Idea Development page 32

Cybermonk, started 8:41 p.m. January 23, 2026

fullscreen

Site Map – Previous page – Next page

Contents:

Incoming Ideas

sm inspiring research in Western religious history for all the wrong reasons; as a backlash against her

Sharday Mosurinjohn ~= shorthand for Mosurinjohn & Ascough

keyboard shortcut

Mosurinjohn
msr

i ❤️😍 Mosurinjohn – for inspiring me – for all the wrong reasons

key words:

  • opportunistic
  • self serving
  • parasite
  • invader
  • two-faced
  • self-contradicting
  • ingratiating 2 opposite camps, both hate her
  • shopped their POS article for YEARS (she cryingly tells us repeatedly IN the selfsame article. do ppl reject your article b/c they “dysfunctionally need to communicate w/ trash Pop entheogen scholarship”? Or, is it because your arricle is a parasitical POS try to elevatte yourself – underservingly! [ie what have u contributed, postiviely, substatively, other than self-elevating self-prromootionsal finger-wagging?] above the people who scholars who revolationary inovative pathbreakers [Muraresku is a bit of a question mark since he allegly abandoned entheogen scholarship] i medan mean evil M. Hoffman (a pathbreaker/seminal) & Ruck, Heinrich awesome Amanita 1995 book, who elise do u want to demonize, smear, & hit-job: demonize, a blanket demonization of Paul Lindgren and James Arthur who CREATED the damn field that you try to BOTH dismiss and deligitimize ENTIRELY, and yet, you ALSO want to preteend to be part of the club of entheogen scholars? two faced turncoat.
  • who next to do a hit job on, after you “DESTROYED Ruck and Muraresku!!”: next, a hit job on Samorini? Lindgren?! the fkking DISCOVERER and Pioneer of Great Canterbury Psalter !!
  • What have YOU discovered and seminal breakthrough innovative paradigm, Sharday Mosurinjohn / Mosurinjohn & Ascough?

keyboard shortcut

Ascough
asc

I Guide and Support and CORRECT the Bad , Parasitical behavior of Sharday Mosurinjohn – and I 100% Support Ruck

I 100% Support Ruck, and Take Corrective Guideance of wannabe opportunitistic parasitical invaders of the field, so newbies ADD TO the field instead of posturing as if tearing down the field to elevate themselves.

todo: (a first: a todo as a heading): new page, inviting Mosurinjohn to become a CONSTRUCTIVE critic of entheogen scholarship, not blanket smearing her elders WHO CREATED the field of Indig Shams Studies and Western Entheogen Studies

I don’t like addressing Mosurinjohn & Ascough as if they are a couple that’s fuzeed together. More powerful is to separately correct and chaasten stodgy Ascough , and separately Mosurinjohn — as i wrote, it’s really hard to accurately criticque two ppl at onece, in fact, THAT’S A MISTAKE Mosurinjohn & Ascough MAKE: LUMP TOGETHER QUESTIONABLE Muraresku (his commitment to entheogen scholarship is apparatenly null, he appears to have abaondaoned the field on bad terms, d/k why)

Error: Mosurinjohn & Ascough’s co-written article (rejected by all types of journals for years, she says), attempts to critique Ruck and Muraresku at the same time: doesn’t work; too imprecise

In a way, it “works”, to simul-critique Mosurinjohn & Ascough who say they have collab’d (ie, before they em

johnny come lately, before they 5 minutes ago discovered entheogen scholarship as a self-promptional prompotional self-aggreandizing opporunity to finger-wag and smear the whole field while simult posturing as if they are constructive contribrs in that very same field – have it both ways!

Mosurinjohn & Ascough saw off the branch that they started sitting on 5 min. ago. We demonize and entirely reject, blanket, entire field.
AND, we show u inferior ppl (Muraresku, Ruck, and Rogan all lumped together fgor for crit’m and hit-job dismissal in the same breath, by the same, CRUDE BLUNT-CLUB amatuer hack job critique — how its done: to contribute to the field of entheogen scholarship.

my point got lost in fulmination-layers insertions : (

  • Our self-marketing posture business plan:
  • Condemn and dismiss the entire field of entheogen scholarship.
  • AND
  • Follow our wise superior lead, in correctly doing entheogen scholarship. In the field that — in the previous sentence — we sweepingly, crudely, clumsily , aggressively, said the ENTIRE FIELD OF ENTHEOGEN SCHOLARSHIP IS ENTIRELY BUNK AND ILLEGIT.
  • “Don’t mis-hear me; it’s good you research in psychedelics in Western religious history.”
  • and: you idiots, i’m way better than u, psychedelics in Western religious history is a MYTH, BEEN DEBUNKED!
  • AND:
  • Pls let me in ur club, i’m legit contributor to your field you created, entheogen scholarship.
  • AND:
  • WE DESTROYED RUCK AND THE MYTH OF PSYCHEDELICS IN MYSTERY RELIGIONS!! 😵😵😵🔫👹😈 (Rogan = Ruck = Muraresku)

😵😵😵🔫👹😈 (Rogan = Ruck = Muraresku)

We Wiser, “Anything but Drugs” Academics DESTROYED the Foolish, Falsehood-Tellers Rogan/ Muraresku/ Ruck!! Follow Our Balanced, Measured, Reasonable Lead

Sharday Mosurinjohn frothing, wild, Mystery religion`. Mr`

Psychedelics, Eleusis, and the Invention of Religious Experience; Sharday Mosurinjohn & Richard Ascough (July 2025); journal: psychedelic medicine; https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/28314425251361835?journalCode=psymed; https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/08/08/psychedelics-eleusis-and-the-invention-of-religious-experience-mosurinjohn-ascough-2025/
ma25

Psychedelics, Eleusis, and the Invention of Religious Experience
peire

Missing Person Alert: Need Again Image of Angel Cooking Mystics in Fire

i think @Cyberdisciple re-found and re-sent the image, BUT, his tip pointed to a defunct url at Egodeath Yahoo Group.

I might be able to get the URL from his email, and find at Archive.

Re-found the “Rebis Holding a Y” Image, Happily

I have hope and faith of finding the image, because with Rick driving the computer, when I described the “rebis holding a Y” image that I was unable to find, his search immediately found it. Very grateful.

image search
image of angel cooking mystics in fire
angel cooking mystics in fire

picture angels correcting mystics

Question for AI

Can you please help me find again an old, probably pre-modern, image of an angel (or possibly a few angels, I can’t remember) cooking variously dressed mystics in flames or fire? It is a good image, but I can’t figure out how to find it again.

the resulting search url of that question

AI Answer:

“Based on your description, this sounds like an allegorical, alchemical, or early modern (16th–17th century) depiction rather than a standard biblical scene. 

Several possibilities match the “angel cooking” and “flames” imagery: 

  • Leonora Carrington’s The Chrysopeia of Mary the Jewess (or similar alchemical art): Carrington (a 20th-century surrealist working with older esoteric themes) created works depicting angels/figures cooking in ovens, often with alchemical transformations in fire.
  • Alchemical “Fire” Illustrations: In 17th-century alchemical emblem books (like Atalanta Fugiens), angels are sometimes depicted with fire or aiding in the “cooking” (distillation/sublimation) of elements within a furnace.
  • “The Four Elements: Fire” by Joachim Beuckelaer (c. 1570): While this is a kitchen scene, it is a 16th-century work that uses the “cooking/fire” metaphor intensely, often with mystical or spiritual subtexts in the background.
  • Allegory of the Soul/Martyrdom: Medieval or early modern engravings sometimes depict the Archangel Michael or other angels with purifying fire, often in a way that looks like cooking or refining, meant to symbolize the purgation of the soul. 

Given the “good image” description, it might be an alchemical engraving (like those by Michael Maier) or a surrealist take on an old painting. 

If it looks like an illustration/engraving: Search for “alchemical furnace angel.”

Keywords for searching: “Alchemical emblem angel fire,” “Leonora Carrington oven [NO],” “17th century angel distilling,” “Angels in fire art.”

If it looks like a painting: Try searching “Leonora Carrington” or “Hieronymus Bosch hell” (though that is more demon-heavy).

/ end of AI response

todo: email Mark Hoffman

email the evil M. Hoffman

Mark Hoffman posted a Q to me at Facebook?

in our private thread, did Mark ask me Q at Facebook?  that site is scary, too many ppl in my life.  Way too visible.  I wanted contact w them, got too much exposure.

Who Is Paul Lindgren?

Tell me everything about your 2001 conversation with the discover of mushroom imagery in Christian art in Great Canterbury Psalter, by Paul Lindgren.

Who is Paul Lindgren?

When did Great Canterbury Psalter go online?

Conjuring Eden: Art and the Entheogenic Vision of Paradise (Hoffman, Ruck & Staples, Entheos 1, 2001), https://entheomedia.net/Issue%20one.htm, https://egodeaththeory.org/2020/12/24/entheos-issues-1-4-mark-hoffman/#Entheos-Issue-1 

  • body of article
  • large endnotes
  • online gallery

Huge major article.

Is “Conjuring Eden” article available to scholars?  

Can someone buy issue 1 of Entheos, 2001?

Scholars are ignorant, b/c must read this article, that enfolds Samorini 1997 & 1998 key articles, 

= 2nd-generation entheogen scholarship (the Explicit Psilocybin paradigm) 

______________________________

Meet at Spring Mysteries panel?  April 2026

Are we meeting at Washington state in April to do a panel at Spring Mysteries / Eleusinian mysteries?  

was supposed to meet last year but Ruck backed out last year to scope out this “witch cosplay”

(guy has Yeti mic at mshrm lab – @ max)

Church elder Eric says to ignore Rick’s negativity, says Spring Mysteries is great and I should invest in going.

dammit sites are down left & right – is it just my computer?

