken seriously it it then all of a sudden there was a whole other level of evidentiary basis that they needed and and I think think that it’s come far enough now that they could they can they

transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity” continues below, after my comments in next sections

Entheogen Scholarship (Secret, Suppressed) is Consp Theory Type Thinking

[equivalent in the Egodeath theory:

Entheogen scholars need to spare us the social drama narrative and open your eyes to the plain evidence, sans your arbitrary added framing “thank you for yet more evidence of use of psychedelics in heretical Christianity groups“.

I’m quite interested in Ascough’s treatment of such social drama narrative. ]

The Egodeath Theory: We Must Move Ahead with Firm Commitment to the Psychedelic Mysteries Hypothesis

[Sharday Mosurinjohn keeps flip flopping on whether she agrees or disproves that.

Trying to play both sides and fence-sit, or put herself oppor’ly on both sides of the fence.

Sharday Mosurinjohn:

“I am firmly committed to debunking the fallacy of the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis. I have no quarter w/ those radical Pop Scholars. The engine of the Mystery Religions was definitely not psychedelics; it’s a myth that it was. I am superior to those pop writers.”

Also Sharday Mosurinjohn:

“We must remember, more, that even as we commit to investigating the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis, it is a hypothesis, not a fact. Look how reasonable, balanced, and nuanced I am. The engine of the Mystery Religions may possibly have been psychedelics; we’d need to collect more data to draw a conclusion.”

Unlike M&A, Greer is consistent in asserting the latter; he does not crow about “I have debunked the myth, and showed that there were no psychedelics in Mystery Religions.”

Ascough lists truths about that motivation, but I insist WE MUST MOVE AHEAD WITH FIRM COMMITMENT TO THE PSYCHEDELIC MYSTERIES HYPOTHESIS.

Ascough’s posturing and waffling and the motte-and-bailey fallacy:

THE PSYCHEDELIC MYSTERIES HYPOTHESIS HAS BEEN DEBUNKED BY THIS ARTICLE THAT GOT REJECTED BY ALL THE JOURNALS OF ALL TYPES

[Should we firmly commit to developing the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis, or should we now reject it because “THE PSYCHEDELIC MYSTERIES HYPOTHESIS HAS BEEN DEBUNKED BY THIS ARTICLE THAT GOT REJECTED BY ALL THE JOURNALS OF ALL TYPES”?

Greer aligns with me here, and Stang, probably some points Ascough makes.

There is some degree of agreement here among:

  • Stang
  • Greer
  • Michael Hoffman
  • Ascough with Sharday Mosurinjohn

I’m sure I’d want to spin it differently than them though.

keyboard shortcut

the book The Road to Eleusis, by Ruck, Hofmann, & Wasson, 1978
rte

-mh]

Transcript Con’t: Drop the Consp Theory

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

They can and probably should drop that conspiracy theory kind of rhetoric and go back and reexamine the evidence and say what can we hang on to and what can we get rid of the root to elus [the book The Road to Eleusis, by Ruck, Hofmann, & Wasson, 1978] the part of our concern is it’s coming up on its 50th Anniversary

it will be

every 10 years it’s re-released with a new introduction and inevitably the introduction says oh

“Everybody hates us because they don’t understand us and they’re wrong.”

and just drop that and and go through the evidence again and say what can we keep; what can we get rid of based on new science, new history, new ways of thinking, and build on those more solid foundations into something

right so it’s like

not throw the whole thing out, but say:

what are the possibilities

just

before as as we end off if I can put you on the spot

when we talked so much about evidence, what kinds of evidence would you be looking for when it comes to psychedelics in religion,

like what would be the smoking gun

oh that’s interesting

I don’t think

I mean I guess if

if we had a text that we uncovered that said explicitly we use these plants to to create this kind of experience

Talk About the Article “Psychedelics, Eleusis, and the Invention of Religious Experience”

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

hn’s talk about the article.

Crops by Michael Hoffman

I mean that’s that’s that’s the direct line kind of stuff we don’t have anything quite like that

we do have medical texts, a whole book of them that do mention Pharmaceuticals

the the pharmco the pharmacos [pharmakos?] which gets translated often as sorcerer in into English

but the the Greek word pharmacos is somebody that that deals with herbal medications

that

we know they knew about opium

that

we know they had the effects

but we it the med you know

some of the medical texts that get cited in psychedelic ler if , if you read them they say:

Use a little bit; if you use too much they die.

