Criticism of the Interpretation Approach of GreekMyths-Interpretation.com
greekmyths-interpretation.com is essentially a GEMATRIA/deciphering theory, some Chronology-deciphering theory and a “the Greek mythic pantheon figures are all arranged into a sequence of initiation stages” interpretation theory, and an Aurobindo/Jung pop spirituality overlay, obscuring:
the Mushroom-Eternalism payload of Greek myth & Mystery Religion
MY complicated, overly sophisticated obscuring-overlay is WAY better than HIS complicated, overly sophisticated obscuring-overlay.
I think I’m already done w/ this site. I am now pasting the top of his very long page “KEYS FOR INTERPRETATION OF GREEK MYTHS” below, to mark it up.
50% gems, 50% rubbish and turgid bloated wording.
This is like a Jung/Aurobindo OVERLAY on top of Greek myth, thus obscuring the mushroom experiencing of the great transformation from possibilism to eternalism experience.
More of the same as below — like a Nasr book: highly inflated lofty prose, but never delivers the goods.
There’s no grain, under the husk of Ultimate Profundity.
Such writing has some good values, but is ultimately empty of any payload.
WHERE’S THE BEEF?
WHERE’S THE TRANSFORMATION-SUBSTANCE?
POP THAT VERBAL BALLOON OF OVERINFLATED, WINDY LANGUAGE.
Ramesh Balsekar actually summarizes his position, not just an ungrounded abstraction like the emptiest of statements:
Greek Myth and Mystery Religion is an initiation path to the highest wisdom EXCEPT it is hereby DAMNED TO HELL by me by my writing, quote:
“the map established by the Greek initiates does not extend till the end of the path which they glimpsed – the point in which matter becomes divine – because they did not yet know how to progress across the last stages. This is why the last Labours of Heracles, the most magnificent of the seekers of truth, took place in mythical regions.”
Let me fix your full-of-sh*t misstatement:
The map established by GreekMyths-Interpretation.com does not extend till the end of the path which he glimpsed – the point at which the initiate becomes divine – because GreekMyths-Interpretation.com does not know how to progress across the stages of mushroom initiation to Completion, to successfully obtain wisdom/gnosis, which is: transforming the mental worldmodel from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking.
Athamas, the {KING} of Thessaly {MARRIED} {cloud goddess} Nephele. Athamas & Nephele had {two children}, a {boy} named Phrixus and < SURVIVES FLIGHT a {girl} named Helle.”
q: if the ram “belonged to Zeus”, how did king Athamas’ wife, cloud goddess Thessaly, dispatch the ram to rescue the boy & girl Phrixus & Helle?
The Higher Level = aboveground world = transcendent thinking = eternalism-thinking The Lower Level = underworld = egoic thinking = possibilism-thinking
The following book tells you all about how profound and lofty their guarded secret knowledge was, to protect wisdom, guarded, from the unworthy.
This book weighs 4 pounds, like the Dictionary of Gnosticism Falsely So Called.
4 pounds of FLUFF and bloated, inflated, hypperbolic prose.
The more sophisticated of a Jung/Aurobindo/Campbell overlay you impose, the less you can see the “mushroom possibilism eternalism” content, which my Diamond Hammer of Interpretation forces the Greek Myths to mean.
Below, he writes this scathing accusation: “the map established by the Greek initiates does not extend till the end of the path which they glimpsed … becomes divine … they did not yet know how to progress across the last stages.”
KNOW-NOTHING WINDBAG POSEUR! IT AMOUNTS TO A SMEAR SITE BY A COMPETING RELIGION. FAKE SITE.
Not written at this site: “Greek myth & Mystery Religion was mushrooms transforming thinking from possibilism to eternalism.“
The site has no summarizable point, or else the site would lead by simply stating the point. It merely says like a tautology, “Greek Myth expresses the highest knowledge of initiates.” Little more than a truism. Yes, it’s correct… so far as it goes. Like Graves & Ruck saying “its a mushroom!!!” not wrong, but, … it is missing what can and must be summarized:
mushroom transformation from possibilism to eternalism <– 100% spot-on; correct. Yes, needs unpacking, but way more on-point than:
Greek Myth & Mystery Religion is a vehicle for Transcendent Knowledge
That’s 50% correct, at best. That’s much less to-the-point than:
Greek Myth & Mystery Religion is mushroom transformation from possibilism to eternalism
That’s spot-on, puts the final point first. That is precisely the programme and agenda of the Mytheme theory portion of Egodeath theory
Sri Aurobindo <– ok so this is the obscuring overlay we’ll be using
This work, the decoding of Greek myths, … intuition has opened ways leading to a wider understanding, progressing through a spiral approach which obliges one to return repeatedly to previous hypotheses.
this work brings forward the main structure and meaning of the most important myths.
The decoding method given in the first chapter[????]
vague as f&ck! could you be any more vague? Why doesn’t he give page title & link? Mabye means
the interpretation rests on decoding the symbolism of proper names.
the decoding of these proper names are given in an annex at the end of this work.[this work???]
the different variables and lines of genealogical descent were introduced to remove ambiguity, cut out disagreement between the different schools of initiation, enrich the knowledge of the path, or to ward off a progressive loss of meaning. Often, the most significant variable, and the only one that has been retained, is the one that is most coherent with the corresponding stage on the spiritual path.
The lists of characters which describe a totality of “conditions” necessary for certain spiritual experiences, have been particularly abridged.
This first volume[????] provides the necessary bases for the decoding process. The following volumes[????] set out theoretical teachings and descriptions of experiences which mark the path, in accordance with to the two great directions discussed later: a progression through the mind and the path of purification/liberation.
the knowledge hidden in the myths was rapidly lost, probably already partly so at the time of the great tragedians. Although sometimes the only surviving sources, the texts of Aeschylus and Euripides are to be considered with precaution for primitive myths were often distorted. To substantiate their dramaturgy these authors not only lowered the stakes of the great myths to the level of our human understanding but also added variations that have little relation to the deeper meaning of these stories. For the sake of play, out of a need for secrecy or to give their theatrical works the value of moral edification, certain stories would be presented as the opposite of what the initiates were supposed to understand through them. Aeschylus for instance glorified the defenders of Thebes because it was a criminal offence to turn against one’s own city. But the seeker must understand that it is the attackers who are in the right, for the myth is about the purification of the energy centres in the body.”
this website sounds rubbish; off-base; wrong spiritual explanation layered over myth, obscuring it -mh
“It would probably be more fitting to use a word such as “traveller” or “aspirant” instead of “seeker”, as this is not so much a mental quest as an aspiration of the entire being for another way of being, for another kind of humanity. In this study however we have kept the term established by tradition
The texts of historians or mythographers must likewise pass under the scrutiny of intuition and experience. The Library of Apollodorus, dated from the 1st or 2nd century AD, generally remains the most complete and reliable source for numerous myths.
Let us also note that of the two great forerunners, Hesiod was the more theoretical and Homer the more pragmatic. Attributed to Hesiod, the Catalogue of Women is a collection of fragments to which we have given major importance. It is an epic poem dating from the VII th century BC, also known as Ehoiai.
This study barely takes Latin mythology into account. At its beginnings in fact, the Roman world rejected the occult forms of the sacred, and it was only later, in view of establishing the divine rights of emperors, that they took on the mythological traditions of conquered territories, in particular those of Greece. Virgil is among the most celebrated of Latin poets. He associated the Aeneid with Greek mythology in a way that suggests that he was hardly aware of its general meaning.
By the symbolic precision of the accounts in his Metamorphoses, which contains Greek myths almost exclusively, Ovid appears to have been even better [than Virgil] initiated into their meaning.
Two contemporary works which have provided us with valuable assistance should also be noted: that of
Timothy Gantz Early Greek Myths
and for the different genealogical lineages that of Carlos Parada Genealogical Guide to Greek Mythology
With regard to the spelling of proper names, this work uses the version that seems the most appropriate: either the form made known by the Latin or French tragedians (for instance Ulysses, whose exact name is Odysseus in Homer’s text, or Pollux, initially known as Poludeukes), or the name in English form, or the transliterated form. The last two are closest to the Greek form, which facilitates an interpretation based on character structure.
Finally, it must be noted that in this work the word “god” is reserved for the mythological gods, that is to say forces that work on the development of human consciousness.
Whichever name is given to the Absolute, and for the sake of avoiding the inevitable associations that come with the word God, it seems preferable to use other terms such as Reality, Real, One, Divine, Truth and Supreme.
This Absolute must in fact not be associated with the God of religions, for it cannot be limited to a single truth or to a God outside his own creation that is a concept stemming from an omnipresent duality.