403 forbidden wtf hell – https://www.springmysteries.com  try http://www.springmysteries.com

i spend more time at Archive …  < cuss emoji >   https://www.google.com/search?q=spring+mysteries+festival&nbsp;  

Entheogenics: Psychedelic Experiences as Revelatory Events in the History of Western Esotericism (Mosurinjohn)

Her book title doesn’t sound very “DESTROYED RUCK’S MYTH”

her two incompatible postitions she waffles:

  • DEFINITELY no psychedelics in mystery religions; Ruck BEEN DESTROYED, its a ITS A MYTH!!! I AM SUPERIOR SKEPTIC, PUBLISH MY ARTICLE PLEEEEEEEEESE!
    Grovel pander ingratiate to “anything but drugs” academics.
  • we just don’t know anything at all boo hoo no evidence who knows can’t draw any conclusion about anything ever < double cry emoji > – MAN UP, SHARDAY!

Timid Ascough copies my 2006 article Plaincourault: that way he can avoid making any assertions, except “sideline Allegro”.

But my article contributes nothing substantive to the field.

I was forced to write it, just to clear the damn OBSTACLE of Allegro out of the damn way so that we can do, after that, substantive positive contrib to field of entheogen scholarship.

Destrroyed ruck’s myth that psychedelics has a key role in Western religious history

yet

there were psychedelics in Western Esotericism

PICK A F*CKING SIDE SHARDAY FLIP FLOP – like Greer. ITS NOT THAT HARD SHARDAY.

she would choke on ‘key’
why?
b/c like Hatsis is fixated on Allegro, Sharday Mosurinjohn is fixated on Muraresku, see focuses on the way the pop audience turns Muraresku, supported by Ruck, in the most extreme way possible.

Muraresku’s book wishes to prove that … i need to read the damn thing.

Muraresku’s book wishes that it could prove its hypoth: psychedelics were KEY , “key”, to mystery religions. As I say:

A typical religion had this traj:

  1. Psychedelics are used, a religion starts because of using psychedelics. not institutional yet.
  2. Institutional religion is built on psychedelics.
  3. The institutional religion denies and suppresses psychedelics.

invnetory of count of image types in Eadwine

from idea development page 31, get outline of types of images todo
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/08/21/idea-development-page-31/#classes-of-images-in-great-canterbury-psalter

  1. Full-page images by Eadwine. Qty: __
  2. 1/3-page images by Eadwine. Qty: __
  3. Images painted by spain regardless wehether drawn by eadwine or spain.
  4. Images drawn by Eadwine and painted in Spain. todo: assign likelihood %, guessing which images were drawn by Eadwine. It would be interesting to afterwards compare my list, vs. the scholars’ list of such – if such a list exists. How do scholars know that some images were drawn by Eadwine and painted by Spain?
  5. Images drawn and painted in Spain. Qty: __

Which Eadwine Image next?

problem/need: I want to add f107 to the church article:
Recognizing Mushroom Imagery in Medieval Art –

  • Page 1 & 2: text
  • Page 3: 11 top (creation)
  • Page 3: 11 bot (eden)
  • Page 4: 109
  • Page 4: 134
  • Page 5: 145
  • Page 5: 177
  • Page 6: 107
  • Page 6: __?

Which images get paired on a side of a sheet of paper, depends which images, if keep in num order.

My gallery of all images no text — does it include all of the Spain images? seems yes. 17 Spain-painted images, some obviously look as if sketched by Eadwine but implemented with zilch compreheension of {mushrooms}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs, so, falls entirely flat.

Eadwine’s images are worthy of a king. Spain, not. even the images that were drawn/ sketched by Eadwine, were painted by Spain w/o inspiration.

My main gallery for Great Canterbury Psalter now shows all the images that were painted in Spain, not only the images that were drawn and painted in Canterbury.

Poor average Spain artists can’t keep up with brilliant themes, technique, and style of Eadwine.

Compound Png combining dog-asp, asp, and {hand mushroom-tree}

wish to get close together the dog-asp, asp, and {hand mushroom-tree}.

how about another first: multi-pic analysis in a single list:

  • {mushroom} motifs in the 3 pics: asp’s mushroom-tree; {hand mushroom-tree}
  • {branching}: IY asp mushroom-tree, non-branching asp tail, cut branches in {hand mushroom-tree}, visually cut “, non-branching thumb, IY hand
  • {handedness}: magician stand on right foot; asp L foot on branching part of tree [
  • {stability}

1:46 a.m. Jan. 25, 2026: the ultra-clear asp diagram, proves that dancing man reading of salamander: it DOES matter which part of the mushroom-tree the salamander touches w/ which limb.

Does it matter which part of the mushroom-tree is touched by which part of the sasp asp? YES! that’s THE WHOLE POINT!

Does R foot touch the branching part of the mushroom-tree? NO!! That’s the whole point of the image diagram! the entire message is,

R foot does not touch branching part of tree

R foot touches a non-branching… the TREE IS THERE SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF MESSAGES ABOUT BRANCHING VS NON BRANCHING

IN THE MEDIEVAL ART GENRE OF {MUSHROOM-TREES}, DONT GIVE A SH!T ABOUT THE SUROUNDING TEXT!

THE GENRE EXISTS UNTO ITSELF! the art genre exists on its own with no text, and then the text people bring in, import those structures-of-concern

ie the network of main cares: {mushrooms}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs – that network of high concerns, is then brought into texts, brining ITS OWN UNIVERSE OF TOP CONCERNS WITH IT.

“I wrote a random psalm and a Christian moral bestiary book. Pls add pictures.”

“ok, here’s some of our {mushrooms}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs pictures, to put with your into your text. We’ll send an artist straightaway to decorate your text – we’ll send one who’s trained in the best art technology: highly inventive and innovaive in variants of {mushrooms}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs! We’ll elevate your text by our Classic

Static Rigid Hand Shapes and Blessing Signs w/ Fingers? No, the Exact Opposite! You’re Expected to Come up with Clever Variants of the Classic Motif Areas, Variations on these 4 Themes: {mushrooms}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs

What is consistent: {mushrooms}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs. But the direction of impln is open, expansive variants.

An element of constancy, but imp… the picture a truee:

Picture a tree:

At the bottom of the tree is a shared, common, bounded, unchanging trunk, which is the common set, {mushrooms}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs, that constitutes the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}.

Move up the tree, it branches out into variants on that set of themes.

New unique ways to depict the unchanging 4 themes; medieval artists loved UNIQUE, Clever ways of implementing their fav 4 themes, {mushrooms}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs.

the {IY} hand

the {IY} hand shape

“shape” redunant like saying “a snake-shaped, non-branching snake”

saying “IY” is redun w/ saying “shape”

White Boxes on Pairs of Hands-Including Both Hands of the {hand mushroom-tree}, This Time!

Crop by Michael Hoffman
“Canterbury-f107-white-boxes-hands.jpg” 761 KB 10:40 p.m. Jan. 24, 2026
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f107.item.zoom
fullscreen / f107 crops

todo: Patch again: draw white boxes on wings.

I have been noticing the 4-trunks problem since like 2021, a long time, figured out today/yesterday: = 4 fingers. via the technique of white boxes on pairs of hands.

Almost immed after drew white boxes on pair s of hands, figured 4-trunks. So, was a success strategy / investment. but had to go back and patch 4 trunks to include in white box – important, in this game; doing so is important for the purpose / Goal of understanding Eadwine’s meaning.

The teacher/ quiz-poser is very concerned that I figure out {4-trunks}. a couple days ago, a difficult hypothesis to judge: “COULD IT BE – CRAZY TO THINK, BUT — COULD FINGERS FOLDED TIPS HIDDEN, BE MEANINGFUL?”

BEST Best answer: EVERYTHING IS MEANINGFUL! As long as you’re gonna paint, paint something worthile: a puzzle in the genre of {mushrooms}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs.

sim idea: FOOD AND DRING *ALWAYS* MEANS PSHIL PSILOCYBIN , IN MYTH & MYTHIC ART. What the hell would REGULAR non-psychedelic food be doing in MythLand? Get it right, what genre.

WE ARE NOT IN MUNDANE EATING SCENE. in justin sledge ESOTERICA land, merkavah mysticism series of videos, “the mystics are so plain, they only eat bread, they have to make it themselves, specially”. why the f would we talk about bread, unless it is MAGICAL BREAD? GET THE GENRE RIGHT! Everything in myth and mythic art means psilocybin (thus also means experiencing eternalism, from psilocybin)

The Magical, Must-Bake-It-Yourself Bread of Dr. Justin Sledge of ESOTERICA YouTube Channel

Sledge assures us, “There are no psychedelics in Merkavah mysticism. Just nothing but bread.”

Psilocybin doesn’t break down at 425 degrees.

The mystic descender to chariot throne palaces nested guy must not have the wife bake

This is special bread “b/c she is unclean” – fake cover-story.

It’s b/c it is high dose psilocybin bread he’s baking, not for wife & fam.

Everything in myth and mythic art means psilocybin (thus also means experiencing eternalism, from psilocybin)

My strategy was sucessful, yesterday into today; Jan 23-24, 2026:

  1. Drew white boxes on pairs of hands. d/k 4 trunks lower right, got omitted. didn’t know what to do w/ 4 trunks, didn’t think of them as visually cut fingers yet. Uploaded the png.
  2. Quickly figured out 4 trunks = 4 fingers folded guy. Cross-cropped, cross-decoded the {hand mushroom-tree} in 107 & 109, drawing lines on 109’s connecting fingers to tree cap stems.
  3. Created crops of guy + tree, ended up w/ 3: 1) shades of green & pink boxes. 2) simpler, white boxes w/ white lines connecting – later, next day ie jan 24 2026, today, realized: ultra blurry (bad process of capture&crop/trim). 3) crisp capture this time, draw very simple 4 white boxes.
  4. Returned to look at the 1st pass entire image white boxes, realized and judged, I MUST fix the pass 1 entire image. done.
  5. Figured out scepter cross Jess Christ holds, has thumb & 4 fingers, L & R. That was made possible by my successful straettgey of taking the time to initially draw white boxes around “all” pairs of hands.
  6. Why not wings? partly just time. SHOULD I PATCH PIC AGAIN TO DRAW ON WINGS? YES
  7. Patched the image to include BOTTOM of {hand mushroom-tree} not just the top hand, but its companion bottom hand too; extended lower right white box to entire {hand mushroom-tree}.
  8. Judged that this is one of the hardest things in the image, and, that the orig v1 of this image … therefore MUST be corrected. pretty much in line w/ my orig straegtegy; never intended to catch everything; v1 pass The first pass was to flush out exactly this sort of hard problem, what to do w/ the 4 trunks.

todo: organize my f107 crops page, create more crops.