CLUE-LESS about Figurative Ego Death; Literalist

[I am not saying that this particular text means ego death; but Ascough shows ZILCH awareness of {death} ie awareness of eternalism; the eternalism state of consciousness – look at his OUTSIDER talking, “a great experience” – incomprehension of the richness of angel/demon experiencing; HE IS MANIFESTLY NOT QUALIFIED to interpret and read texts as an insider; ie, he is illiterate about mythic analogies, the Mytheme theory -mh]

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

But nowhere do they say in there:

If you use like the right amount, they’ll have a great experience.

it’s like little bit; healthy; a lot … and and so or so

that would be one something that sort of makes that direct line

another would be yeah more clearly

somebody Secrets leak so something out of elusive being found that does

actually we have some leaked texts some of them from Christians who are very derogatory

you don’t trust them at all but

something again that that says very explicitly that involved substances as well as these other experiences

there is one that gets cited in the book and in the literature

about

it’s from a satire and it’s about barley wrote being eaten and

the person is vilified for releasing the mystery

but he’s actually prosecuted because he’s a foreigner and not prosecuted for doing that.

Ancient Playwright Permitted to Reveal the Mysteries

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

but even more importantly, the playwright

If the characters in this satire have actually told what happened in the Mysteries, which you’re not allowed to do, and you could be prosecuted for it, the playwright should have been prosecuted for putting that into the play but he wasn’t.

So again that when he talks about the barley grows having this kind of effect, it’s probably not true; otherwise he would have been prosecuted

right so and no nobody

nobody saw oh look he mentioned this, this is a proof that the psychedelics were used in the Mysteries

Arguing Based on “Secrecy” Premise: A Mis-Emphasis that Trainwrecked Entheogen Scholarship

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

but you can’t have it kept a secret and not be prosecuted there

true so

that’s what I’d be looking for: something just very clear, and it would still not convince everyone, but something a little bit clear

it’s too

it’s too circumstantial and too much, like I say, going through the book [the book The Road to Eleusis, by Ruck, Hofmann, & Wasson, 1978], saying it might be the case that they were able to synthesize the ergot[sic], and then two pages later they say, “when the priest synthesized the ergot” — well you you didn’t prove that; you made it a hypothesis two pages earlier but now

[GTFO, this is stupid, he is misrep the nature of theory dev’mt. I don’t buy it. He’s making a big stink over “Ruck’s paradigm is circular”. WTF do you expect a new theorist to do, grovel and obscure their point, and block their every conjecture by saying “I’m probably wrong, but perhaps maybe… blah blah QUALITFY QUALIFY QUALIFY , Asc expects Ruck to POUND ON THE POINT OF “HYPOTHESIS MAYBE WHO KNOWS??” IN EVERY SINGLE SENTENCE.

Ascough Magically Moves from Possibility, to As-if Fact – EXACTLY as He Accuses Ruck of Doing

[Ascough makes much out of little, here, in this line of accusation — and Ascough himself is guilty of this very same shorthand;

Ascough very often talks as if Asc has proved that psychedelics were not the engine of the Mystery Religions.

  1. “We don’t know for certain at this time whether psychedelics were in Mystery Religions.” (possibility)
  2. “I have proved that psychedelics were not in Mystery Religions.” (fact)

Ascough himself does EXACTLY what he claims is a fatal method’y flaw by Ruck: Asc moves magically from a possibility (that Ruck is wrong), to as-if a fact (that Ruck is wrong).

M&A act like this is devastating, if Ruck ever says “The hierophant did X.”

We do not hold ppl to this standard on any topic other than this taboo topic, demanding that every statement be couched in “We really don’t know anything for certain, not even in Physics”.

To do Science per Ascough, every statement in every textbook must be timid and emphasize we know nothing about anything for absolutely certain; to attach the degree of confidence to every statement, as a mode of writing.

On topics other than psychedelics in Western religious history, we do not demand that every single sentence be couched in heavy qualifiers. This is ridiculous over-arg’n, trying to make a mountain of a molehill – and also, projecting, or, hypocrisy.

When Ruck moves from writing as possibility to writing as speculated fact, that’s bad, a method’l flaw.