In this work, the word Absolute refers to a state of being, a perfection that humanity has tended towards throughout the ages. The idea is brought forward that
each can touch upon the Supreme Consciousness of Truth, which we must learn to know and to become. When asked the question “What is the Divine”, Mother replied, while pointing out that there could be a hundred different answers: “The Divine can be lived, but not defined. The Divine is an absolute of perfection, eternal source of all that exists, whom we grow progressively conscious of, while being Him from all eternity.” Mother’s Agenda Vol 8, 24 May 1967
INTRODUCTION
In this world, many feel suffocated or unable to feel anything “real” and therefore aspire deep within themselves for a powerful change. More numerous still are those who feel that humanity is in a dead-end, and, suffering, vaguely perceive that the solution can no longer be external. Conscious of their powerlessness and disengaged from all political, philosophical or religious “isms “, leaving behind humanitarian and revolutionary temptations, and sometimes destroyed in body and soul, some leave external paths to undertake the inner adventure. They then go in search of a guide or a path to gain understanding and attempt to transform themselves, so as to attain an ideal that they have constructed. In accordance with his nature and the “synchronicities” of life, each tends towards one path or another, often wandering a long time before “recognizing” his own through some mysterious adequacy.
Nevertheless, one who no longer wishes to be limited by a partial vision resulting from a particular experience, who aspires to a wider and higher synthesis, will find himself faced with innumerable religions, with the wisdom of the East and the West, with false or true gurus and the genuine or sham “awakened”, “enlightened” or “liberated” ones. Each of them proposes a path or else claims that none exists. Some follow the path of “forces”, while others avoid them at all costs. Some only swear by the rising of the “Kundalini”, while others caution against it. Some reject the mind, while others demand its full maturity. Many paths herald salvation only at the heights of the spirit world, beyond this world or after death, while other increasingly numerous teachings aspire for an in-depth human transformation reoriented towards the body, to the point of envisioning a mutation of “cellular consciousness” as the only possibility for the survival of humanity. The seeker must soon acknowledge that if all true enlightened individuals approach the same Reality, often through similar experiences, then each in his own way and according to his own type is bound to express and transmits a teaching that is true to himself. He must understand that a variety of paths is necessary, even though many still have to evolve to once and for all abandon all pretension of holding the sole “truth”. It seems obvious that each one must ultimately follow his own path of evolution. The seeker must also be aware that the specific experience of Reality lived and transmitted by a master is quickly distorted and codified by his disciples and so loses the breath that animates it and rapidly becomes dead knowledge, or, if it is imprisoned in the shackles of religious dogma rather than being alive and always fluctuating as it was meant to be, it becomes a truth emptied of its substance.
Recognising as a common denominator that these paths aim solely at accelerating or perfecting the evolutionary movement – whether it is for personal, collective or divine ends as high as they may be – we can ask ourselves whether it is possible to conceive of a vast synthesis and to find the common orientations which would shed light on the paths of those who aspire for “something else”. This may shed light on the wider path of humanity as well.
Following the initiates of ancient Egypt and the Rishis of the Vedic period, the masters of wisdom of ancient Greece undertook this task. Rather than creating an inventory of spiritual paths and teachings, which would have been an impossible challenge even in antiquity, theirs was to be a vision of the human adventure identifying the major stages of its evolution and marking the obstacles which punctuate its progress. This work therefore seeks to demonstrate that Greek mythology is, in its essence, an attempt to achieve such a synthesis.
For a variety of reasons which we will examine later, the initiates of ancient times were obliged to encrypt their knowledge in the form of mythology so that it would be accessible only to initiates who possessed the appropriate keys to understanding them. This study would have no foundation if it did not begin by making explicit the keys to understanding that will be used in this interpretation.
In the case of the early Greek poets, this synthesis was not the result of intellectual speculation but rather the fruit of experience. Amongst the early Greek poets, Homer is of course the figure of greatest stature. Till the present day and to the best of our knowledge, only Sri Aurobindo carried out a similar synthesis, which goes so far as to give access to new evolutionary possibilities. This study will consequently be constructed on the works of these two giants of spirituality.
Such an attempt requires complete pragmatism and, at first, a distancing from particular individual experiences and beliefs of any kind. If there is an evolutionary process, and all so called “spiritual” undertaking is inscribed in it, then it is necessary to plunge into its archives, to open up past scenarios and present stages and to integrate the experiences of those who followed its movement so as to open up the paths to the future.
There are two ways that are especially helpful in bringing to light the guiding directions of past and present evolution: on the one hand the observation of animal nature and the development of man from infancy to adulthood and on the other hand an inner investigation of the layers of consciousness.
From this synthesis, the Greek “initiates” established three major movements:
– Man’s own evolution, succeeding animal evolution and retaining memories of it, and following a mental progression of an “intelligence” which combines logic and intuition in seven major stages represented by the Pleiades. Humanity as a whole operates on the first three levels, with only a few rare individuals operating on the fourth level.
– A slow process of purification from the mixing and impurities resulting from past evolution, and a liberation from evolutionary supports which are no longer necessary for future stages of evolution.
– The growth of an “inner being”, in this study referred to as the “psychic being”, according to the Greek term Ψυχη (Psyche), which is represented by Leto and her children Apollo and Artemis, “called to be greater gods than the children of Zeus and Hera.”
Any spiritual path, which is ultimately only a will to accelerate the movement of nature, should therefore strive to:
– Develop the mind until its logical component finds its appropriate place and becomes a perfect instrument of execution, at the service of a Truth perceived by intuition.
– Purify and “liberate” from fear, ego, desire, attachment, etc., until the realisation of a perfect identification with Reality. This includes a liberation from all systems needed to attain the goal and from any preconceived idea about the path, other than that of being perfectly oneself in Truth.
– To achieve a shift of governance from the lower nature and the ego to the inner being united with the Divine.
These movements can be followed independently of each other. They result in a spiral evolution based on a double movement of ascension and integration, and the necessity of realising in the vital and the body what has been established in the mind. This spiralling movement thus leads one to live anew the same kinds of experiences, but at different levels of consciousness.
At any time, and at any level of progression in the mind, the independence of these progressions allows one to proceed to an “unveiling” of the essential nature in order to regain a certain level of Reality. This is an unveiling for which there seems to be no other path than a complete engagement with everything that life offers at each moment, in accordance to one’s own nature, and sustained by an inner fire.
The process of ascension and integration makes necessary and permits an increasingly deep diving into the human and animal evolutionary memories, from the human ego to the formation of the animal self and even further back towards the basic forms of life. We are in fact still strongly imprinted by this and have retained many of its mostly unconscious workings, which combine with those of higher planes and thereby disrupt them.
Nevertheless, if the path of union with the worlds of the Spirit had since long been marked out, the ancient seekers must have come up against what seemed to them insurmountable barriers in the process of transformation of evolutionary memories.
These initiates however proclaimed the existence of a Reality in which all beings are united beyond appearances, in the context of which persists the illusion of separation [{mask}] that hides from man his true nature and binds him to his ego. They also affirm that man has the possibility of contacting this “Divine” Reality in its personal or impersonal forms, and of uniting with Him. Through this he could also realize a union with all creatures, with nature and with the universe. This is the meaning of the Sanskrit word Yoga, which signifies “union”. The term “Yoga” was later used to also designate recommended methods for reaching this state.
This union was for a long time considered to be the ultimate goal of all forms of Yoga, because the transformation of human nature into a perfect instrument of the Truth seemed to be an impossible task.
In fact, the legacy of thousands of years of evolution opposes this. The union can be realized on the mental or vital plane, but the initiates came up against the stumbling block [loss of control] of the most archaic corporeal nature, subject to the so-called “laws of nature” and presenting an insurmountable obstacle to transformation. The mind can be made silent, the vital calmed to a certain degree and the root of desire removed, but primitive reactions and bodily habits obstinately refuse to change, along with their attendant woes of suffering, hardship, illnesses and death. A union with the Absolute was fulfilled in the Spirit, but in the lower planes, the rebelliousness of nature prevailed. Man remained riveted to his animal nature without real hope of transformation. Also, many systems resulted in a rejection of earthly life and its activities; paradise was exiled from the earth to mythical sites in the world of the Spirit. Or else the concept of materialism was seen as a sufficient justification for existence, which is the case for many today.
But the wise men of ancient Greece refused to consider this defeat as insurmountable and this schism as the only possible outcome; they argued against an earthly existence that had as its sole goal an escape from itself or an unrestrained enjoyment. This “reorientation” of spirituality was a terrible battle in their times, probably carried out as much on the individual inner plane as well as externally amongst the different schools of initiation; we will see how the account of the Trojan War depicts episodes as bloody as the difficulties they represented were reputed to be insurmountable.