Expanded Page: Minkowski’s Block Universe: Spacetime: Minkowski’s Papers on Spacetime Physics (Petkov, 2021)

absolute four-dimensional spacetime​

done: create a page [rather, expand the existing page] on Petkov book.

Minkowski’s Block Universe: Spacetime: Minkowski’s Papers on Spacetime Physics (Petkov, 2021)
https://egodeaththeory.org/2020/11/05/minkowskis-block-universe-computational-framework/

Created Josie Kins Effect Index backup page of Perception of eternalism

done: create page on Josie Kins Effect Index “Perception of eternalism” page; a copy. see below.

“Donnie Darko” “The Philosophy of Time Travel” (book written for in the movie)

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Donnie+Darko%22+%22The+Philosophy+of+Time+Travel%22

What’s the book about time, in the movie Donnie Darko?

https://www.google.com/search?q=What%27s+the+book+about+time%2C+in+the+movie+Donnie+Darko%3F&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS780US780&oq=What%27s+the+book+about+time%2C+in+the+movie+Donnie+Darko%3F&aqs=chrome..69i57j33i160l5j33i299l2.17031j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

AI’s answer:

“In Donnie Darko, the book about time is titled The Philosophy of Time Travel, written by the character Roberta Sparrow (also known as “Grandma Death”).

“It is a fictional text that serves as a guide for the movie’s events, explaining the mechanics of the Tangent Universe, the dangers of unstable time, and the roles of the “Living Receiver” (Donnie) and the “Manipulated”. 

“Key details about the book’s content include:

  • The Tangent Universe: The book explains that when the Fourth Dimension is corrupted, a “Tangent Universe” is created. It is unstable and will destroy the Primary Universe if it collapses.
  • The Artifact: When a Tangent Universe occurs, an object from the real world—the “Artifact”—appears in the new, unstable one (in the movie, this is the jet engine).
  • The Living Receiver: Donnie is described as the “Living Receiver,” who is chosen to guide the Artifact back into the Primary Universe to stop the collapse.
  • Water and Metal: The book explains that water and metal are key elements for constructing time portals.
  • Purpose: The book provides the rules for the world the characters inhabit, helping to explain the strange, apocalyptic events, such as the falling jet engine.

“The book was written for the film by director Richard Kelly to explain the plot and was included on the official DVD.”

/ end of ai ans.

Phrases from Block-universe eternalism slides to add to church reader article

todo: add ‘block’ to the article

slides:
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/12/02/images-upload/#block-universe-eternalism-slide-1-by-church-leader

Wording per the church leader’s slide deck slides:

The “What’s Right” Slide

“the Block Universe Theory”

“There is no free will in the Block Universe”

“The Block Universe Theory (Eternalism)”

“A philosophical concept supported by physics, especially Einstein’s theory of relativity, which suggests that the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously and are equally real, forming a four-dimensional “block” of spacetime.”

The “Train” Slide

“There’s no higher “absolute time”

The “Block Universe” Slide

Crop of slide:
https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/img_8754.jpg

“The Block Universe Connection”

“picture the universe as a giant block of spacetime — past, present, and future all existing together, like pages in a book.”

“We don’t write the book as we go. The whole book is already there — we just experience it one page at a time.”

Copy of Slides wording to boil down, to extract key words for church article

“the Block Universe Theory”

“There is no free will in the Block Universe”

“The Block Universe Theory (Eternalism)”

the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously and are equally real, forming a four-dimensional “block” of spacetime.

“There’s no higher “absolute time”

absolute four-dimensional spacetime​ [countering slides]

The Block Universe Connection

“picture the universe as a giant block of spacetime — past, present, and future all existing together, like pages in a book.”

“We don’t write the book as we go. The whole book is already there — we just experience it one page at a time.”

Petkov’s Book: Minkowski Profoundly Comprehends Absolute Four-Dimensional Spacetime​, Einstein Doesn’t

Photo: Michael Hoffman

[vs Petkov’s word-choice, “absolute four-dimensional spacetime​” – in 1987/88 i had a problem with how relativity is taught couched in Einstein’s reasoning – Petkov shows that Minkowski had better understanding than Einstein, I like Petkov not Ein’s view

Petkov / Minkowski: “absolute four-dimensional spacetime“; book pages photos are in WordPress gallery – or only mobile device? – and maybe visible some idea development page here. Petkov would recoil at some statements in the slide deck.]

Panofsky & Huggins Perceive {branching} in Mushroom-Trees, but Fail to Perceive {non-branching}

Was this point omitted from the emails? i swear i wrote it: maybe in the “lost” (& restored) Email 1 to Entheogen Scholarship Journal Editor and Author.

Panofsky and Huggins both make their main argument (their main support for denying mushroom imagery in Christian art) the presence of branching/ branches.

But both Panofsky and Huggins fail to perceive the {non-branching} motif, or the {branching vs. non-branching} motif.

Email 4 to Entheogen Scholarship Journal Editor and Author

That is true, I have the most solid of content for articles ready.

My theory of mental transformation driven by psychedelics is very mature, 

and my model of analogies (in myth and in mythic art) for psychedelic mental transformation is very mature.

With my concise Aug. 2025 article for Sacred Garden Community Church Reader, my model, and my manner of explaining that model, reached great maturity:

Emailing you, Brown, Cyberdisciple, and Max Freakout has been helpful, to speak plainly on complex, advanced points.

Emailing with Travis Kitchens has been helpful, re: journalistic reporting on both psychedelic (pseudo) science (eg. the major conflicts of interest exposed in the Hopkins “religious leaders study”) and entheogen scholarship.

Sharday Mosurinjohn and Richard Ascough for whatever reasons (flip-flopping between two inconsistent positions) had a hard time for years trying to submit their article Psychedelics, Eleusis, and the Invention of Religious Experience to both psychedelics journals and religious studies journals.

If only I knew a Classics expert to help outline professionally a classics journal article, who is an expert at my particular theory of psychedelic transformation, along with myth themes as analogies for that transformation of personal agency:
https://cyberdisciple.wordpress.com/site-map/
(per previous emails from him to me, providing a professional outline structure.)

I am accustomed to thinking of writing an article for the Journal of Psychedelic Studies​, not a Classics journal.

— Michael Hoffman 

Email 3 to Entheogen Scholarship Journal Editor and Author

An error in the Journal of Psychedelic Studies (Browns 2019)​, and an important, missing connector point that I intended:

Huggins 2024 carries forward the extremely important “branching” argument from Panofsky‘s entirely censored-by-Wasson, 2nd letter (available to scholars in 2019 by Brown):

Panofsky 1952 puts forth, as his ultimate basis for denying mushroom imagery in Christian art:

* But mushroom-trees have branches, therefore, cannot mean mushrooms, and must mean trees; I cannot accept mushroom-trees as meaning mushrooms (unless someone explains the branches).

https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/01/07/panofskys-letters-to-wasson-transcribed/#Sentence-2-6

“But even that [that “some especially ignorant craftsman may have misu[n]derstood the finished product*, viz., the “Pilzbaum,” as a real mushroom.”] is not very probable

because even the most mushroom-like specimens [of the hundreds of mushroom-trees in Christian art] show some traces of ramification [branching]; 

if the [Plaincourault fresco] artists had labored under the delusion that the model [prototype] before him was meant to be a mushroom rather than a schematized tree

he would have omitted the branches altogether.”

Here’s where I jokingly — the highest of humor — show pictures of cutting branches, a major motif in the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}.

eg the image contributed by the Journal of Psychedelic Studies​ – Brown 2019, St. Martin

Saint Martin Frescos🌴🔪🍄🖼🔍🔬🧐

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/#Draping-Walls-Right-Foot-on-Gate

(emojis in url)

Direct link to the PNG that I derived from Julie Brown:

Photo Credit: Julie M. Brown; crop and image enhancement by Michael Hoffman.

showing a youth cutting off a branch, with the {Left vs. Right}, {handedness} motif.

Compare Panofsky’s “he would have omitted the branches altogether”.

Except that the very message of the “mushroom-tree” genre, ie the “branching-message mushroom tree” art genre, is regarding branching!

Psilocybin changes the experiential mode from [branching-thinking;​ possibilism-thinking] to [non-branching thinking; eternalism-thinking].

Browns 2019 Error in the Journal of Psychedelic Studies​

Browns mistranscribed Panofsky’s letter as “project”, ie the fresco at Plaincourault.

But actually Panofsky wrote “product”, ie alleged “prototype” template artists supposedly worked from like human photocopy machines with zero intentionality — but only when it comes to the “hot” topic of mushroom imagery in Christian art.

This seemingly minor error messed me up while analyzing Panofsky’s argumentation in a podcast – it changes the meaning from “the prototype given to the artist” to “the finished fresco”.

Embarrassed, I had to retract, revised, re-publish a correct analysis based on accurate reading of the letter itself instead of the mis-transcription in the Journal of Psychedelic Studies​.

Comprehending Panofsky’s arguments in the condensed, rough letters was difficult; this error made it harder and Panofsky’s argumentation (in his 2nd, completely censored-by-Wasson letter) even more baffling to follow.

Now by 2026, since Browns 2019 revealed the Panofsky letters 7 years ago, and I provided an extreme, sentence-by-sentence webpage for reference, I fully follow Panofsky’s arguments.

I now follow not only Panofsky’s explicitly stated arguments to Wasson, but even Panofsky’s silent presuppositions that accompany the argument:

“There are hundreds of mushroom-trees, therefore this fresco cannot mean mushrooms.”