When M&A move from writing as possibility (“we can’t conclude if, at this point, psychedelics in Mystery Religions”) to writing as speculated fact “We destroyed the myth that psychedelics were in Mystery Religions!“, that’s good, a victory of superior scholarship.

Self-promotional hypocrites.

-mh]

Possibility-to-fact magician Ascough con’t:

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

You’re saying they did it

and moving to the next hypothesis and so it’s hypothesis

but it’s you know turtles all the way down

but if if the bottom turtle is gonna reide

so again

Motte-and-Bailey Master of Posturing and Self-Promotion, Ascough; While Hypocritically Denigrating Entheogen Scholars for “Moving from Possibility to Fact”

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

it’s just like

let’s have a solid argument

and so this is what professor Sharday Mosurinjohn and I are pushing for.

it’s like not we don’t believe it [the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis]

[“BULLSH!T – THEN WHY DO YOU ANNOUNCE IN THE ABSTRACT OF THE ARTICLE, “WE HAVE DESTROYED THE MYTH OF THE FOOLISH ENTHEOGEN SCHOLARS!”

You should admit you keep shifting, the motte-and-bailey fallacy, your accusations and positions back and forth. -mh]

it’s like

let’s make sure it’s as solid as we can make

yeah absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

but also we need to make sure that we’re staying grounded, and not

you know

divulging to the same [todo – listen to vid]

it’s interesting that they want to be grounded, but they also say “I think or I believe I think and I believe actually”

My Students, Passion, Teaching Religion

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

going back to where I was with my students, it’s always fun yeah yeah absolutely

So speaking of your students and I guess my entire generation, I do want to ask someone like yourself

What advice do you have for them um it can be in terms of learning and education

it could be in terms of religion but we talked about you know the 20 second Tik Tok attention spans

and what we’re trying to do with this podcast as

someone like yourself who found passion and understanding and fun in a very dense and historical and um complex field

what advice would you give to Gen Z

in this way I think you’ve touched on the key word, passion

Follow Your Passion

Ascough Magically Shifts from Possibility to as-if Fact; from “We Don’t Know if Psychedelics Were in Mystery Religions”, to “We Proved Ruck is Wrong for Asserting Psychedelics Were in Mystery Religions”

[There is waffle room in the latter: do you mean [Ruck is wrong to say that we definitely know psychedelics were in mystery religions], or that [Ruck’s hypothesis is wrong]?

Ascough’s passion for hypocrisy, magically shifting from possibility to as-if fact, in his use of DIRTY RHETORIC:

“We don’t know for certain, if psychedelics in mystery religions“
— and then,
“We victoriously proved Ruck is wrong for asserting psychedelics in mystery religions“.

-mh]

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

because that’s when it gets hard

that’s what’s going to dis sustain it

so I mean I

I love what I do but there are times when I slog through some inscriptions, go oh my gosh this is killing me

you

I get the big dictionary out, trying to figure out what this grammar means,

that’s tedious but it has its reward in the end

but what push

what helps me push through is, I have a passion for it, I have a passion to know

so I would say you know

if you’re doing work on your own research on your own or in a school, do the things that drive you, that you want to know more about, that you want to learn more about, and don’t let it go

like keep

keep shaking it even when it gets hard, and then that’s where the passion part comes in

Ascough’s Motte-and-Bailey Self-Marketing Posturing

He Wants SO BAD to Say “Psychedelics in Mystery Religions Is an Easy Solution, Therefore, Wrong”

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

Don’t accept easy answers, and if they come easy [eg “simple explanation: psychedelics in mystery religions], they’re probably [YOU KNOW HE WANTS TO SAY “WRONG”!] … they probably need … that’s not that they’re wrong; they probably need to be re-examined.

[Mr. Super-Reasonable, here, after trumpeting “I DESTROYED RUCK’S CLAIM OF PSYCHEDELICS IN MYSTERY RELIGIONS!!”