This opening was nevertheless of short duration, probably because humanity was not yet ready. Christianity imposed on the West the idea of a paradise outside the earth, which believers had to merit by leading a life of work and suffering and by redeeming themselves in a fallen world. As is stated in Mother’s Agenda (Volume 8 p.179) suffering “was a necessity to emerge more consciously from inertia (…) It’s very clear in animals, it has become very clear already: suffering was the means to make them emerge from inertia”. Furthermore, as stated in p167-168: “Christianity deifies suffering to make it the instrument of the earth’s salvation. (…) the action of this religion on earth has been to “deify suffering” because men NEEDED to understand – not only to understand but to feel and adhere to the raison d’être (the universal raison d’être) of suffering on earth as a means of evolution. We might, basically, say that they sanctified suffering so it may be recognized as a means indispensable to the evolution of the earth. So now, that action has been exploited to the full and more, and ought to be gone beyond, and that’s why it must be left behind in order to find something else.”
As in the ancient Greek teachings, spirituality and human evolution are considered to be inseparable in this work. Therefore there is no distinction between “spiritual” or “sacred” things and others that are not. Evolution should lead us neither towards an escape into the Spirit, nor towards a materialistic denial which rejects all forms of a higher Reality and would inexorably lead to the glorification of the ego.
It is therefore high time that in its material arrogance western civilisation comes to understand that the Greek civilisation from which it developed had, in contrast to our own, preserved a high degree of spirituality. This spirituality which permeated all of life was hidden in the heart of the culture and veiled by mythology, the significance of which was concealed in the external world. Its meaning was only revealed to a few sincere seekers at specific sites: the “Mystery Schools”, the teachings of which were associated with particular gods of the Greek pantheon. The most well known are those of Eleusis and Samothrace.
Nobody knows precisely what was taking place in these schools before they progressively declined in the VIth century BC, what teachings were being handed down or what rites were being practiced there. (The process of decline and the progressive loss of the sacred in ancient Greece was described by Julian Jaynes in his book The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind.) For the initiates and candidates for initiation were held to absolute secrecy (the word “mystery” comes from the Greek verb μυω, “to keep the eyes shut or the mouth closed”). In the words of one of them, in the account given by Apollonius of Rhodes in the Quest of the Golden Fleece: “in the evening by the injunctions of Orpheus they touched at the island of Electra, daughter of Atlas, in order that by gentle initiation they might learn the rites that may not be uttered, and so with greater safety sail over the chilling sea. Of these I will make no further mention; but I bid farewell to the island itself and the indwelling deities, to whom belong those mysteries, which it is not lawful for me to sing. ” (Apollonius of Rhode, Argonautica, Book 1 verse 910, trans. R.C. Seaton)
The teachings were divided into “lesser” and “greater” Mysteries.
The Lesser Mysteries which conferred the title “Myst” (one who is initiated into the mysteries), seem to have been related to the myth of Demeter, the goddess of domesticated nature, and to
her daughter Kore, who became Persephone at the time of her union with Hades [that confirms what i thought -mh] and had to remain for part of the year in the abode of her husband in the nether world.
The Greater Mysteries seemed to have been founded more on the myths of Dionysus and Orpheus, who, according to the most well known legend, strove to bring back his beloved wife from the realm of Hades.
“wife stuck in Hades” = virgin maiden egoic possibilism-thinking, no longer accessible to eternalism-thinking
Everybody agrees that these Mysteries probably referred to a spiritual teaching which included a test of confrontation with death, and that rites of purification held a central place.
But nobody knows how the candidates for the second initiation, the Mysts, [sic, mystes?] progressed through different stages to attain Illumination (Elampsis Ελλαμψις), the final consecration that conferred the title of “Epopte”
[“one who has seen” the snake worldline and the god-phallus inside the mind, worldline of thought-injector]
, a degree of contemplation [i.e. trip balls] at the highest level of initiation. The only information at our disposal about the content of these initiations is to be found in mythology.
We shall see that these are a fabulous reenactment of the synthesis mentioned earlier and of the teachings that accompanied it. Constructed with mathematical rigor and precision, the myths constitute an extraordinary mnemotechnical tool which marked out important points of reference through which spiritual masters of ancient Greece would guide their disciples.
Different versions of the same myth sometimes contain elements that seem at first contradictory. There are several reasons for this. In the first place, this was to perhaps question the method of transmission: those who recorded these myths were not all initiates, but often historians or mythologists. In the second place it appears to have been necessary for some, over the course of time, to eliminate ambiguities and thus to make clear the nature of the events or the personality traits of the characters by adding other lines of descent or other histories. This is most often the case. Lastly, the significance of the myths became less and less well understood over time, which provided an opportunity for numerous errors to slip in.
For almost three thousand years, all these texts kept their secret so well protected that only a few centuries after Homer, numerous authors could already completely misunderstand their meaning. Today, most people see mythology only as the result of an imaginary collective construction developed from a primitive unconscious common to all peoples.
This law of silence, the transgression of which was severely punished, [true? false?] was applied not only to the Mysteries but also to the myths; Aeschylus nearly lost his life for this reason, having been accused of revealing in some of his tragedies which have since disappeared details about divine genealogy that only initiates were to know. But far beyond the external threat, it is a spontaneous and sacred fear of the Divine which naturally kept the secret. [seems correct -mh]
Only that which would strictly contribute to maintaining the public religion was to be divulged. And in fact religion referred to mythology but did not explain it. It relied on images of the forces of nature sufficiently close to daily reality so that understanding the myths was not an absolute necessity. This progressive disconnection between the founding myths and the practice of faith can be observed in almost all religions. This is because for the latter, it matters less to understand that to believe and to adore, and the images were sufficiently filled with emotion to satisfy the greatest majority. In contrast however, the seeker of Truth cannot be satisfied with dead truths. He wants at all costs to understand and obtain the answers to his urgent questions as well as to his aspiration for another way of being in the world.
This practice of secrecy was not limited to the Greeks but was common to the people of this time. For instance, the teachings contained in the Vedic texts, the Egyptian myths and the first Biblical texts were protected in this way.
Before approaching the keys for decoding the myths, attention should be given to several general questions.
– First, what credit can be given to the present interpretation when Greek mythology has already been the subject of in-depth analysis by a great number of highly qualified experts?
If mythology expresses a veiled spiritual content, it is likely that those who do not possess deep spiritual knowledge, based at least in part on their own experience, have no chance of discovering the deeper meaning of the myths or of going beyond the apparent inconsistencies of the different versions. And those who held this knowledge were either not interested in mythology or did not wish to reveal what they had understood, probably for the same reasons as those who had initially chosen to veil the meaning of the myths.
How can mythology be understood simply as an amalgam of tales and legends destined only for the moral education of the people? Why then such sophistication in their internal structures?
Let us imagine societies of a thousand years ago. Knowledge was most often transmitted orally. Outside the priestly class, rare were those who knew how to read or write. Alphabets were still sacred in nature. That is to say that letters expressed energies, principles and cosmic and divine laws. It is not so long ago that the first hieroglyphs engraved in stone served to underline the sacred and eternal sense that they carried.
[rock = block universe/worldlines/non-control]
Only a few hundred years later, towards the end of the 8th century BC, Homer bequeathed us the Iliad and the Odyssey.
Without much doubt we can suppose that
the priests and Greek initiates, who after the Egyptians became the custodians of the oral knowledge accumulated over centuries or even thousands of years, were most preoccupied with safeguarding what was most valuable in their eyes. And is it not the synthesis of the most advanced knowledge concerning man and his destiny that is most important to a people, rather than a few children’s stories emerging from a supposed collective imagination? If we dared claim that the men at the origin of these brilliant civilisations were but ignorant beings with rough and uncultivated minds, we would have to explain by what evolutionary mystery these people we able to generate, only a few decades later, systems of philosophy that many of our contemporaries still have difficulty comprehending. The appearance of writing does not coincide with the beginnings of intelligence and human consciousness, far from it.
Using the keys for interpretation put forward in this work, the reader will be able to progressively penetrate into the significance of these accounts, both in their overall structure and in their smallest details, and grasp the purpose of the different versions despite their apparent contradictions. Little by little, the principal structures, around which more than two thousand characters revolve, will become more organised and animated.
These mythsalso served to support the religious and moral education of the people. But well beyond that, as a synthesis of spiritual knowledge they were one of the primary teaching tools at the disposal of the masters of knowledge who would progressively reveal the significance of the myths to their disciples by means of the Mysteries. Since that time, Mystery Schools have disappeared and genuine masters are rare. We have descended a little more deeply into the night which, according to Genesis, is desirable for acquiring discernment. But on the other hand we are also nearer to the dawn, before which night is at its darkest.
In our times it is often difficult to find a path and to persevere on it, especially as every form of spiritual search has become liable to suspicion and the true value of things has been reversed without our always being aware of it. Seekers lack points of reference, straying into numerous dead-ends and knocking on many a door that leads only into emptiness.
What we will discover behind these myths is a roadless map, but in which we will be able to situate the great variety of spiritual teachings. We will also discover certain milestones, traps, dead-ends and necessary preparatory steps for the journey, for the spiritual path is a conquest in which the risks of losing one’s way are numerous and the dangers real.