  1. There are hundreds of mushroom-trees in Christian art.
  2. The mycologists in 1952 (ie Affirmers of mushroom imagery in Christian art) are unaware that there are hundreds of mushroom-trees in Christian art.
  3. If the mycologists/affirmers of mushroom imagery in Christian art had been informed and aware that there are hundreds of mushroom-trees in Christian art, they certainly would not have asserted that Plaincourault fresco means mushrooms.
  4. Therefore the Plaincourault fresco cannot mean mushrooms.

But the reaction of Giorgio Samorini and me, upon reading in SOMA (1968) that there are hundred of mushroom-trees in Christian art, is: ALL OF THE HUNDREDS OF MUSHROOM-TREES mean psilocybin mushrooms or Amanita. Not “Oops my mistake, I thought Plaincourault fresco was the world’s only instance of mushroom-tree in Christian art. Since I learned there are hundreds of mushroom-trees, I cannot possibly maintain that Plaincourault fresco means mushrooms, because that would imply an impossibility: that Christian art contains hundreds of psychedelic mushrooms.” That’s how Panofsky ASSUMES (because of his presuppositions/bias/ prejudice) we mycologists/ affirmers would react.

References:

The mushroom-tree of Plaincourault (Giorgio Samorini, 1997) https://www.samorini.it/doc1/sam/sam%20plaincourault.pdf

“Mushroom-Trees” in Christian Art (Giorgio Samorini, 1998) https://www.samorini.it/doc1/sam/sam-alberifungo-1998.pdf & https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/mushroom-trees-in-christian-art-samorini/

Conjuring Eden: Art and the Entheogenic Vision of Paradise (Hoffman, Ruck & Staples, Entheos 1, 2001), https://entheomedia.net/Issue%20one.htm, https://egodeaththeory.org/2020/12/24/entheos-issues-1-4-mark-hoffman/#Entheos-Issue-1

There are hundreds of mushroom-trees in Christian art, therefore the Plaincourault fresco cannot mean mushrooms

“There are hundreds of mushroom-trees in Christian art. Therefore the Plaincourault fresco cannot mean mushrooms.”

What kind of logic is that?! DOES NOT FOLLOW.

— until you include the silent presuppositions/ prejudice/ bias, that Christian art cannot (“of course, obviously!“) contain hundreds of mushroom imagery in Christian art; hundreds of mushroom-trees that intend psilocybin mushrooms or Amanita mushrooms.

Panofsky makes that (“mushroom-trees have branches/ branching, therefore cannot mean mushrooms”) as his ultimate argument, and so does Huggins 2024.

But by 2024, I had already fully explained the central importance of not only branches, but {branching vs. non branching}, in the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}.

The {branching vs. non branching} contrast is the main message of the genre, standing for possibilism vs. eternalism, and the personal-control ramifications.

Psychedelics produce the eternalism state of consciousness (against psychedelic pseudo science; not “the (Positive) Unitive state of consciousness; not “the Unitive state of consciousness “as everyone, eg. Jeffrey Breau 2023, mischaracterizes it re: the central dynamics/experience.

eternalism = non-branching of possibilities = analogical psychedelic eternalism with 2-level, dependent control.

possibilism = branching possibilities = literalist ordinary-state possibilism with monolithic, autonomous control.

A YI tree — or thumb vs. fingers, in the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees} — contrasts possibilism vs. eternalism.

You don’t “get rid of” possibilism-thinking; you add eternalism-thinking to it; you end up with 2 points of view.

The “Perception of eternalism” article in Josie Kins’ Effect Index

See Josie Kins’ (mediocre, semi-comprehending) Effects Database entry on “eternalism”, showing that I’m not the only one focused on this effect of psychedelics.

https://www.effectindex.com/effects/perception-of-eternalism

That site is down yet again.

Here are copies of the “Perception of eternalism” article at Josie Kins’ Effect Index ( https://www.google.com/search?q=Josie+Kins+Effect+Index ):

https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/02/18/3-phase-transcendent-possibilism-2-phase-eternalism/#Perception-of-Eternalism

https://web.archive.org/web/20260115121759/https://www.effectindex.com/effects/perception-of-eternalism

— Michael Hoffman 

/ end of Email 3 to Entheogen Scholarship Journal Editor and Author

Email 2 to Entheogen Scholarship Journal Editor and Author

Sent 12:58 p.m. Noon, Jan. 24, 2026:

That a certain “disproved Ruck” article that got rejected by this journal cropped up elsewhere, sounds like the possibly fallback, 3rd-rate (d/k), journal that FINALLY accepted the Mosurinjohn & Ascough article, the journal psychedelic medicine.

I felt pretty sure that Sharday Mosurinjohn was referring to the Journal of Psychedelic Studies, in her live 10-minute talk video, or in her interview with Hu / blogpost.

She said and wrote that for YEARS, Mosurinjohn & Ascough submitted their “Invention” article to psychedelics journals, and FINALLY it was accepted by the psychedelic medicine journal.

One of her (sometimes inconsistent & self-contradictory, tightrope-walking) messages is: and it’s somewhat vague: 

Academic journals and pop entheogen writings need to start communicating with each other. 

I assume she means, pop entheogen writings (ie Ruck, or Muraresku) need to shut up and listen to the academic naysayer authority journals (1-way “communication”).

I feel like every statement I make about Mosurinjohn & Ascough’s position or message, I need to provide 10 exact quotes showing how they prevaricate, waffle, and sit on both sides of the fence.

Mosurinjohn & Ascough then get booted by both parties: “anything but drugs” academics, and “pop” entheogen scholars (they repeatedly list Muraresku, Ruck, & Joe Rogan).

Sharday Mosurinjohn seems to really be struggling against both camps, beaten-down, trying to have it both ways and appease both camps, alternatingly.

It’s a tough balance, or flip-flop, tightrope she’s trying to walk, in this contested (& ignored, suppressed) topic of scholarship.

One of the most glaring contradictions by Ascough, in a video interview, is:

  • We academic scholars have written rebuttals proving that Ruck is wrong, and we don’t want to keep repeating publishing (he says “have considered”, vaguely – what’s that mean, exactly?) of these ample disproofs of Ruck and disproofs of the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis.
  • Academic publications practically NEVER have written anything on the topic of the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis.

Citations needed! 

Exactly as I wrote in 2006 re: Wasson SOMA p. 180, Wasson’s censored passage from (one of the!) Panofsky 1952 letters: I said:

More than anything in the world, I WANT to “consult” the art authorities, but you refuse to give me any citations! 

SURELY I guarantee that Panofsky MUST have given Wasson citations, to make such an aggressive claim, “we experts know all about mushroom-trees, totally routine, we’ve “covered” that.” 

Me, in 2006: Citation needed PLEASE!  

In 2019, the Journal of Psychedelic Studies – Browns to the rescue, PROVED my 2006 accusation that Wasson was withholding citations, probably super-weak citations.

In my book-length, 64-page article in 2006, about Plaincourault, which Ascough cites in article “John Allegro and the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis”, 

Wasson and Allegro on the Tree of Knowledge as Amanita (Hoffman, 2006), http://egodeath.com/WassonEdenTree.htm&nbsp;

. . . . I got fooled by the . . . . ellipses on p. 180 of SOMA, where the academic, obstructionist fraud Gordon . . . .🔍🧐🤔 Wasson (an academic fraud regarding his cover-up of mushroom imagery in Christian art, as the pope’s banker) berates mycologists (= MICA Affirmers) for not “consulting” (what’s that mean?) the art authorities, who are experts on “related” matters (but not THIS matter, of pilzbaum, mushroom-trees)

and the art authorities never thought or wrote about mushrooms according to Wasson,
and art authorities have never thought about, written about, or published anything about trees, per Ronald Huggins.

Email 2 to Entheogen Scholarship Journal Editor and Author con’t below, after the following addition:

SOMA’s insane arg’n [insertion]

Having never thought about, written about, or published about mushrooms in medieval art (per Wasson 1968), or trees in medieval art (per Huggins 2024), this makes (per Wasson 1968) the art authorities a must-consult authority on the topic of mushroom-trees in medieval art, because the art authorities are experts on “a matter relating to art” (per Wasson 1968).

Wasson and Allegro on the Tree of Knowledge as Amanita > Wasson’s Argument from Authority and His Judgment of Art-History Competence
https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/03/18/wasson-and-allegro-on-the-tree-of-knowledge-as-amanita/#wassons-argument-from-authority-and-his-judgment-of-art-history-competence
http://egodeath.com/WassonEdenTree.htm#_Toc135889230

Exact wording from SOMA:

“For more than half a century the mycologists have refrained from consulting [? Citation needed! “Consult” what writings; or conversations, discussion, telegrams, smoke signals, or anything??] the art world on a matter relating to art.

“Art historians of course do not read books about mushrooms.“

Or write or think about trees in medieval art, because “trees are merely incidental”, per Huggins 2024.

Therefore, entheogen scholars must be sure to consult art authorities on the topic of mushroom–trees.

Wasson’s argument makes no sense at all.

Actually, it follows that entheogen scholars should IGNORE the ignorant art authorities, because those “authorities”, “on a matter relating to art”, don’t know anything at all about mushrooms, or about or trees in medieval art.

Page 180 of Gordon . . . .🔍🧐🤔 Wasson’s SOMA (1968) (with My Annotations) Quoting and Censoring Panofsky (1952 Letter 1 of 2)

p. 180, SOMA, Wasson 1968, annotations by Michael Hoffman.
Gallery date of this, 2nd version of photo = Jan. 8, 2025.
That’s the 2nd pass, of adding text.
Wrritten on the page says Dec. 2, 2024: that’s the first pass of my writing, with cuss words, on the page; see my older photo Dec 2 2024 showing cuss words and fewer add’l annotations.

p. 180, SOMA, Wasson 1968, annotations by Michael Hoffman.
Gallery date of this, 2nd version of photo = Jan. 8, 2025.
That’s the 2nd pass, of adding text.
Wrritten on the page says Dec. 2, 2024: that’s the first pass of my writing, with cuss words, on the page; see my older photo, Dec. 2, 2024, showing cuss words and fewer add’l annotations.