This is nothing but posturing, self-marketing as “Look how skeptical I am! I’m better than those gullible Ruck & Muraresku amateur writers; buy my product!” -mh]

and yeah, don’t accept everything everyone tells you but don’t reject it outright think about it and and work your way through it yourself um and that’s hard to do we we like to be told what to do you know it’s it’s much easier if someone would just tell me to do but think more than ever right now with the way the world is sort of tilting to the right there’s a lot of people out there that want to so to the right I mean sort of not necessarily even politically but just kind of to a sort of a more right wrong black white kind of dichotomy there’s a lot of people out there that quite happy to tell us what to think and what to believe and make our life so much easier because we don’t have to think for ourselves and and I just go back to that great scene again dating myself

Life of Brian

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

In Monty Python’s Life of Brian where Brian is mistaken for the Messiah and this big crowd in front of him says

tell us Brian tell us what must we do

and he says just go away just go and think for yourself

and they kind of pause and look at us tell us Brian

tell tell us how must we think for ourselves

collectively you know it that’s easy the difficulty is you know it’s easy having someone tell you it’s it’s more difficult

and so yeah

we have the internet

we have ai now to help us

we can generate so much information

but don’t just take it at face value

push back on those topics that really drive you

yeah

a good question I like to ask myself and that I tell other people my age and even a bit younger and older is

how much of your thinking is predicated on the algorithms that you consume

yeah you know exactly that

that that gets them to stop and think

yeah

I was going to say

I didn’t know whether to go down there or not but appr propo of that you know re the internet absolutely we should use it

but remember that’s that’s not the only way of doing research or

just running a Google search is not research

you know people say I’ve researched this that because the algorithm will give you often things you already want to find

so try and get the ALG the other algorithms to give you the alternative and again it’s not that the alternative is is right and yours is wrong it’s just hear both voices

con’t below the next section(s)

Ascough Hasn’t Read the Best Entheogen Scholarship

[Ascough didn’t read the best entheogen publications – he cites my Plaincourault 2006, copyied the concl about sidelining Allegro, did he read it though? anyway my article is only negative, way-clearing, I really cared about

Not the best in POSITIVE entheogen scholarship:

The best in positive entheogen scholarship; Ascough is writing out of ignorance, until he’s read, eg:

]

Get Both Sides of the Research Story

  • [Affirmers of psychedelics in Western religious history publish lots of writing.
  • Deniers of psychedelics in Western religious history don’t write anything about that.

Wasson says art historians don’t think about mushrooms in art.;

Huggins says art historians don’t think about trees in art.

This is why, against Affirmers/mychologies,

Art historians are the authorities on mushroom-trees:

because art historians never think about or write about mushrooms or trees in art.

Art historians are expert on “related topics”

ie, they are not experts on mushroom-trees, and never gave any thought, or published anything, about mushrooms in art, or trees in art.

Thus, academic art historians are the authorities to consult, on mushroom-trees.

Ascough uses the same arg’n.]

Ascough con’t:

Opinion Column Format of Newspaper: Get Both Sides

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

I remember back in the you know because I’m a dinosaur newspapers used to have um you know the opinion piece where it be Pro and anti and you could read both of them beside each other

and the algorithms now will only give us the one that that it thinks we want and it’s okay to go and look for the other one to find the opposite and pay attention to it and get both sides

even if you end up I think if you end up not changing your opinion you’ll at least strengthen your position

yeah the confirmation bias and combined with the dun and Krueger effect is a powerful and terrifying combination

Justice, but Not Decrim of Psilocybin

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

[slight relev. psychedelic relig freedom:]

If you had a magic wand, and you could solve one problem in the world what would it be and why that’s difficult?

The obvious ones are me world peace and things like this.

If I could solve it all I would but really to to get people to having the conversations about Justice and actually acting on

Justice Transcends Politics and Religion

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

What I would want is Justice, human Justice, human rights for everybody

that transcend all the other things like nationalism and national politics, or religious rights or religious freedoms.

that Justice would always triumph over that

and to to you know have a world in which you know it’s it’s kind of like Plato’s philosopher king it’s not quite a dictator but it sort of sounds like one

but somebody that would do always do the right thing but for justice

and make sure that that that people are not being trampled

and that you know religion, governments, economics, these are not being used as tools for oppression

That’s a big wish I know but we evolve as human beings we we have more and more tools

we have AI it’s scary it’s thrilling you know it’s it’s it’s a mixed bag in terms of what the potential are for achieving some of these things.

… omitted off-topic …

Finding Richard Ascough Online

Continued transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”:

Where can we find you online?