As each must follow his own way, the paths of evolution are innumerable but the major stages universal, as are those of the growth of a human being from the time of conception: standing, walking, speaking, becoming autonomous, etc. Nevertheless, the map established by the Greek initiates does not extend till the end of the path which they glimpsed – the point in which matter becomes divine – because they did not yet know how to progress across the last stages. This is why the last Labours of Heracles, the most magnificent of the seekers of truth, took place in mythical regions.
In order to elucidate the significance of certain passages, some indications originating from the experience and understanding of the author have been added to the interpretation.
The reader should also keep in mind the following warnings while progressing through this study:
“Do not believe anything merely because it was written by some ancient sage,do not believe anything on the authority of masters or priests, but rather believe what agrees with your own experience and after an in-depth study satisfies your reason and leads you in the direction of your good. This you can accept as true and shape your life around. ” (attributed to Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha)
“Truth is a pathless land...” From a talk by Krishnamurti on the 3rd of August 1929 at Ommem. Krishnamurti: The Years of Awakening, by Mary Luytens, Shambhala Publications 1997.
“If thou wouldst not be the fool of Opinion, first see wherein thy thought is true, then study wherein its opposite and contradiction is true; last, discover the cause of these differences and the key of God’s harmony. “ Sri Aurobindo. Thoughts and Aphorisms. Aphorism 122.
” …nobody has the Truth, nobody knows the right action, nobody knows the right way. The only way is to stumble on and to falter on and to knock oneself and even fall and go on and on. Everything is false from top to bottom, down from the Upanishads to the daily newspapers, everything can be twisted and is twisted, nothing is sure, nothing is black or white, there is no certitude—the only thing unchallengeable is this burning need in our hearts. ” Satprem. Notebooks of an Apocalypse. Volume 4.
– The second general question is that of encryption. Why was the highest of knowledge concealed in the guise of stories, while in the eyes of a man of the 21st century, these texts do not appear to hold any secret of a nature that could put people or entire civilisations in danger?
There are many reasons for this, being known that the practice of secrecy in the domain of spiritual research is a universal tendency, more or less pronounced depending on the period.
Here are two possibilities: The first is that spiritual research reaches beyond commonly held ideas, beliefs and dogmas, and often comes up against misunderstanding or even general hostility.
It is their credibility of religious leaders, the foundation of their authority, which is threatened by genuine research. This is confirmed by History.
This reason was sufficient to justify a retreat from the world for many seekers of Truth, or for monks who wished to go unnoticed “donning the clothing of their country ” as is one of the rules imposed on apprentice alchemists.
The second reason is the risk that some would misuse the knowledge and powers acquired on the spiritual path, or worse, that they may choose this path solely for that purpose. This was a real risk in ancient times as these “powers” were much more easily accessible than they are today. The term “powers”, unlike what we think of today as “paranormal faculties”, is to be understood as the capacity of governing the psyche of other human beings or of consciously relating with other planes of existence for one’s own ends.
This kind of knowledge is still called for in the context, for instance, of certain African or other shamanic rituals. But the process of individuation [JUNG-STINK OVERLAY] which humanity has undergone with increasing intensity over the past several thousand years has rendered these powers difficult to access, although they have not been entirely eliminated. For they presuppose a capacity for identification which has been gradually lost, to the point of becoming almost impossible to acquire today.
greekmyths-interpretation.com is essentially a GEMATRIA interpretation theory.
_________________
To proceed with the interpretation of Greek myths – keys for decryption essentially include
the symbol letters
the elementary symbols
the family trees
the chronology of the myths.
To fully understand this web page, it is recommended to follow the progression given in the tab Greek myths interpretation. This progression follows the spiritual journey. The method to navigate in the site is given in the Home tab.
Introduction
The progression of mythological tales follows that of human evolution.
[STRAINS OF KEN WILBER – UP FROM EDEN BOOK]
Just as the stages of learning in childhood – walking, talking, social interaction, etc. – are a summary of universal stages of growth,
Mythology retraces human evolution from its origins and anticipates its future development from its present stage of intellectual domination.
It is built on the results of experiences rather than around a system of beliefs.
It teaches us the necessary preliminary steps for progressing towards each new stage of evolution.
Although initiates were unanimous in their understanding of the initial stages of the path, this was not always the case for the more advanced stages.
For instance, the Trojan War not only illustrates an inner struggle , but probably also a fierce controversy among the supporters of different paths of initiation.
Through a number of symbols,
Mythology is the expression of the synthesis of thousands of years of individual experiences , and the presentation of the knowledge gained, in the form of epics.
The keys for decoding can be classified in several more or less complex categories.
1. Letter Symbolism Deciphering, Symbolic Letter-to-Word Puzzle (Like Graves’ MUKE (‘mushroom’) derivation from Kykeon Recipe Ingredients)
*The first category utilises the symbolic content of the letters of the alphabet , which in turn form proper names, the meaning of which stems partly from the order of their constituent characters. Most often the names of gods, heroes, characters, places, etc. are constructed by an association of significant letters and words from common, everyday language to create a symbolic word puzzle.
There is every reason to believe that this method of encryption had already been used by the Egyptians.
When referring to Egyptian signs, the Greeks called them “Ta hiera grammata”, the sacred letters, or “Ta hiera glyphica”, an expression meaning “the engraved sacred (letters)” or “hieroglyphs”.
Why “sacred” if it was not that they manifested, in their lines, a symbolic content revealing sacred knowledge? The Egyptians themselves referred to them as “the writing of divine words”.
2. Basic Symbols Deciphering (Images, Numbers)
*The second category is linked to the meaning conveyed by basic symbols (images, numbers, etc.) , often with multiple meanings that try to follow as closely as possible the “dictionaries of symbols“. [??]
However, caution is advised when using information given in these works, as the Greeks sometimes took up ancient meanings entirely unknown to us. For instance they borrowed from the Vedas the image of the cow as a symbol of the “light of Truth” rather than meaning “Mother Earth” or “abundance” , as indicated in dictionaries. And so,
The herds of the Sun, Helios, are “parts of Truth” perceived by the seeker through experiences such as illuminations, revelations or inspirations.
🐄💩🍄
This category also includes numbers as basic symbols.
3. Genealogy Deciphering
*The third category consists of a structure belonging to Greek mythology , at least in its wider sense, for its seed was already present in the mythology of Egypt and the Middle East: the genealogical trees.
These provide symbols with multiple ramifications, allowing a play of a number of ideas such as spiritual progression, theory and practice, the succession of levels of consciousness, the history of spirituality, stages of the path and the necessary conditions to engage with them.
Knowledge of two or three hundred characters (among the two or three thousand listed) helps to easily find one’s bearings within the spiritual progression.
A detailed study of genealogical trees giving the fundamental structure of myths will begin in the next chapter. At this point, we will only discuss how they are to be used.
4. Chronology Deciphering
*The fourth category includes the chronology of the tales, in themselves a coherent assembly of the basic symbols containing teachings or allegorical descriptions of experiences.
Once the stage of interpreting simple symbols and the contents of a particular myth is over, the difficulty is to place [read: FORCE] the story within the frame of spiritual development.
The answer is most often given in the myths themselves, by an indication of a certain number of generations or years “before” or “after” certain points of reference, such as the Trojan War or the Quest for the Golden Fleece.
It can also be given by the age of the characters – Theseus, for instance, was said to be over fifty years of age at the time of the abduction of Helen, while she was still nubile –
or by the journey of peoples or heroes through real or imaginary lands.
Other more specific indications, such as distant kinship or “visits “, helps bring more precision to the chronology.
5. Caduceus Deciphering
*The fifth and last category is related to a single symbol, graphically simple but very complex in its interpretation: the Caduceus of Hermes.
It includes very extensive esoteric knowledge [so what is the alleged “very extensive esoteric knowledge?
the mushroom-revealed injector-worldline of control-thoughts
MUSHROOMS REVEALING THE WORLDLINE CONTROL-THOUGHT SOURCE, CAUSING TRANSFORMATION FROM POSSIBILISM-THINKING TO ETERNALISM-THINKING
Correct answer:
caduceus = esoteric knowledge = Transcendent Knowledge = the mushroom-revealed injector-worldline of control-thoughts, causing transformation from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking. ]
[summed here: the message of Hermes cadeusis = Y = tree vs snake = branching snake = branching vs nonbranching = possibilism-thinking vs eternalism-thinking, mushroom-revealed. -mh]
[turgid, inflated, ungrounded writing hides the lack of substance]
about the planes of consciousness
[“the planes of consciousness” has to actually refer to: the lower level vs. the higher level; the god abducts the virgin maiden from lower to higher level, sacrificing her along the way because of the transition;
To flip from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking IS to sacrifice the child, which includes {Sacrificing the childhood virgin maiden} includes the REAL “initiation sequence”:
Mytheme: {virgin maiden struggles to resist}: the Great “Seeing, Resisting, then Complying” “Female” Pattern of the Mind in the Mushroom State
1. the Seeing of the control-thoughts injector-worldline 2. the Resistance/Wrestling against that {phallus-snake} (the mind’s inner thought-injector, spread along its worldline across time) 3. the Compliance of the mind, submitting to the underlying power of the control-thoughts injector-worldline.