WordPress image gallery upload date: Dec. 3, 2024

WordPress image gallery upload date: Dec. 3, 2024

Foraging for Psychedelic Mushrooms in the Wrong Forest: The Great Canterbury Psalter as a Medieval Test Case (Ronald Huggins, 2024) https://www.academia.edu/118659519/Foraging_for_Psychedelic_Mushrooms_in_the_Wrong_Forest_The_Great_Canterbury_Psalter_as_a_Medieval_Test_Case & https://egodeaththeory.org/2024/11/23/huggins-foraging-psychedelic-mushrooms-wrong-forest/&nbsp;

Email 2 to Entheogen Scholarship Journal Editor and Author, con’t

In the SAME PARAGRAPH, 

1) Wasson berates mycologists (MICA Affirmers) for failing to “consult”(?) the art authorities, and,

2) Wasson covertly, maliciously censors and suppresses the extremely strong recommendation/ citation that Panofsky provides Wasson, of:

Tree Stylizations in Medieval Paintings (Brinckmann, 1906) https://egodeaththeory.org/2020/12/11/brinckmann-mushroom-trees-asymmetrical-branching/&nbsp;

just 86 pages, only 5 hits on “pilzbaum”.

Ronald Huggins 2024 is extremely suspect (he’s a Wasson/Panofsky apologist) in failing to cite Entheogens in Christian art: Wasson, Allegro, and the Psychedelic Gospels (Jerry Brown & Julie Brown, 2019) https://doi.org/10.1556/2054.2019.019&nbsp;

Huggins doesn’t assist entheogen scholars by usefully citing Browns’ article; he just uselessly cites a drawer at Harvard (entheogen scholars: please fly to Harvard, if you want to check my citations).

Huggins suspiciously cites Brinckmann out of the blue, by magic, without pointing out Wasson’s censoring of Brinckmann in Wasson’s 1968 SOMA book.

How the heck did Huggins find out about the two letters from Panofsky, if not from the Journal of Psychedelic Studies?!

Panofsky’s two, complete letters (sans 2 mysterious medieval artworks copies showing “even more emphatic” mushroom imagery); and Brinckmann’s book are a huge discovery, independently, by the evidently brilliant scholar Ronald Huggins, if he is honest, which I suspect not, because he’s a Wasson/Panofsky apologist and is on team “MICA Deniers”, who is concerned with wanting to appear credible, no matter how bad of argumentation is required.

Huggins, like the other MICA Deniers — “anything but drugs” academics –shamelessly sign their name to junk argumentation.

The great discovery of the two complete Panofsky letters along with the Brinckmann book citation are a HUGE DISCOVERY!

Yet Huggins nonchalantly cites and glosses over these previously unknown-to-the-public (scholars) citations, as if everyone has had the two letters and the Brinckmann citation since 1968 or since 1952.

Mosurinjohn cites Huggins’ 2024 article (Foraging for Psychedelic Mushrooms in the Wrong Forest: The Great Canterbury Psalter) AS IF it is credible/fact.

But Huggins’ article is terrible and fails to provide any argumentations that stand up to scrutiny; it’s a typical fallacy-fest, typical of MICA Deniers.

Huggins’ article is valuable for indirect reasons: He says he can’t accept mushroom imagery in Christian art until someone explains the branching (picture two exact cubensis arms L & R in famous image panel Day 3 of Creation, in Great Canterbury Psalter) in mushroom-trees – which I had already done, by the time of writing to Jerry Brown March 21, 2022, my first mention of “branching-message mushroom trees”.

Screenshot of my March 21, 2022 email to Jerry Brown, announcing the identification of branching-message mushroom trees:

https://egodeaththeory.org/2021/01/04/log-of-discoveries-achievements/#branching-message-mushroom-trees

Similarly, in 2023 I emailed Jerry Brown the identification of branching morphology of fingers vs. thumb, which in the past couple days in 2026, got full confirmation in relation to branching morpology of mushroom-trees in the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}:

Feb. 9, 2023 – Decoded Hand Shapes, Fingers, Thumb, Mapped to Possibilism & Eternalism

Feb. 9, 2023, into Feb. 10: Emailed Brown the Fingers Shapes etc. Announcement of Decoding:
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/#identified-sticks-and-feathers-match-finger-shapes

Those are emojis in the url.  Scroll down to the pictures from St. Martins’ church fresco, Entry into Jerusalem: Jesus holds out finger-shapes.  

I confirmed and proved in the past few days, in Great Canterbury Psalter, that {fingers & thumbs branching vs. non-branching} is a stock motif in the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}.

Huggins pretty much bets his entire denial of mushroom imagery in Christian art on one panel, which shows strong mushroom imagery: the 2000 Paul Lindgren-discovered, famous Day 3 of Creation panel] as a Medieval Test Case, the cover of Browns’ 2016 book and other books) , based on the fact it has “branching” (which is exacly identical to L & R cubensis arms).

Conjuring Eden: Art and the Entheogenic Vision of Paradise (Hoffman, Ruck & Staples, Entheos 1, 2001), https://entheomedia.net/Issue%20one.htm, https://egodeaththeory.org/2020/12/24/entheos-issues-1-4-mark-hoffman/#Entheos-Issue-1&nbsp;

TWICE credits Paul Lindgren with discovering, by 2000, mushroom imagery in Christian art in Great Canterbury Psalter.  Ruck et

Also Huggins magician re: panel Day 4, which shows 4 exact mushrooms with no branching (so, these are not mushroom-trees): in misdirection-of-attention fashion, instead of him pointing out that these are exact literal mushrooms, he instead directs our attention to the minor, trident little plants, pointing out that they also appear in the mushroom-mountain folio image of Great Canterbury Psalter, folio f22:

https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/06/07/eadwine-images-great-canterbury-psalter-catalog-gallery/#f22

Full res: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f22.item.zoom

See the little plants in the mushroom-trees mountain.

Day 4 of creation: row 2 column 1, see the little plants between the 4 mushrooms (but pls do not point out the exact 4 mushrooms)

https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f11.item.zoom

Per the artist Eadwine, we are to analyze the branching, YI morphology, of his mushrooms, mushroom-trees, and these smaller plants.

We are to see Eadwine’s images through the lens of branching vs. non-branching morphology.

Eadwine’s message: We are to affirm non-branching of possibilities (and nullity of personal control ability), in contrast to our usual, familar thinking in terms of branching possibilities and personal control ability.

To re-stabilize personal control while on psilo., we are to stand on right foot (relying on eternalism-thinking), instead of our usual standing on left foot (relying on possibilism-thinking).

Huggins 2025 just pulls the two complete Panofsky letters and Brinckmann citations out of the blue, out of nowhere: the Brinckmann book citation and the two, uncensored-by-Wasson, Panofsky articles.  These are huge discoveries!  

Does Huggins not realize the import of these citations, since Huggins published in an art scholarship journal, as a newcomer in the field of entheogen scholarship?

Huggins wrote one previous article on entheogen scholarship: Ronald Huggins’ 2022 article “Dizzy, Dancing or Dying?” re: dancing man image / salamander in bestiary.

The characteristically shady ways of MICA Deniers; no integrity.

MICA Deniers are a fallacy-generating machine; where do argumentation fallacies come from?

Logical argumentation fallacies are produced from the hot/suppressed topic of mushroom imagery in Christian art.

References/See Also:

Ronald Huggins’ articles on entheogen scholarship:

About articles or videos by Mosurinjohn & Ascoug about entheogen scholarship:

Entheogen scholarship by Michael Hoffman:

— Michael Hoffman

/ end of Email 2 to Entheogen Scholarship Journal Editor and Author

Email 1 to Entheogen Scholarship Journal Editor and Author

Email 1 WAS in the present page, but vanished! Check History. Meanwhile, here’s a fresh copy again.

A couple pairs of scholars may have contacted the Journal of Psychedelic History, or 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 Cube) 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 Sharday 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”

* 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 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 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)

/ end of Email 1 to Entheogen Scholarship Journal Editor and Author

One’s a Fluke; Two’s a Pattern: Branching Morphology of Hand and Mushroom-Tree

11:23 a.m. Jan. 24, 2026

f107: Image 1 of hand = tree; Hand Mushroom-Tree

Crop by Michael Hoffman, f107
fullscreen / f107 crops
orig was 12:36 p.m. January 19, 2026

f109: Image 2 of hand = tree; Hand Mushroom-Tree

Crop by Michael Hoffman, f109
fullscreen / f107 crops

In f107 that Jan 19 discovery by me 5 days ago, the 4 weird cut trunks, is pretty big; ie, the trunks are very weird and puzzling and baffling, but, totally SOLVED HERE.

A good riddle (or puzzle, here, functioning largely as an instructional aid / quiz), has the property:

The moment that you figure out the solution, facepalm “IT’S TOTALLY OVIOUS” and there’s essentially the opposite of doubt; there’s natural certainty, “OF COURSE THATS THE INSTRUCTOR’S RIDDLE SOLUTION!”

Figuring out a riddle = 100% certainty, of a certain kind.

How do you know when you figured out the solution to a riddle or puzzle; why does it feel so definitely the correct solution, with such certainty?

The Submitted Question, Broken up Per-Sentence

How do you know when you figured out the solution to a riddle or puzzle; why does it feel so definitely the correct solution, with such certainty?

For example, the well-known riddle where a person is told words that seem unrelated, but the trick to figure out, in this game, is that each word has a repeated letter, such as ‘nn’.

Anyone who figures out the trick to solve that “repeated letter” riddle immediately can start producing their own example words that contain a repeated letter; there is no doubt (why not?) that it’s the correct, intended solution.

The Question as I Submitted It to AI

How do you know when you figured out the solution to a riddle or puzzle; why does it feel so definitely the correct solution, with such certainty? For example, the well-known riddle where a person is told words that seem unrelated, but the trick to figure out, in this game, is that each word has a repeated letter, such as ‘nn’. Anyone who figures out the trick to solve that “repeated letter” riddle immediately can start producing their own example words that contain a repeated letter; there is no doubt (why not?) that it’s the correct, intended solution.