Go to Queens University, uhca or queens you.ca

And Google my name.
https://www.google.com/search?q=richard+ascough

[Richard S. Ascough is Professor of Religion, Queen’s University in Kingston, Canada.
https://www.queensu.ca/customsearch?term=richard+ascough]

I show up I have a faculty profile there

I’m on Instagram

I’m on Facebook but really that’s just my friends, I just post pictures of my travels to make my friends jealous as we all do

as we all do

as we all do yeah

but thank you for the sof tune

it’s been wonderful lots of fun great talking to you

you know I got to to look at a few of your other podcasts beforehand when you invited me

/ end last 40% of vid, transcript

End of Video Transcript

End of transcript of the video “Psychedelics and the Birth of Christianity”.

Faculty Page: Richard S. Ascough

https://www.queensu.ca/religion/people/faculty/richard-s-ascough

Has his cv.

Ascough’s research focus:

  • Early Christianity and Greco-Roman religious culture.
  • The dynamics of religious interaction and community development in small religious associations in the Greco-Roman world.
  • Modern theories of Christian origins.
  • Religion in Greek and Roman antiquity.
  • The first two centuries of the development of Christianity.
  • Religion and film.
  • Religion and business ethics.

Article: John Allegro and the Psychedelic Mysteries Hypothesis (Ascough, 2025/08)

John Allegro and the Psychedelic Mysteries Hypothesis
Ascough, 2025/08
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/15/moving-past-mysticism-in-psychedelic-science-article-debate-series/#Psychedelic-Mysteries-Hypothesis

Cites my article:
Wasson and Allegro on the Tree of Knowledge as Amanita
Hoffman, 2006
http://egodeath.com/WassonEdenTree.htm

Why waste time on slop of off-cuff vid, when should read print article instead?

Because I happened to hear “WTF!” (ie juicy; stop-everything; must-capture timestamp and quote him) statements in the vid, nuances contradicting his OFFICIAL self-promotional narrative, and wanted to check transcript, and take 5 minutes (2 hours) to paste here to read it.

I have read his article 1-2 times; will look for this pattern of:

  • This article corrects the FALSE CLAIM of psychedelics in Western religious history. Buy my $cholarship. I correct the folly and errors of Pop, inferior entheogen scholars (ie, Muraresku train I’m riding, with Ruck footnoted underneath Muraresku).
  • I’m reasonable and balanced: There well may have been, not unlikely, some extent of psychedelics in antiquity.

Easy Mode scholarship by appearance, the appearance that I DESTROYED the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis.

Easy-Mode, Post-Muraresku-Train Scholarship by Appearance: Posturing and Giving the Appearance that I DESTROYED the Psychedelic Mysteries Hypothesis

His message is a copypaste of bottom of my article; compare quotes, same idea:

“Sideline Allegro, do not build on him, to move entheogen scholarship forward.

“Also (volume: Max): Only fools think there were psychedelics in Western religious history; this article [the one w/ Sharday] disproved that false myth.

“And, it’s too early to know if there were psychedelics in Western religious history. Follow my reasonable lead.”

Myth-busting psychedelics in ancient Greece: 5 Questions for religious studies professors Sharday Mosurinjohn and Richard Ascough (Hu, Sep. 2025)

Section of the Hu Blogpost, No Commentary

Myth-busting psychedelics in ancient Greece: 5 Questions for religious studies professors Sharday Mosurinjohn and Richard Ascough
“The professors discuss the scant evidence for the idea that the Eleusinian Mysteries used psychedelics, and why it persists anyway.”
Jane Hu, Sep. 15, 2025
https://themicrodose.substack.com/p/myth-busting-psychedelics-in-ancient
My page:
https://egodeaththeory.org/2026/01/20/psychedelics-eleusis-and-the-invention-of-religious-experience-mosurinjohn-2025/#Myth-busting-psychedelics-in-ancient-Greece

copypaste from Hu, emphasis added, sentence-per-para:

“You’ve already given us some sense of this, but what do scholars make of these claims?

Do they take them seriously?

Richard Ascough:

“Well, one of the critiques is that perhaps classists don’t take it seriously because we’re afraid of it.

The narrative is we’re afraid of it because it’s so radical.

And my response is, no, it has been considered, and it’s so wrong that we don’t need to keep repeating it!

I work on the Mystery religions, but psychedelics never show up in the academic literature about them.