When the naive egoic thinking {virgin maiden struggles to resist} new power-tools for idea development — 1. Define a mytheme- [acro]/keyboard shortcut: a mytheme keyboard shortcut [mks] test: mytheme keyboard shortcut mytheme keyboard shortcut – passed. {virgin maiden struggles to resist} [{vmsr] — test: {{virgin maiden struggles to resist} fail, test slower: {{virgin maiden struggles to resist} fail {virgin maiden struggles to resist} – finding: issue w/ open-brace in acro/ keyboard shortcut. plsu, fails to italicize. not impressed at this technique for rapid idea development. 2. Add a mytheme entry in the Key Mythemes catalog, for {virgin maiden struggles to resist} done: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/15/mytheme-list/#virgin-maiden-struggles-to-resist
the god’s control-thoughts injector-worldline, turmoil, chaos, and defeat; cybernetic control-cancellation/loss-of-control.
When wisened maiden submits to the inner control-thoughts injector-worldline, she dies, is sacrificed, and the mind spiritually is ascended pulled up lifted up to The Higher Level, ABANDONING THE MAIDEN DOWN IN THE LOWER LEVEL.
control-thoughts injector-worldline [ctiw]
the compliance of the mind, upon more seeing of the uncovered, mushroom-revealed injector-worldline of control-thoughts.
mushroom-revealed injector-worldline of control-thoughts [mriwct]
mushrooms reveal the control-thoughts injector-worldline as the true source of control-thoughts [mriwsct]
transformation of the mental worldmodel from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking [tmwptet]
mushrooms reveal the control-thoughts injector-worldline as the true source of control-thoughts causing transformation of the mental worldmodel from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking
passed. ]
and their interactions, the circulation of energy, etc. It is better known under its dynamic form, in which it is represented as two snakes wrapped around a staff
[
the better, original form of the caduceus: Y; a pole w/ U on O.
Britannica: “Originally the caduceus was a rod or olive branch ending in two shoots and decorated [probably TIED/fastened/knotted -mh] with garlands [= loop crown of a wreath of flowers and leaves, worn on the head or hung as a decoration] or ribbons. “ribbon = a long, narrow strip of fabric, used for tying something or for decoration.” [the initiate is tied fastened to the physical world” = frozen tied secured into the block universe in altered state.-mh] [ribbon = snake = person’s worldline -mh] Later the garlands were interpreted as two snakes entwined in opposite directions with their heads facing; and a pair of wings, in token of Hermes’ speed, was attached to the staff above the snakes.”
The original form is that of two (thus branching) snakes on the end of a tree-trunk/pole, therfore it’s a Y morpologolical form, w/ the 2 branches crossing over each other. -mh]
, and is transcribed in static form in the Hebrew tradition of Kabbalah by the symbol of the ” Tree of Life ” (see diagrams in the appendices). Explanations about this symbol appear at the end of the third volume.
An in-depth study is only
imperative for those wishing to decipher ancient texts, myths or genesis stories amongst others.
Besides these main categories, several specific keys are applicable only to a small number of myths, and are therefore not subject to a detailed analysis in this chapter. For instance, the way heroes belong to different planes of consciousness, or the functioning of the mind in accordance with cycles of alternatingseparative [Persephone winnow/thresh away husk; Saturn scythe-away child]and fusional tendencies, which manifested through the intellect and intuition. We will study these in the relevant myths.
Greek mythology also refers to practices, such as the recitation of mantras, or to the performance of certain dances, of which the details are not known to us. They were most probably a necessary part of the oral teaching from master to disciple which could not be transcribed into writing.
From Section “THE STRUCTURE OF GENEALOGICAL TREES” of Page “KEYS FOR INTERPRETATION OF GREEK MYTHS”
Many heroes are thus the fruits of unions between Zeus and mortal women: Heracles (borne by Alcmene), Perseus (by Danae), Aeacus (by Aegina), Minos (by Europa), Epaphus (by Io), Argos (by Niobe) and Dionysus (by Semele).
All these unions reflect an important awareness and a contact with the higher planes of consciousness at a specific point in a yogic progression.
🗑️ Garbage Theorizing, Exhibit A: “The Subconscious”. What next, “The Shadow”??
Less conscious evolutionary processes are expressed by the unions of Poseidon, the god that rules over the subconscious:
a few examples are Agenor and Belus (borne by Libya), and Pelias and Neleus (borne by Tyro).
Tracing back over a lineage therefore makes it possible to situate a character in the individual spiritual development and within human evolution more generally. For certain heroes, several different ancestries are given depending on the author. There is nothing contradictory in this; rather it shows that a particular work can be done or a particular experience can be met on different paths.
It is said that the ancient masters were involved in endless debates about the genealogical trees, as it was important to be able to situate in relation to one another the major phases of the spiritual journey, the various yoga and necessities of purification, the realisations and experiences, and to understand the conditions required for overcoming a particular stage or the reasons for the difficulties.”
Site name: THEOI GREEK MYTHOLOGY / the Theoi Project http://theoi.com “A site exploring Greek mythology and the gods in classical literature and art. The aim of the project is to provide a comprehensive, free reference guide to the gods (theoi), spirits (daimones), fabulous creatures (theres) and heroes of ancient Greek mythology and religion.”
Site name: GREEKMYTHOLOGY.COM http://greekmythology.com TITANS: https://www.greekmythology.com/Titans/titans.html “The Titans were the deities in Greek mythology that preceded [strong connotations of “lower level”, egoic thinking; Kore; possibilism-thinking]the Olympians. They were the children of the primordial deities Uranus (heaven) and Gaea (earth).
“The Titans included Oceanus, Tethys, Hyperion, Theia, Coeus, Phoebe, Cronus, Rhea, Mnemosyne, Themis, Crius and Iapetus.
“Cronus was the leader of the Titans, after he managed to overthrow his tyrant [{King Ego, evil king, possibilism-thinking}] father Uranus from the throne.
“Cronus later learned of a {prophecy that said his son would eventually overthrow him} and did everything he could to prevent it. {the forcibly abducted virgin maiden struggles to prevent her power being overpowered by the god who “lifts her up”; which is to say sacrifices her in the process of bringing her, by force, up from possibilism-land below, up into eternalism-land} However, the prophecy came true and Zeus managed to {dethrone false king} him and end the age of the Titans, after the Titanomachy, the great war between Titans and Olympians.”
https://www.theoi.com/Ther/DrakonesMedea.html — “”She [Medea, posing as a priestess of Artemis,] declared [to King Pelias] that Artemis, riding through the air upon a chariot drawn by Drakones (Dragon-Serpents), had flown in the air over many parts of the inhabited earth and had chosen the realm of the most pious king in all the world for the establishment of her own worship and for honours which should be for ever and ever . . . By means of certain drugs, Medea caused shapes of Drakones to appear, which she declared had brought the goddess [Artemis] through the air from the Hyperboreans to make her stay with Pelias.””
Condensed:
“Drugs caused shapes of Drakones to appear, which brought the goddess through the air, riding through the air upon a chariot drawn by Drakones (Dragon-Serpents); flown in the air.”
[1:35 a.m. December 29, 2020] idea, the concept name of {caduceus mushroom tree}.
Esoteric Y branching. Caduceus mushroom tree. 1. Caduceus = branching vs. non-branching experiential mental worldmodels 2. Caduceus = male ruler snake & female ruler snake, frozen in rock
Lash’s Deleted Mushroom Articles Are Yet another Negative Example, of How Not to Frame & Approach the Field of “Western Mushroom Scholarship”
Kinda sorry I wasted time on John Lash’s deleted mushroom articles, but he is an example of garbage or garbled reasoning in the field, and of highly distorting bias, like framing Gnosticism’s {Archons} as literalized UFO extraterrestrial aliens — a conflict of geocentric vs. sun-centric cosmology, for starters. And back-projecting Late-Modern-era mythmaking, onto Antiquity.
Episode title: Jan Irvin – The Holy Mushroom November 9, 2008 Jan Irvin is an independent researcher, author and lecturer [previously] in archaeoastronomy, astrotheology, ethnopharmacology, shamanism, symbolism, ancient and modern mythology, fertility cults, and ancient and modern religion.
He co-authored the book “Astrotheology & Shamanism: Unveiling the Law of Duality in Christianity and Other Religions” with Andrew Rutajit.
He also co-produced the DVD “The Pharmacratic Inquisition“, also with Andrew Rutajit.
He is the curator of the official website for John Marco Allegro [did he transition that to Judy Brown?], the much criticized Dead Sea Scrolls scholar, and has contributed much to the re-examination of many of Allegro’s theories.