AI’s Answer

“Knowing that you have solved a riddle or puzzle—the “Aha!” or Eureka moment—feels like absolute certainty because it represents a, cognitive restructuring of information, where your brain suddenly switches from an incorrect, blocked, or disorganized view to a coherent pattern that perfectly fits all available data. 

“In your example of the “repeated letter” riddle (e.g., words like “Balloon,” “Sunny,” “Committee” hidden among random words), the certainty arises because the solution is predictive; once you find the pattern, it explains every clue instantly and allows you to generate new examples, confirming its validity. 

“Here is why that solution feels so definitive:

1. The “Aha!” Moment (Insight)

  • The Shift from Impasse: You likely struggle initially, trying to find thematic, logical, or emotional connections between the words. You reach an “impasse”—a moment where you are stuck.
  • Sudden Restructuring: Insight happens when your brain rearranges the information—perhaps shifting focus from the meaning of the words to their orthography (spelling).
  • The Feeling of Certainty: This moment of insight is accompanied by a rush of positive emotion (dopamine) and a high level of subjective confidence, often called the “Aha! experience”. 

2. Why It Feels Correct (Pattern Recognition)

  • Total Fit: The solution (the repeated letter) is not just a good guess; it perfectly matches every single word provided. It satisfies all criteria without leaving lingering anomalies.
  • Predictive Power: When you realize the “nn” in “Sunny” is the trick, you immediately test it on “Balloon” and “Committee.” Because the rule holds true, you have verified the solution. This allows you to generate your own examples (like “Puppy” or “Bookkeeper”), which provides absolute certainty.
  • The “Elimination” Factor: The feeling of certainty also comes from the unconscious brain “turning down the volume” on incorrect interpretations that you were previously considering, leaving only the correct one in focus. 

3. The Psychology of Why We Trust It

  • “Aha!” vs. Analytic Solving: Research suggests that insights are often more likely to be correct than slow, step-by-step analytical reasoning.
  • Memory Boosting: These moments of insight sear the solution into memory, making it feel robust and “real”.
  • Cognitive Load: The “Aha!” experience is surprisingly resilient to cognitive load, meaning your brain is confident in the solution even if you are distracted or tired, because the pattern-recognition process happens subconsciously. 

“In summary, you know it is correct because it resolves the chaos of the puzzle into a single, simple, and universally applicable rule, triggering a neurological sense of, satisfaction and certainty that is hard to doubt.”

/ end of AI’s answer

The Search Url

Might give different results if click it again.

The search url posing the question to AI. That url is:

https://www.google.com/search?q=How+do+you+know+when+you+figured+out+the+solution+to+a+riddle+or+puzzle%3B+why+does+it+feel+so+definitely+the+correct+solution%2C+with+such+certainty%3F+For+example%2C+the+well-known+riddle+where+a+person+is+told+words+that+seem+unrelated%2C+but+the+trick+to+figure+out%2C+in+this+game%2C+is+that+each+word+has+a+repeated+letter%2C+such+as+%27nn%27.+Anyone+who+figures+out+the+trick+to+solve+that+%22repeated+letter%22+riddle+immediately+can+start+producing+their+own+example+words+that+contain+a+repeated+letter%3B+there+is+no+doubt+(why+not%3F)+that+it%27s+the+correct%2C+intended+solution.&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS780US780&oq=How+do+you+know+when+you+figured+out+the+solution+to+a+riddle+or+puzzle%3B+why+does+it+feel+so+definitely+the+correct+solution%2C+with+such+certainty%3F++For+example%2C+the+well-known+riddle+where+a+person+is+told+words+that+seem+unrelated%2C+but+the+trick+to+figure+out%2C+in+this+game%2C+is+that+each+word+has+a+repeated+letter%2C+such+as+%27nn%27.+Anyone+who+figures+out+the+trick+to+solve+that+%22repeated+letter%22+riddle+immediately+can+start+producing+their+own+example+words+that+contain+a+repeated+letter%3B+there+is+no+doubt+(why+not%3F)+that+it%27s+the+correct%2C+intended+solution.

f107: Jesus’ Cross-Scepter has a Thumb and 4 Fingers (f107), and Its Right Arm Toughh Angel R wing, top touch God cloud

4:28 p.m. Jan. 24, 2026: The top of Jesus’ cross-scepter touches God’s cloud.

11:25 a.m. Jan. 24, 2026 – crop needed: Jesus’ cross-scepter’s Right arm touches the Right wing of the angel, which is touching God’s cloud.

better than: [?] means, “need better crop”

todo: make a better crop

11:28 a.m. Jan. 24, 2026 – Jesus’ L hand: knob on cross = thumb; 4 arms of cross = fingers. compare recent discovery f134 row 3 mid: scythe L & R handles height

Crop by Michael Hoffman, Aug. 21, 2025, fullscreen
Crop by Michael Hoffman, gallery says jan 22 2026

Improving Content Quality Beyond Mosurinjohn & Ascough: Native Brand Deodorant Commercial

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUQO_KIDECQ —

Chat Post to AM

I’m 😤 demolishing Mosurinjohn & Ascough, double-pandering, two-positions, motte-and-bailey covert flipping between two contradictory positions.

  • Entheogen scholars, we’re with you, stop being pissed off at us, everyone.
    AND
  • We DESTROYED Ruck’s entire myth about psychedelics in mystery religions!!

Updating Titles for Canterbury Images

Purpose of New Page a Little Early: Non-Sluggish Development of Updated Titles for 6 Pages about Particular Folio Images from Great Canterbury Psalter

these sections were moved from page 31 b/c at 91 sheets, was too long to be stable and responsive

I’m trying to get work done here, but previous page was ground to a halt and crashing.

Update f11 Title [done]

Crop by Michael Hoffman
fullscreen

Result:

☀️ Canterbury f11: 6 Days of Creation, Eden

☀️ Canterbury f11: 6 Days of Creation, Eden, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f11.item.zoom, https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/25/f11-great-canterbury-psalter-6-days-of-creation-eden/, https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/canterbury-f11-sideways.jpg
f11u

  1. Update title in top of page.
  2. Update keyboard shortcut.
  3. Update sitemap 3x: toc, heading, link.
  4. Update sidebar Nav.

Emojis:

  • ☀️

Canterbury f11:

Distinctive Themes:

  • Creation
  • 6 Days of Creation
  • Eden
  • Mushroom-Tree of Knowledge
  • Serpent
  • Creation

Update f107 Title

Crop by Michael Hoffman
fullscreen
  1. Update title in top of page.
  2. Update keyboard shortcut.
  3. Update sitemap 3x: toc, heading, link.
  4. Update sidebar Nav.

Emojis:

  • ⚰️

Canterbury f107:

Distinctive Themes:

  • Lifted from Ossuary
  • Sun & Moon
  • Left-Elbow Mushroom-Tree

Update f109 Title

Crop by Michael Hoffman
fullscreen
  1. Update title in top of page.
  2. Update keyboard shortcut.
  3. Update sitemap 3x: toc, heading, link.
  4. Update sidebar Nav.

Emojis:

  • 🤚

Canterbury f109:

Distinctive Themes:

  • Net Rescue <– THEME IN CENTER, DISTINCTIVE
  • Hand Mushroom-Tree – “hand” not distinctive but … can’t RIGHT NOW! NEED PIC IN EACH SECTION HERE. CAN’T THINK.
  • Right-Limb Ossuary
  • Clean Temple
  • Cut-Branch Dog
  • Hand Mushroom-Tree
  • 5 Hand-Guys
  • Scroll & Book
  • Ossuary No Left Limbs
  • Hellmouth — poor because so non-distinctive, how damn many hellmouths are there in Eadwine? net is WAY more distinctive. dog, too. cloth-wrapped temple, too. OTOH it’s my fav hellmouth.
  • Asp-Dog Branch

Update f134 Title

Crop by Michael Hoffman
fullscreen
  1. Update title in top of page.
  2. Update keyboard shortcut.
  3. Update sitemap 3x: toc, heading, link.
  4. Update sidebar Nav.

Emojis:

  • 🙃

Canterbury f134:

Distinctive Themes:

  • Leg-Hanging Mushroom Tree
  • Psalter Reader
  • Wise Oxen

Update f145 Title

Crop by Michael Hoffman
fullscreen
  1. Update title in top of page.
  2. Update keyboard shortcut.
  3. Update sitemap 3x: toc, heading, link.
  4. Update sidebar Nav.

Emojis:

  • 🐪
  • 👑
  • 🗝
  • 🔐
  • 🔓
  • 🔒
  • 🐫
  • 👑

Canterbury f145:

Distinctive Themes:

  • Blue Produce Trade
  • Lockboxes
  • Cubensis Trade Lockboxes

verdict – crown is as good and distinctive as anything. focus on the words/ phrases. exception: probably get rid of bus emoji. on 109

107 is new, not committed to emoji yet, coffin well b/c ossuary is central theme/image / focal point.

Update f177 Title

Crop by Michael Hoffman
fullscreen
  1. Update title in top of page.
  2. Update keyboard shortcut.
  3. Update sitemap 3x: toc, heading, link.
  4. Update sidebar Nav.