[Reporter’s note: Mystery religions are secret religious groups or cults from Greco-Roman times.] 

It’s very rare and if it comes up at all, it’s something like,

“There is this fringe element that talks about psychedelics but they have no evidence.”

And yet, at these psychedelics conferences, it keeps coming up again and again.

There’s a disconnect between what has been said by biblical scholars and classists, and what’s being promoted within the psychedelics community.

That forced us, then, to dig deeper:

Where does this disconnect come from?

Why is there this disjuncture?”

/ end of Hu excerpt

It’s an asymmetry:

  • Affirmers publish/ write/ think/ talk about psychedelics in Western religious history.
  • Deniers don’t publish/ write/ think/ talk about psychedelics in Western religious history.

In what sense is this situation a “disconnect”?

Section of the Hu Blogpost, With Commentary

  • Citations needed. WHERE HAVE SCHOLARS WRITTEN skeptically about the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis? (or other variant point of dispute)
  • Which specific scholars? Name names.
  • WHICH SPECIFIC ARTICLES?
  • WHICH SPECIFIC BOOKS?
  • WHICH SPECIFIC TREATMENTS OR PHONE CALLS OR TELEGRAPH MESSAGES, ON WHAT DATE?

Same hazy bluff as academic fraud Wasson telling us to “consult” the art historians – (in 2006,) I’d love to, but you censored the single lone thing they ever wrote: (revealed in 2019:)

Tree Stylizations in Medieval Paintings
Brinckmann, 1906
86 pages. 5 mentions of ‘pilzbaum’; mushroom-trees.
https://egodeaththeory.org/2020/12/11/brinckmann-mushroom-trees-asymmetrical-branching/

“You’ve already given us some sense of this, but what do scholars make of these claims? Do they take them seriously?

“Richard Ascough: Well, one of the critiques is that perhaps classists[sic] don’t take it seriously because we’re afraid of it.

“The narrative is we’re afraid of it because it’s so radical.

[weasel word: “considered”. citation needed.

His word “repeated” implies repeating publications – but doesn’t say “publications”, b/c that would be a lie.]

Against the Wasson/ Panofsky/ Ascough BLUFF, classicists have given NO thought to psychedelics in Western religious history. No discussions, no “considered”, no telegrams, no phone conversations, nothing.

Against the Wasson/ Panofsky/ Ascough BLUFF, classicists have published NO articles or works on psychedelics in Western religious history.]

Ascough:

“Psychedelics in Mystery Religion Has Been Considered by Classicists, We Don’t Need to Keep Repeating That”

“considered” is a euph. for “not considered, and certainly not published”. Ascough tries to spin academics sticking head in sand, with a rebuttal and “need for communication” but Affirmer journal eg the Journal of Psychedelic Studies​ rejects Denier article, the specific article “and the Psychedelics, Eleusis, and the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis”

Even the title screams “look how obnoxious we are; king of the Deniers, it’s our brand”:

Psychedelics, Eleusis, and the Invention of Religious Experience

For years the article was rejected by eg the Journal of Psychedelic Studies​, and religious studies journals.

Also Ascough, in the next sentence:

“Psychedelics Are Never Mentioned in Academic Literature about Mystery Religions”

So what is there to repeat? Re-publish your (non-existent) articles.

It took zero effort to not write the article the first time.

What does “considered” mean? It means: We considered what happened to Allegro.

Here’s the f-d up dynamic that Allegro caused:

  1. Allegro, to harm Church, writes against Xy by misusing entheogens topic.
  2. Backlash against Allegro by academia.
  3. No other academics dare assert psychedelics in Western religious history.
  4. Academics take empty pot-shots, like Ascough, against those who assert psychedelics in Western religious history, but not in proper academic fashion by publishing.

Classicists or other academics “considered“, and don’t want to “keep repeating” their… repeating what? Their “consideration”. Totally vague!

All that the Deniers have is alleged conversations, never publications.

Ascough ought to say “We academics have published these specific rebuttals [providing citations], and we don’t need to keep PUBLISHING these articles.”

It’s the old familiar Wasson/ Panofsky bluff.

Wasson’s bluff, since Panofsky provided a citation and two art works to Wasson, which Wasson censored, in con-artist fashion.