He contributed research toward the academic article “Wasson and Allegro on the Tree of Knowledge as Amanita“, with Michael Hoffman. http://www.egodeath.com/WassonEdenTree.htm
He brings with him over 15 years of research into the study of ethno-pharmacology and drugs.
For the first hour, Jan discusses his book “The Holy Mushroom – Evidence of Mushrooms in Judeo-Christianity”, a critical re-evaluation of the schism [I’m glad he doesn’t mis-call it a “debate”! -mh] between John Allegro and Gordon Wasson over the theory on the entheogenic origins of Christianity that is presented in John Allegro’s book, “The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross”.
[The above misrepresents the scope of the Wasson-Allegro schism.
The schism between Wasson-Allegro wasn’t about “the theory on the entheogenic origins of Christianity that is presented in John Allegro’s book”; the expressed schism was restricted to the single, highly charged proxy issue, the single mushroom tree of Plaincourault and the 1952 censored letter from Panofsky, and the Ramsbottom letter that exposed Pope Wasson saying “rightly or wrongly we” (the Pope & Wasson) are going to reject Plaincourault as representing mushrooms. -mh]
During hour two, we talk more about the schism between John Allegro and Gordon Wasson and the symbolism behind the concept of Jesus as a mushroom and the fact that some cardinals and bishops to this day are dressed up as mushrooms. [Amanita, b/c visually striking -mh]
We talk about religious art work that contains references to the* mushroom, the Mandeans, Lucifer, the Devil, the Jesus Seminar, symbolism in St. Marks Basilica in Venice and much more.”
[*WHOA careful with the ‘the’! mushroom != Amanita ! -mh]
“As soon as possible following the launch, NEMETA will propose its initial book project: Gnostic Sabotage in the Book of Revelation. Subtitle: How Christianity Carries the Seeds of Its Own Destruction. Needless to say, this is a sensational title bound to incite controversy and attract attention from Christians. the potential market is huge. Christians will buy it just to hate it and tear it apart. John has chosen this book for conversion — changeover from IT/electronic format to material artifact you can hold in hour hands — precisely to exploit its controversial potential. Like Not in His Image, Gnostic Sabotage contains a massive load of ideological semtex [? cut off]
Handled correctly, such a project could bring considerable financial return to NEMETA. … Other titles in waiting:”
[I advocate making money.
I’m against politicizing religion or mushroom scholarship to a priori disallow mushrooms from “our” religion, Greek & Christian religion. -mh]
Lash Article: Wasson and Company: The Entheogenic Theory of Religion
God I HATE how these writers attribute everything, the entire field of mushroom shcolarship, to Wasson & Allegro!
“Wasson and Company is a section of Psychonautics dedicated to research and evaluation on the controversial topic of the entheogenic theory of religion: that is, the claim that the religious experience of the human species originated in altered states induced by the ingestion of sacred medicine plants such as the amanita muscaria mushroom or other psychoactive fungi.
R. Gordon Wasson receiving psilocybin mushrooms from the Mazatec curandera Maria Sabinas
Although there are important antecedents, [GRAVES, BLAVATSKY, SALARI…] the argument for the entheogenic basis of religion can be said to have been formally launched by R. Gordon Wasson in his book, Soma: Divine Mushroom of Immortality. Initially, due in part to the influence of his Russian wife, Valentina, Wasson posited the existence of a prehistorical shamanic mushroom cult in the Ural mountains. He sought to prove that the natural sacrament and inebriant of this cult was the fly-agaric, amanita muscaria, which he identified with the Vedic inebriant, soma. Variations of the Wasson thesis, [GODDAMN STOP EQUATING THE FIELD WITH A PERSONALITY!] including some considerable extrapolations and departures from it [<– STRONG DISAGREE W/ THIS FRAMING], have been advanced by John Allegro, Ralph Metzner, James Arthur, Terence McKenna, Benny Shannon, Jim de Korne, and many others. [JOHN RUSH]
[MY RESEARCH IN MUSHROOM SCHOLARSHIP IN NO WAY “COMES FROM” OR IS A “DEPARTURE FROM” WASSON. WASSON IS IRRELEVANT! I GOT THE MALFORMED ENTHEOGEN BRICK, BUILDING BLOCK TO REPAIR AND SUPPORT MY EGODEATH THEORY, FROM HEINRICH, RUCK, M HOFFMAN… NOT FROM ALLEGRO OR WASSON. STOP IT WITH THE PERSONALITY/FIELD CONFLATION.
STOP MAKING EVERYONE IN THE FIELD A SLAVE OF POPE WASSON & ALLEGRO! WASSSON & ALLEGRO ARE IRRELEVANT, NOT THE GUIDING STAR TO STEER THE UNIVERSE OF THIS TOPIC BY. -MH]
Most recently, John Rush. Failed God: Fractured Myth in a Fragile World.
The Entheogenic Catch-22
At the outset, let me emphasize that I differ from most of the other exponents of this theory in two key respects, each of which implies a kind of Catch-22 in the theory. To refresh your memory, Catch-22 is defined like this:
1. A situation in which a desired outcome or solution is impossible to attain because of a set of inherently illogical rules or conditions. 2. The rules or conditions that create such a situation. 2. A situation or predicament characterized by absurdity or senselessness. 3. A contradictory or self-defeating course of action.
First objection: I draw a strong distinction between religious experience and religion as such, i.e., dogma, hierarchy, institution, ritual and regalia. I reject the claim (expounded by Benny Shannon) that authoritarian religious dogmas such as the Ten Commandments could have been derived from visionary states induced by sacred plants. Consistent with this stance, I reject the notion that
genuine visionary revelations given by plant-teachers became corrupted or co-opted into dogmatism and blind beliefs. I insist that the corruption of paternal/authoritarian religion was present from its inception, a calculated and deliberate strategy for behavioral control.
[WHAT’S YOUR POINT? THAT HAS F*CK-ALL TO DO WITH ENTHEOGEN SCHOLARSHIP; To what extent mushrooms in Christianity? -MH]
I argue that religious belief-systems and associated rules that locate their origin and authority in a paternal off-planet deity cannot have been derived from visionary trance induced by sacred plants,
[who cares where worldly mundane rules came from. IRRELEVANT.]
for such plants are teachers given by nature to assist the human species in maintaining continuity with nature and, when required, healing its rupture from nature due to socialization of the species. The second part of this proposition states my assumption—pet theory, if you like—that
sacred planets teach and inspire our connection to the earth, so they cannot be cited as the source of off-planet dogmas or anti-natural belief-systems.
[YOU ARE CONFUSED AND IRRELEVANT. -MH]
Catch-22: psychoactive agents designed and provided by nature to connect the human species to nature cannot induce visions that turn humankind against nature in favor of off-planet divinity , as all the major religions do.
[YOU ARE GETTING LOST IN YOUR OWN THEOLOGICAL WRONG CONFUSED SPECULATIONS IRRELEVANT. STAY ON TOPIC. YOUR “OBJECTION” TO “THE THEORY”[SIC] IS IRRELEVANT GASEOUS VAPOUR. -MH]
[DUMB*SS LASH THINKS ALLEGRO BELIEVES IN MR. HISTORICAL JESUS!:]
John Lash wrote: “associations between psychoactive mushrooms and the historical Jesus, famously argued by John Allegro in The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross“
[WHY SHOULD ANYONE WASTE TIME READING LASH WHEN HE CATESTROPHICALLY BOTCHES ALLEGRO’S AHISTORICITY POSITION? Clark Heinrich’s book commits same major egregious error.
DUDE YOU DIDN’T EVEN READ ALLEGRO, DID YOU?! Manifestly not!
YET YOU PRESUME TO WRITE ABOUT YOUR PROJECTED FANTASY OF “WHAT ALLEGRO WROTE”, OR “THE ALLEGRO THEORY” — YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND SH*T ABOUT ALLEGRO THE ACTUAL MAN AND HIS ACTUAL REAL BOOK.]
Second objection: I discount the widely accepted associations between psychoactive mushrooms and the historical Jesus, famously argued by John Allegro in The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross. In my view as a comparative mythologist, a great part of Allegro’s conflation of mushroom/penis/savior is unfounded, if not downright fatuous. His scholarship is excellent except when he gets lost in word games with terms in lost languages. In parallel with my objection in the first point, I reject the idea that true, pure, or genuine teachings of Jesus existed, having been derived from visionary trance induced by sacred mushrooms, [THAT’S NOT ALLEGRO’S POSITION, DUMB*SS!] but then were later repressed, distorted, coopted or otherwise corrupted by those who wished to profit from such visions while prohibiting them to the world at large.
[ALL OF THAT IS IRRELEVANT/PERIPHERAL TO THE FIELD, TO THE CENTRAL QUESTION: To what extent mushrooms in Christianity?]