Emojis:

  • 🐴 – distinctive, w/ mushroom-tree. Falconers has horse, traders has horse, but these are 4 horses with mushroom-tree; so, distinctive.
  • 🐏 – no one can tell that the creatures in hellmouth are rams, and, non-distinctive.
  • ⚖️ – 8 images have {balance scale}; non-distinctive

Canterbury f177:

Distinctive Themes:

  • 4 Horses
  • Balance Right Foot
  • Hellmouth Rams
  • Four Horses
  • Balancing on Right Foot
  • Four-Horses Mushroom-Tree
  • 4-Horses Mushroom-Tree

Old Titles

☀️ Canterbury f11: 6 Days of Creation, Eden

⚰️ Canterbury f107: Lifted from Ossuary by Right Arm

🤚 Canterbury f109: Hand Mushroom-Tree, Hellmouth, Net Rescue, Right-Limb Ossuary, Clean Temple, Cut-Branch Dog

🙃 Canterbury f134: Leg-Hanging Mushroom Tree

👑 Canterbury f145: Blue Fruit Trade, Stored in Lockboxes

🐴 Canterbury f177: 4 Horses, Balancing on Right Foot

Keyboard Shortcuts for Main Eadwine Images

todo: update after finish analysis above to update titles

☀️ Canterbury f11: 6 Days of Creation, Eden, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f11.item.zoom, https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/25/f11-great-canterbury-psalter-6-days-of-creation-eden/, https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/canterbury-f11-sideways.jpg
f11u

⚰️ Canterbury f107: Lifted from Ossuary by Right Arm, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f107.item.zoom, https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/canterbury-f107.jpg, https://egodeaththeory.org/2026/01/16/canterbury-f107-lifted-up-from-ossuary-by-right-arm/
f107u

🚌 Canterbury f109: Hellmouth, Net, Ossuary, Cloth, Looking Out from Temple, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f109.item.zoom, https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/25/f109-great-canterbury-psalter-hellmouth-net-ossuary-cloth-looking-out-from-temple/, https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/canterbury-f109.jpg
f109u

Great Canterbury Psalter folio image f134: leg-hanging mushroom tree, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f134.item.zoom,https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/eadwine-leg-balancing-image-2023-01-09.png
f134u

Canterbury folio image f145: cubensis traders, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f145.item.zoom, https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/03/17/canterbury-f145-king-orders-shipments-of-blue-fruit-to-storage-lockboxes-with-blue-stemmed-mushroom-tree/, https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/canterbury-f145.jpg
f145u

Canterbury folio image f177: Balance right leg held up by God, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom, https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/03/12/4-horses-mushroom-tree-right-foot-balancing-great-canterbury-psalter-f177/, https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/canterbury-f177-whole-image.jpg
f177u

The urls to construct f177u keyboard shortcut:

Mosurinjohn Is Irresponsible and a Bad Model of Scholarship, for Trying to Appear to Hold Two Different Positions, Covertly Flip-Flopping and Pandering to Both Entheogen Scholars and “Anything but Drugs” Academics

Christian Greer doesn’t do that. He holds ONE, consistent, position; nuanced, developed, coherent.

Greer doesn’t play the game of posturing to two opposed audiences, motte-and-bailey covert flipping between two contradictory positions.

REMINDER, WINSLOW: NO ONE HAS “DEBUNKED RUCK”.

Debunking the psychedelic theory of the Eleusinian Mysteries
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/henrywins_what-do-joe-rogan-a-freshly-minted-neoshaman-activity-7361038406467948546-63ak

Regardless of what Sharday Mosurinjohn told you in April 2025.

No “demolishing of the whole the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis” has taken place.

Mosur has merely cautioned, which is no substantive contribution to the field.

We can well do without her worthless finger wagging at HER BETTERS.

The Covert TWO Different Positions Alternatingly Asserted by Mosurinjohn

You can’t have it both ways. Pick ONE position and stick to it.

You can’t say “We’re looking into it, there may be psychedelics in mystery religions, little evidence yet” and ALSO say “It’s a myth[?define] that psychedelics were in Mystery Religions.”

Maybe she’ll claim weasely,

“I mean, it’s a myth that we have enough evidence to say one way or another w/ certainty. Don’t misread me.”

  • I agree with entheogen scholars. Psychedelics may have been used in mystery religions.
    AND:
  • I agree with “anything but drugs” academics. Psychedelics were not used in mystery religions.

– Mosurinjohn’s COVERT INCONSISTENT PAIR OF POSITIONS. Pander to both crowds, hedge your bets.

Greer doesn’t do this con-artist shell game. He has ONE, nuanced position: psychedelics were present in mystery religion culture, to some extent, the only thing left to debate is extent.

I hate the question of extent, because it blinds people to evidence, even really clear evidence, because ppl have the “extent” tail wag the “evidence” dog.

eg Letcher looks hard for secret mushrooms, but sees them on door, so, it’s proved: no secret mushrooms in Xy; ie, no mushrooms in Xy.

The whole “secrecy” concept totally derails and blinds people to simple sheer fact of presence of evidence.

Wrong paradigm blinds people.

My eyes have finally been opened to see the evidence I didn’t see for Nov 2020- Dec 2025 or from 2001 (online gallery of entire folio image f11 by Entheos journal, supporting “Conjuring Eden” article) until Jan. 13, 2025:

Day 1 panel in f11 in Great Canterbury Psalter, God holds a {balance scale} containing mushrooms per indications by Eadwine in panel Day 4 under Day 1.

Blue Krater Looks at Mushroom Bins

Crop and annotation by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f134-blue-krater-looking-msh-bins.jpg” 741 KB [8:26 p.m. March 26, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f134.item.zoom#

Proof that Day 1 of Creation, Light, {scale balance} Pans Contain Mushrooms

Crop and annotations by Cybermonk
“f11 Row 1 and 2 Left lines.jpg” 220 KB [1:15 am Jan. 13, 2025]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f11.item.zoom#

f134 blue vase DOES contain Cubensis, took a year to open my eyes and look at the mushroom dispensary bins above it.

The “there’s no evidence in support (so don’t look for such)” paradigm that I held, blinded me.

Motivation for Starting this Page Now: Long-Page Crashorama

Slimy Con Artist Waffle Motte-and-Baily Game Played by Mosurinjohn & Ascough: Covert Flipping Positions to Have It Both Ways

Maybe Greer has integrity/ consistency.

Mosurinjohn & Ascough market themselves to “anything but drugs” academics one way, and to entheogen scholars another, contradictory way.

“Fellow Academics: Our Position Is, No Psychedelics Were in Mystery Religions!”

“Fellow Entheogen Scholars: Our Position Is, Entheogens Might Be Slightly True”

Two-faced backstabbers, trying to have it both ways.

EXHIBIT:
https://egodeaththeory.org/2026/01/20/psychedelics-eleusis-and-the-invention-of-religious-experience-mosurinjohn-2025/#henry-winslows-motte-bailey-sleazy-strategy-theres-no-evidence-been-debunked
Henry Winslow uses slightly hazy vague “hot” language.

AI Hilarity: Generated Title “This Post Reports that Mosurinjohn Has Definitively Proved There Were No Psychedelics in Mystery Religions [pers. comm.]”

I was looking for wording that SOUNDS like Sharday Mosurinjohn has “disproved” Ruck.

I was glad to find this title of this post — but! it’s AI gen’d.

That is, AI interprets Henry Winslow’s post as asserting this, even if he uses wording that is inadvertently hazy and doesn’t define “Sharday totally disproved Ruck”.

I highlighted the title as showing guilty word-choice.

It’s an AI-gen’d title trying to characterize his post – not literally Winslow’s wording – but he DID accept the AI suggestion/ characterization, so he’s fully responsible for the false word-choice.

But, blame Sharday Mosurinjohn for pretending to hold two different positions, covertly flipping between them, and they PERSONALLY CONVERSED, so, no excuse.

Henry Winslow’s Post Claiming That Mosurinjohn Proved That Ruck Is Wrong

Date calc:
5 months before 2026/01/23 = 2025/13/23 – 0/05/00 = 2025/08/23

Debunking the psychedelic theory of the Eleusinian Mysteries (Winslow, Aug. 2025)

Debunking the psychedelic theory of the Eleusinian Mysteries
Henry Winslow
~Aug. 23, 2025
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/henrywins_what-do-joe-rogan-a-freshly-minted-neoshaman-activity-7361038406467948546-63ak —

“What do Joe Rogan, a freshly minted neoshaman, and half the speakers at psychedelic conferences have in common?

“They all love telling people that the ancient Greeks’ rites of passage were psychedelic ceremonies.

“According to this popular theory, the secret sauce behind the legendary Eleusinian Mysteries was ergot-laced barley[sic] that sent initiates on revelatory, near-death-like psychedelic journeys.

“But is it even true?

“Researchers from Queen’s University think not.

“So they just dropped a thorough takedown of the whole theory in the journal Psychedelic Medicine.

“Drs. Sharday Mosurinjohn (whom I interviewed in April [2025]) and Richard Ascough systematically dismantle [??? vague] what they call “the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis,” pointing out there’s zero archaeological evidence for psychedelics at Eleusis.

[The former doesn’t follow from the latter!
Deniers employ a loaded, poisoned notion of “evidence”, purpose-built. – Cybermonk]

“They say proponents are presenting speculation as fact, and the entire narrative is built on shaky foundations and circular reasoning.

[A paradigm is “circular”; inherently. (Or, elliptical orbits, in the sun-centered revised cosmos model that took from 1510 to 1677 to be switched to.) – Cybermonk]

[Mosurinjohn & Ascough present speculation as fact, when they venture boldly from their boring motte position into their exciting-to-Winslow, indefensible bailey position, “There definitely were no psychedelics in mystery religions” before crying “We didn’t say that” and rushing back to hide in their cold, boring motte -Cybermonk]

“So why does the myth persist?

“The authors argue it’s about legitimacy.

“People want to believe there’s a ‘respectable’ Western pedigree for psychedelics with our European ancestors.

“Never mind that there are plenty of Indigenous lineages around the world that have preserved psychedelic wisdom for millennia.

[the entheogen scholars are the ones who researched Indig Shams – Cybermonk]

“If we need history’s stamp of approval to justify research and policy reform today (we don’t), surely that’s enough.”

[lies of omission about entheogens in Western religious history are not “enough” – Cybermonk]

/ end of Winslow’s credibility

Blame Mosurinjohn for playing 2-faced, flip-flop, have-it-both-ways games with him, to ingratiate herself with two opposed camps and paradigmatic commitments incompatible:

  • I agree with entheogen scholars. Psychedelics may have been used in mystery religions.
    AND:
  • I agree with “anything but drugs” academics. Psychedelics were not used in mystery religions.

– Mosurinjohn’s COVERT INCONSISTENT PAIR OF POSITIONS.