“And my response[citation?] is, no, it has been considered, [yeah ok but was it published, when, where, by who?] and it’s so wrong that we don’t need to keep repeating it! [repeating what? which articles? citation needed]

“I work on the Mystery religions, but psychedelics never show up in the academic literature about them. [Reporter’s note: Mystery religions are secret religious groups or cults from Greco-Roman times.] 

“[re: psychedelics in Mystery Religions] It’s very rare [in classicists’ publications] and if it comes up at all, it’s something like, “There is this fringe element that talks about psychedelics but they have no evidence.”

[True or false? “Entheogen scholarship has no evidence of entheogens in Mystery Religions.”

If you don’t look at or cite the evidence publications, you are ignorant of the field.

Ascough just reveals his exclusive view; he doesn’t want to cite anyone or do scholarship.

Letcher, the naysayers, avoid engaging the published evidence.

Ascough limits the conversation to two books. Easy Mode scholarship. He treats them as a proxy. He only knows of:

  • Works by classicists that don’t mention psychedelics.
  • The Immortality Key by Brian Muraresku, 2020
  • Road Eleusis.

No other entheogen scholarship is cited.

ASCOUGH HAS READ ONLY ROAD to Eleusis & KEY, acts like that’s the only publications he has to read and cite.

He has read 2 books affirming, and has read no classicists publications because there aren’t any.

Why does he not cite the rebuttal books & articles, that he fears needlessly re-publishing?]

[weasel word: “said”. whatever. give us citations! and quotes in published works]

And yet, at these psychedelics conferences, it keeps coming up again and again. There’s a disconnect between what has been said by biblical scholars and classists [citations needed!], and what’s being promoted within the psychedelics community. That forced us, then, to dig deeper: Where does this disconnect come from? Why is there this disjuncture?”

  • Academics write nothing on the topic of psychedelics in Mystery Religions, or Western religious history.
  • Non-academics write on the topic of psychedelics.
  • Ascough false arg: “If Ruck and Muraresku had read the writings of academics, they would abandon their myth of psychedelics in Mystery Religions.” But, “Academics never write on psychedelics in Western religious history.”

What does Shar have in mind by “we need communication between the camps”. The only camp publishing is Affirmers (of “Did psychedelics have an important role in Western religious history?”)).

Affirmers publish on the topic of “Did psychedelics have an important role in Western religious history?”

Deniers don’t publish on the topic of “Did psychedelics have an important role in Western religious history?”

Ascough’s greatest fear is that scholars will have to again publish their articles and books that are negative about “Did psychedelics have an important role in Western religious history?” But he says they never published any; they have never written or even thought about this topic. Kettle logic.

We’ve already written tons disproving psychedelics in Western religious history. [no citations provided]

And, we’ve never written anything on the topic of psychedelics in Western religious history, because there is no evidence.

And, writers who publish positive articles and books [he thinks ONLY: RtE + The Immortality Key by Brian Muraresku, 2020] should be in communication with classicists, who never write anything on the topic.

Sharday can be taken in a true, constructive sense: entheogen scholars SHOULD be in communication with Classicists. That’s true. Who is at fault here?

Rotten Abstract of M&A Article: “Exposing Methodological FlawS; Namely, a Single Pattern of Turning Possibility into Fact

The Abstract Commits the Same Fallacy it Claims to Report

The Abstract Acts Like M&A’s Possibility (That There Were No Psychedelics in Mystery Religions) Is Fact

“Ruck says that the engine of the Mystery Religions was psychedelics.

We show that Ruck is wrong; the engine of the Mystery Religions was not psychedelics.”

An unwarranted conclusion, as if to turn the possibility of Ruck’s wrongness, into fact.

Academics don’t know if the engine of the Mystery Religions was psychedelics. Yet academics assert, as if fact, that the engine of the Mystery Religions was not psychedelics. And brag about having disproved Ruck’s psychedelic mysteries hypothesis.

REMINDER: NO ONE HAS DISPROVED RUCK’S PSYCHEDELIC MYSTERIES HYPOTHESIS.