Catch-22: The supposed original teachings of Jesus as leader of a Palestinian mushroom cult [NOT EVEN CLOSE TO ALLEGRO’S POSITION!] cannot have been corrupted into the message of the New Testament because that message is proven by historical and textual analysis to be a systematic contrivance that does not require a hidden or esoteric message for its basis. In short, the NT cannot be corrupted or encoded mushroom shamanism [MISSING PERIOD/TEXT]
[ANYONE TALKING OF “MUSHROOM SHAMANISM” IS WORKING IN SOME TOTALLY DIFFERENT FIELD THAN my field: Psilocybe in Greek & Christian religion & mixed-wine banqueting. -mh]
[whatever you think the position is that you are objecting to — as confused as Letcher — is irrelevant to the real field of mushroom scholarship about Psilocybe Mixed Wine.
Your position is irrelevant, because your imagined “position objected to” is garbled by you, and irrelevant. -mh]
Various points of difference and my reason for them can be found in the files linked from this page. Principally, I object to attributing paternal dogmatic religion such as the Mosaic cult of Yahweh to visionary trance induced by psychoactive plants
[at best, those are secondary, peripheral issues, not the center of the field, of mushroom scholarship: To what extent mushrooms in Christianity? -mh]
because that argument lends a kind of legitimacy to belief-systems which are hostile to the Goddess and the earth. [you are twisting the field into political proxy, stop it -mh] I insist that endorsing this argument turns out to be a good thing for religion, making it look good because its basis is presumed to have been an authentic visionary revelation, but a really bad thing for psychonautic visionary practice. I oppose Shannon and others mainly on this point: they give manistream[sic] religion a specious provenance and false legitimacy.
[Lash has bias against religion, which bias is driving his confusion regarding mushrooms in that religion. LASH IS SO CONFUSED AND JUMBLES SO MANY DISTORTED VIEWS, HE CAN’T CONTRIBUTE ANYTHING TO THE proper field. -mh]
“Finally, I would point out that in my opinion it is no coincidence that the argument for “Moses on marijuana or mushrooms” attained international press coverage at the very moment that governmental agencies around the world commenced a brutal crackdown on psychoactive plants, homeopathic medicine, and natural remedies. Tell me, if you can:
Why did media interest in Shannon’s thesis [why call the entire field (as you mis-see it) as “Shanon’s thesis”? -mh] come at a moment when the practice of psychoactive shamanism around the world came under extreme threat?
Dead Sea ET Cult
In Not in His Image, I argued that the Zaddikim of the Qumran settlement were a UFO cult [Lash is a confused literalist -mh], not a mushroom cult. In that same book I showed that disciplined use of psychoactive planets in the Mysteries was guided by a master narrative, the myth of the fallen goddess, Sophia. This myth includes an episode that explains the origin, nature, and effects of alien intrusion upon the human mind—the riddle of the Archons. I contend that
Archontic suggestion or subliminal entrainment by that one identified species of predatory psychic entity can account for the salvationist belief-systems and paternal/authoritarian religion in human history.
Gnostics of the Pagan Mysteries were trained clairvoyants, clairaudients, and adepts of astral projection and lucid dreaming. Like the new seers of Carlos Castaneda[FRAUD], they were able to explore the Nagual, navigate the supernatural layers of the universe, and investigate other dimensions and alien entities, including inorganic beings like the Archons. In short, they were past masters of the noetic sciences and experts in parapsychology.
The Gnostics attributed Judeo-Christian religion to mental aberrations due in part to the intrusion of extraterrestrial predators, the Archons. [SEE my recent aside, mytheme: {giants abduct/lust for virgin daughters of men}; find “daughter” in present page, “idea development page 6”. Lash ought to write “extra-cosmic”, or “supra-lunar”, not “extra-terrestrial”. -mh] Their characterization of the m.o. of these entities accords closely with the “spiritual control program” attributed by Jacques Vallee to ETs, whom he called “messengers of deception.” Not agent of evil, please note. The Apocryphon of John and other Gnostic texts describe the Archons in exactly the same manner.
Following the Gnostic view, I attribute Judeo-Christian religion (the Abrahamic creeds) to the influence of these “messengers of deception,”rather than to visions and revelations inspired by psychoactive plants, or a later distortion of such visions and revelations. On the contrary, such visionary experience, or trance learning, offers healing insight and corrective instruction against Archontic deviation. Such is my position on entheogenic revelation contrasted to mainstream religious doctrines, rites, and rules.
[summary: Lash likes entheogens, and hates religion, therefore, our religion (which is bad) cannot have included entheogens. -mh]
Fail-Safe
Noetic sciences in the Mysteries carried a fail-safe against the risk of tricking ourselves into delusional beliefs by the cleverness of our own minds. To safeguard their investigations, the telestai (“those who are aimed,” self-designation of initiates in the Mysteries) used sacred plant-teachers that enabled them to learn directly from Gaia, and correct errors in their mystical vision of the earth and humanity. They would have argued that such plants cannot impart to our minds any teaching, belief, or dogma of a paternal, off-planet, authoritarian, anti-feminine bearing. Sacred plants are emissaries of the living earth, the Aeon Sophia who morphed into the planet. In shamanic trance induced by psychoactive plants, the telestai detected what deviates us from rapport with nature. I conclude that
It is absurd to speculate that the plant-teachers provided by Gaia to keep us sane and align us to her purposes could have been the source of an off-planet religion, deviating us from our rapturous bond with the planet.
But hold on a second. The famous account by Michael Harner of his shamanic initiation with ayahuasca lends a further twist to this scenario. Harner saw dragon-like entities in long-boats sailing through the sky. In the altered state, he understood these entities to declare that they were the creators of humanity. When he recounted this incident to an old-timer who had monitored his ayahuasca session, the veternan shaman replied with a chuckle, “They always say that, but they are liars.”
Note well: it was not the plant entity of ayahuasca itself who spoke to Harner claiming to be the off-planet or ET creator of the human race. That was the claim of skybound entities who appeared in the ayahuasca-incuded trance. This distinction supports my view that ancient seeers who investigated the cosmos in altered states induced by sacred plants were able to detect alien deception and intrusion. They had the power of true discernment, just like the old ayahuascero who wisened up Michael Harner.
Knowing how we can be deviated was one of the primary concerns of the Pagan initiates of the Mysteries. Like them, I have encountered Archon/ETs in lucid dreams and other altered states, with and without the assistance of plant teachers. But I have learned what to make of these encounters, and how to distinguish predatory entities from belevolent or neutral ones, through long and disciplined practice with sacred plants, the medicine of true vision.
Harner’s anecdote is extremely instructive. It shows how two aspects of Gnostic teaching dovetail into a single, supremely important insight:
Cognitive ecstasy induced by sacred plants exposes the alien factor in our own minds and the cosmos at large, providing a crucial discrimination: anti-human and anti-nature beliefs attributed to an off-planet deity arise with that alien factor and not from the plant-teachers who alert us to its presence.
Gnostic teaching in this vein were tremendosly[sic] sophisticated.
[call John Lash garbled, but he’s no more garbled and irrelevant, putting forth confused, tangential, arbitrary argumentation, than Letcher, and maybe Hatsis.
WHY DID LASH’S NEW WEBSITE OMIT ALL HIS MUSHROOM COVERAGE? -mh]
Eadwine Psalter
The centerpiece of the study of entheogenic religion is the Paris Eadwine Psalter, a one-of-its-kind manuscript from the 13th century which I had the good fortune to discover in the National Library in Paris in September 2007, just prior to the publication of my book, Not in His Image.
This portal page is in development… (12 Nov 2009 Flanders)
/ end of Lash article
Trying to Look at the Eadwine Psalter or “Paris Eadwine Psalter” – A Copy of Canterbury Psalter? Confusing & Unclear
slow site! No confirmation yet of same images as Canterbury. Frustrating and confusing. I cannot confirm that the Canterbury mushroom tree pictures also appear in Earlwine Psalter as people seem to be saying.
“A recent trip to Paris afforded me the chance to visit the National Library of France and acquire some inkjet reproductions of the Paris Eadwine Psalter. With a couple of exceptions, where the source is wrongly attributed to “the Canterbury Psalter,” this material appears exclusively on the Internet on metahistory.org. Gaze and wonder!
Here is the same folio page shown in another view with color values adjusted to how it looks on microfilm—rather faded. I have not yet seen or handled the original MS so I do not know if its colors correspond to the gloriously preserved tones of the other version, or if this is a photoshop effect.
Scholars take the Sermon on the Mount for an illustration of Psalms 2, with allusion perhaps to verse 6, “Yet I have set my king upon the holy hill of Zion.” In the scant literature I have been able to find on the Paris Eadwine Psalter, we are told that the lavish imagery of the MS is linked textually to the Old Testament books describing early events in the ecclesiastical story of humankind, mainly Genesis, and to the Psalms.