The Egodeath Theory Is the Leader, the Perfect Opposite of Indigibaloney Shams P.C. Shoved Down Your Throat

Indigebaloney Shams and Their Pandering Cheerleaders Can 👞💥 🪨
– Cybermonk, Leader of the “Colonialist Violence” 🙄 Entheogen Scholars

Sharday Mosurinjohn, P.C. Hack, resorting to cheap cliche namecalling & false accusations against opponents, instead of actual argumentation of substance. Hack.

Mosurinjohn is a newcomer amateur newbie who hasn’t read the most important papers in entheogen scholarship and presumes to lecture and caution us who have been in the field since 1975 & 1998 doing productive research, unlike her EMPTY paper presenting to contribute caution but not providing anything new at all but self promotion.

Yet presumes to lecture and caution us that hypoth != fact. Shut up. Try contributing something other than flip-flop the motte-and-bailey fallacy …

I don’t like “the motte-and-bailey fallacy” in sentences.

motte-and-bailey covert flipping between two contradictory positions
mbcf

Yet presumes to lecture and caution us that hypoth != fact. Shut up. Try contributing something other than motte-and-bailey covert flipping between two contradictory positions.

Unlike Christian Greer, who is honest, steady, and consistent, reasonable, coherent (Stang seems pretty good this way too) and DOES NOT MISLEAD GULLIBLES SUCH AS HENRY WINSLOW.

How much does each bandwagon rider do motte-and-bailey covert flipping between two contradictory positions?

  • Charles Stang
  • Christian Greer
  • Richard Ascough
  • Sharday Mosurinjohn

Winslow is a Mosurinjohn fanboi, conversed with Mosurinjohn.

Winslow made a super sh*tty blog post, says “M&A DESTROYED ruck and proved HE’S wrong, there’s no psychedelics in mystery religions!!!!” (frothing at mouth)

REMINDER: NO ONE HAS DISPROVED RUCK.

So — Mosurinjohn & Ascough — STFU about “correcting the myth”, etc., all your LOADED phrases that imply you have definitely concluded “no psychedelics in mystery religions”.

This is misleading language to cowtow to stodgy academics like Ascough.

He’s so reasonable and balanced one moment; the next moment, his Abstract of the Inventing article loudly trumpets “Psychedelics in mystery religions is a myth! What’s wrong with entheogen scholars that they are so foolish and blundering?! We explain their errors. No evidence! A myth!”

Mosurinjohn & Ascough “signal”.

They want to both crow about demolishing foolish entheogen scholars – RUCK IS A MILLION TIMES YOUR BETTER, SHARDAY — and yet at the same time:

pander to entheogen scholars
AND
pander to “anything but drugs” academics

posture, posture

flip, flop

{spear and shield} in hand, they venture into high dose Cube land … nice:

High Dose Cube Land = 4D Spacetime Mysticism, Land of Controller-Transformative Myth

The biggest dispute in the field is between Sharday Mosurinjohn[A] and Sharday Mosurinjohn[B].

PICK A GODDAMN SIDE (like Greer)

Greer stays in the moderate middle: in ancient religion, we can safely assume that some Xns used psychedelics. The real issue is extent. THAT IS A CONSISTENT VIABLE STABLE *SINGLE* POSITION

Sharday Mosurinjohn flips between two positions like a con artist shell game, covertly, and pretends she didn’t. but she sends a loud message, swill that Henry laps up, “WE DESTROYED THE RUCK MYTH THAT MYSTERY RELIGION USED PSYCHEDELICS”.

Next sentence: “You foolish entheogen scholars need to realize hypoth != fact.”

OH SHUT UP, WE DON’T NEED YOU TO POINT OUT THE STUPIDLY OBVIOUS.

I’ll pay 2 cents for your contributions to the field.

ALSO I REJECT THEIR ARTICLE’S MAIN ARG,

“RUCK SLIDES FROM POSS’Y TO FACT”.

BULL ONEY.

That’s called, developing a model.

Your arg has NO MERIT, just like Ronald Huggins Conclusion that YOU CITE HIS GARBAGE ARTICLE AS FACT.

But Huggins conclusion is:

Huggins’ article’s conclusion: This image cannot mean mushroom, because it has branches.

Day 3, Canterbury Psalter: Huggins Bets His Entire Denial of Mushroom Imagery on this panel: It has branches, therefore, doesn’t look like “a mushroom”; cannot mean “a mushroom”; It Must mean “a Tree”

But on the page where he says “has branches”, he does not show the image. But when you bring his sentence next to the image, you’d have to be a moron to buy his — like Sharday Mosurinjohn citing gullibly his article as if fact, as if this is credible scholarship that has endured pushback and testing.

Huggins’ article totally fails every test, it has no merit, aside from incidental, like Hatsis accidentally contributing his excellent Hatsis Gallery of Mushroom Imagery in Christian Art,
then when I impl’d that (I failed to take the time to copy his images; I linked to them), he deleted all of his articles & website.

Foraging for Psychedelic Mushrooms in the Wrong Forest: The Great Canterbury Psalter as a Medieval Test Case (Ronald Huggins, 2024) https://www.academia.edu/118659519/Foraging_for_Psychedelic_Mushrooms_in_the_Wrong_Forest_The_Great_Canterbury_Psalter_as_a_Medieval_Test_Case & https://egodeaththeory.org/2024/11/23/huggins-foraging-psychedelic-mushrooms-wrong-forest/

Crop by Michael Hoffman
“Canterbury-f11-day3-left-2-mushroom-trees.jpg” 132 KB 9:18 p.m. Jan. 24, 2026, trying to beat prevoius sharpness
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f11.item.zoom
fullscreen / f11 crops

Above, I was I’m curious to see if I can get it sharper, I wouldn’t bet on it: fresh mushrooms Jan. 24, 2026.

Huggins’ article’s conclusion: This image cannot mean mushroom, because it has branches:

Crop by Cybermonk
per Huggins, has branches, therefore can’t be mushrooms; must be tree

Based on the branches, this clearly means a tree, not a mushroom.

BRAIN = DEAD.

This is the quality of academic works that Mosurinjohn & Ascough cite as fact.

ABD Apologists: Anything But Drugs is to be considered a “reasonable” and “evidenced” cause of the intense mystic altered state.

“anything but drugs” academics
abda

I don’t blame Henry Winslow; I blame Sharday Mosurinjohn for condoning and causing this sh*t, by playing slip-n-slide, the motte-and-bailey fallacy.

I hate term “the motte-and-bailey fallacy ” – it’s of little use in sentences to describe the terrible situation w/ Mosurinjohn & Ascough.

We can do better; we have the technology, since April 1987, developed in-house, purpose-built:

motte-and-bailey covert flipping between two contradictory positions
[MBCF]

Mosurinjohn & Ascough
m&a

“Fellow Academics: Our Position Is, Entheogens are False!”, and Also:
“Fellow Entheogen Scholars, Our Position Is, Entheogens Might Be True, and We’re Merely Saying, Differentiate Hypothesis vs. Fact”

also, i’m on a roll with Sharday Mosurinjohn / Ascough, i get it!

They are playing a stupid game with our precious field of entheogen scholarship:

they covertly are playing a shell game the motte-and-bailey fallacy, THEY ARE HOLDING TWO DISTINCT POSITIONS AND COVERLY FLIPPING BETWEEN THEM.

“Stop attacking us, we’re on your side, entheogen scholars!

We are neutral, even SLIGHTLY positive to collect data.”

— Sharday Mosurinjohn as Dr. Jekyll; feeble motte position

and also:

“We DESTROYED Ruck!

the psychedelic mysteries hypothesis is BULLSH!T!

There were CERTAINLY NO psychedelics in mystery religions!

Stop attacking us, ABD Apologists! “anything but drugs” academics!

We’re on your side, look at us throw the walburga tapestry in the river to show what great skeptics we are, exactly midpoint on the spectrum of reasonableness.

Pls keep our “competent academic” status, please!”

— Sharday Mosurinjohn as Mr. Hyde; aggressive bailey position

Unstable Overlong Page: New Titles for Folio Webpages

I’m in the middle of designing 6 new page-titles, for the 6 main Great Canterbury Psalter images that have dedicated pages.

Page 31 too long and crashy to finish that.

Idea Development page 31 is only 91 sheets, not reached full 100, but my god it’s EXTREMELY slow and even crashing.

This might change my recent target-length decision for such pages.

100 sheets is 200 pages, but WordPress is designed for max 2 pages length of webpages, like 89 words.

I think I’m going to set target length to 50 sheets / 100 pages.

I forgot how slow and crashy an ultra long page gets.

New Target Length for Idea Development Pages: 50 Sheets (100 Pages), not 100 Sheets (200 Pages)

Recent Posts Since Started Previous Idea Development Page

Dogged Avoidance of Perceiving Non-Branching in the Eternalism Experiential State

Michael Hoffman 9:10 p.m. Jan. 24, 2026

Mosurinjohn’s feeble, motte position:
“There’s inconclusive evidence for psychedelics in mystery religions.“
Uses that stance when marketing her scholarship to entheogen scholars.

Mosurinjohn’s aggressive, bailey position:
“It’s a myth that psychedelics were in mystery religions.“
Uses that stance when marketing her scholarship to “anything but drugs” academics.

When she ventures out from her feeble, motte position (“there’s inconclusive evidence for psychedelics in mystery religions”) into her aggressive, bailey position (“it’s a myth that psychedelics were in mystery religions”), she can’t stand hearing the {mushrooms}, {non-branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs.

Crops by Cybermonk, Canterbury f109
fullscreen / f109 crops
Crops by Cybermonk, Canterbury f109
fullscreen / f109 crops

Asp (Aberdeen Bestiary)

The serpent is trying not to hear.

L foot = branching = possibilism-thinking = ordinary-state possibilism with monolithic, autonomous control – unstable on psilocybin loose cognition; gives way to:

R foot = non-branching = eternalism-thinking = psychedelic eternalism with 2-level, dependent control

Unknown's avatar

Author: egodeaththeory

http://egodeath.com

Leave a comment