NO ONE HAS DISPROVED RUCK’S PSYCHEDELIC MYSTERIES HYPOTHESIS.

the engine of the Mystery Religions was psychedelics
emrp

My “transcript of Sharday Mosurinjohn’s talk about the article” page:
Video: The Sweetest Taboo: Psychedelics and the Invention of Religious Experiences (Mosurinjohn, Sep. 2025)
Psychedelics, Eleusis, and the Invention of Religious Experience (Mosurinjohn & Ascough, 2025)

It is potentially reasonable to “turn a possibility into as if a fact”.

You must develop a hypothesis like the heliocentric theory, and build up a model with vigor.

Limp-wristed, feeble, “We don’t know anything, nothing is certain, who knows” gets you NOWHERE.

I tend to defend this alleged “turning possibility into as-if fact”. If M&A can do that in their article’s Abstract, so can everyone else.

The Motte-and-Bailey Fallacy in the Abstract of M&A’s “Invention of religious experience” Article; a Functional Self-Contradiction

M&A Turn the Possibility That the Psychedelic Mysteries Hypothesis Is Wrong, into the Fact that the Psychedelic Mysteries Hypothesis Is Wrong

M&A Turn the Possibility That Ruck Is Wrong, into the Fact that Ruck Is Wrong

“We point out, Ruck might be wrong in saying that the engine of the Mystery Religions was psychedelics.

That is, we point out, Ruck IS wrong in saying that the engine of the Mystery Religions was psychedelics. It is a myth, ie false, that the engine of the Mystery Religions was psychedelics.”

We must remember, the specific interactions Mosur had.

M&A are specifically pushing against The Immortality Key by Brian Muraresku, 2020 (enfolding Ruck’s RtE and all of Ruck’s work).

The article is too meta: it’s an article about the rejection of the article for publication.

The Abstract alone is so nasty, cock-sure, insulting, self-assured, that’s reason enough that the article got rejected by two kinds of journals, for “years”.

The Abstract is a motte-and-bailey fallacy: in fact it does same as a… “to accuse is to confess”.

  • We do not have evidence. We don’t know, we cannot conclude if psychedelics in Western religious history / if the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis is true.
  • Ruck is wrong to claim psychedelics in Western religious history.
    Ruck is wrong to assert that the engine of Mystery Religions was psychedelics. In fact, the engine of the Mystery Religions was no psychedelics.

M&A in the Abstract assert:

The Abstract presents possibility as if fact. It’s possible Ruck is wrong, in claiming that the engine of the Mystery Religions was psychedelics; we don’t know if that claim is true or false.

M&A in the Abstract also assert:

We correct Ruck’s false claim that the engine of the Mystery Religions was psychedelics; the fact is, the engine of the Mystery Religions was not psychedelics

When I read Andy Letcher’s book Shroom, 2006, I noticed the same tactic, the motte-and-bailey fallacy. He acts as if he is certain that no mushrooms in Western religious history.

“No evidence for X, means that you are false in asserting X.”

the motte-and-bailey fallacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy

the motte-and-bailey fallacy
mbf

Inflated Bragging About Methodology

Have Mos & Asc been studying Thomas Hatsis’ superior historiographical methodology?

Which means Hatsis spilling ink on that claim, while failing to deliver even basic, simple, elementary scholarship.

eg the Psychedelic Mystery Traditions page, “Been debunked; see my writings online”.

Making it worse, Hatsis deleted that site, breaking my wonderful, valuable Thomas Hatsis Gallery of Mushroom Imagery in Christian Art – the best thing Hatsis contributed to the field.

Mushroom-Tree & Hell-Mouth

Crop by Michael Hoffman
2nd attempt, crisper
“Canterbury-f109-mushroom-tree-hell-mouth.jpg” 515 KB 9:47 p.m. January 21, 2026
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f109.item.zoom

Canterbury folio image f109: lifted up in ossuary by Christ

Full Res Library:
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f109.item.zoom

My f109 Page:
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/25/f109-great-canterbury-psalter-hellmouth-net-ossuary-cloth-looking-out-from-temple/

Fullscreen of WordPress gallery image:
https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/canterbury-f109.jpg

See Also

https://cyberdisciple.wordpress.com/site-map/ –

  • Classicist.
  • Psychedelics in Western religious history.
  • The Egodeath theory.
    • Eternalism-driven control-transformation.
    • Analogical psychedelic eternalism with 2-level, dependent control.
    • The Mytheme theory.

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

Unknown's avatar

Author: egodeaththeory

http://egodeath.com

Leave a comment