Lately we are hearing a lot of chatter about entheogens in the Old Testament, suggesting that Moses was “high” on Mount Sinai in ways that have not previously been considered. Benny Shannon seems to have kicked off the discussion, which involves a variation of the ecclesiastical mushroom cult proposed by Carl Ruck, a spinoff of the Allergo thesis (The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross), itself a spinoff of the Wasson thesis. [I hate several aspects of this narrative. -mh] Biblical Entheogens by Shannon, just out in March 2007, looks set to stir up a lot of controversy, not to mention loud protests from the Catholic Church and other defenders of ye ol’time relijun, salvationist-style. Paul Krassner has now jumped into the fray, as doubtless many others will do in short time.
I can only wonder how the revelations of the Paris Eadwine psalter will affect this debate. One possibility: since the Paris MS does not show amanitas, it may influence the prevalent tendency of Allergo, Ruck, and others to identify the fly-agaric as the entheogenic sacrament of choice among the Christian fold. In other words, it will support speculation that Christianity arose from a mushroom cult in Palestine. I strongly oppose this thesis.
[THE “MUSHROOM CULT” NOTION IS CONFUSED, UNCRITICALLY PRESUPPOSES THE RARITY/ABNORMALITY OF ENTHEOGENS. -MH]
Another possibility: close analysis of MS 8846 may suggest the survival of non-Christian cultic practices in Europe, late remnants of the Mysteries. If so, we will have to consider how Mystery cult revelations of the magic mushroom differed from the visionary states experienced by the ecclesiastical elite who, according to Ruck and others, kept the secret to themselves. I have some thoughts on this issue, to be presented in a look at the “Good Friday Experiment” coming up in The Psychonautic Adventure, G2.
[“how differed from” is crap writing! Unclear, packed with misguided assumptions, leading to confusion, leading to the kind of garbled, confused & confusing, roundabout writing typical of the minimal & modertate entheogen theorists. -mh]
Typically, the MS presents botanically pictured fungi of different species or genii along with a stylized version, the omphalos-bud, as I am calling it. Beneath the Savior [where? vague! THERE ARE 2+5+3 MUSHROOM TREES IN the whole image; WHICH ONE ARE YOU FOCUSING ON??] are two [sic; five] botanical images, white (left) and brown (right), The brown mushroom [the rightmost m-t of the group of 5?] sprouts from the same trunk as a blue omphalos-bud. In the upper right, under the angelic finger [upper right of whole image], two botanical specimens with their caps shredding sprout from the same trunk as a blue omphalos-bud. Just to the left, an ochre-colored omphalos-bud shares the trunk with a brown mushroom.
Did the visionary artists who conceived and oversaw the making of the psalter want to signify that both [be specific!] kinds of mushroom, literally represented and stylized, have the same source? They both come from the fruiting body of the mycelium. The blue-staining properties of the Psilocybe genus, indicative of tryptamines, are continually emphasized by the distinct bluish color of the trunks of the fruiting bodies. Elsewhere in the MS the botanically represented specimens display the same coloring.
is #2 a combined Vine-Leaf Tree / Mushroom Tree? the blue strand-plants — nonbranching laurel strands like Greek-myth trees?
Close up, the mushroom mountain has some intriguing details. The omphalos buds [right side of tree 2, tree 3, left side of tree 5] appear in three different types, (left to right): a composite of mouth-like nodules (recalling a venus fly-trap) , white mini-mushrooms [Liberty Caps – doesn’t Lash know anything? confusing writer, and ignorant -mh] in a lattice, and oblique, tree-shaped triangles. The mini-mushroom head is strikingly juxtaposed to the world globe at the tip of the long inverted cross held by the Savior. In Christian symbology, the fusion of cross and globe signifies the reign of dominator religion across the entire planet. Here, with the staff pointed down, it may carry another message. The ecclesiastical staff touches or almost merges with the mini-mushroom cluster—as if to say, “The true power of the world comes from here?“
The two lower mushrooms are clearly represented as botanical specimens, [literal depictions, vs. stylized depictions & depictions of effects -mh] although the one on the right may incorporate other plant imagery [vine-leaf?]. Otherwise, the mushroom mount is composed of clustered dark ringlets with some kind of white-flowered plant sprouting from them. These delicate plants have ochre buds or flame-like blossoms at the top. Botanical identification? I can’t say. However, speaking as a psychonaut, I can attest that the ringlets resemble a sight I have frequently seen in visionary trance: [here instead of proper Mythemeland tradition, he gets too modern -mh] supple conduits that wind endlessly into hyperspace. I take these conduits to be micro-tubular channels in the atmospheric body of Gaia. Paracelsus called them iliastri, threads of star-matter. They are closely associated with DNA which is structurally arranged by microtubules. The unidentified plants have three stems, recalling the triplets of DNA. Could the leaves on the plants be a way of picturing letters in the genetic code?
Christ tempted by an antlered [= branching; possibilism-thinking -mh] shaman-devil in a mushroom grove.
his new site: http://nemeta.org – it appears that all of his ‘mushroom’ content has been omitted. The articles are all at wayback machine; use the links below, via internet archive.
The Discovery of a Lifetime describes how I found in the National Library in Paris a medieval ms. of the 13th Century, the Paris Eadwine Psalter, the only copy in existence, lavishly illustrated with Daliesque images of psychoactive mushrooms. http://www.metahistory.org/psychonautics/Wasson/Discovery.php [be sure to shield Mr. Historical Moses & Mr. Historical Jesus from this taboo discovery! -mh]
Entheogenic Revelation: The Paris Eadwine Psalter outlines my proposed book on the Wasson theory of the origin of religion (working title “Paradise Denied‘), a project that did not get sold. It relates the Eadwine psalter to the Mysteries, in particular to perception of the molecular structure of DNA in a heightened state induced by psychoactive plants. http://www.metahistory.org/psychonautics/Eadwine/EadwinePsalter.php [or a vision of the intertwined frozen worldlines of the the control-thought inserter/injector & the control-thought receiver/receptacle, per the later depiction of the caduceus -mh]
The Entheogenic Theory of Religion sets out my strong objections to the trendy notion (coming from Benny Shannnon, John Rush, and others) that patriarchal figures like Moses and Jesus [who existed ahistorically, in Mythemeland -mh], iconic proponents of salvationist religion, acquired their message by inspiration from sacred teacher plants. http://www.metahistory.org/psychonautics/Wasson/WassonAndCo.php works:
The Oldest Taboo in the World:Introduction to Wasson Book (incomplete and unpublished). Considers the taboo encoded in the Old Testament myth of the Temptation of Adam and Eve, forbidding the eating of sacred plants that give wisdom or a divine or god-like nature. [golden apples of tree in garden of hesperidess grants immortality, original dwellers in garden: Zeus & Hera -mh]
The Banker and the Bruja: Chapter One of Wasson Book – describes the meeting between R. Gordon Wasson and the Mazatec shaman Maria Sabina, resulting in the handover of psychoactive plant mysticism by its indigenous practitioners, making it known to the world at large.
/ end Lash site content
Confirmed that Vine-Leaf Trees Pair with Mushroom Trees, by a Combined “Mushroom+Vine-Leaf Tree” in Typo-Titled, Wrong-Psalter Video
[8:26 p.m. December 22, 2020] —
I’m getting more confirmation: Feeling generally that I made the correct bet/investment. I’m getting more evidence, sufficient to defend the case that the dud mushroom trees in Canterbury are vine-leaf trees.
hi-res
Confirmed: Grape leaves ARE sometimes, in important art, shown as tripartate, like the vine-leaf trees in Canterbury, confirming that those trees are specifically a vine leaf (grape vine leaf or possibly ivy vine leaf). The stylization is emphatic in this art style, so we are looking for a stylistic match, not a botanical literal match. Especially match stylized grape leaves in Greek & Christian art, with the stylized vine-leaf trees in Canterbury — more than comparing to specimen photos.
Confirmed: Vine leaves ARE paired with mushroom caps: proof: multiple mushroom trees in Canterbury Psalter have a mushroom cap and a leaf.
Also confirmed: lifted garment in greek & Christian art: the Maenad’s cloth in the Dionysus Triumph mosaic is lifted on the right, just like Dionysus’ garment is lifted to the left; both are lifted by explicit, hardly-hidden mushroom shapes (though I believe that I didn’t see the mushroom in Dionysus garment in 2006, but only closer to 2019 or 2020).
[11:59 a.m. December 22, 2020] I just got corroboration of pairing of mushroom trees + vine-leaf trees where vine = nonbranching: the tree on the right side of the devil temptation scene, has both a vine-leaf, on the left, and a cubensis/liberty-cap, on the right.
Score:
Hatsis: -1 — incorrectly said in a “Pyschedelic”[sic] debate video clip that this Canterbury Psalter image is from the “Edwin-Paris Psalter”, not the same psalter as the Canterbury Psalter with its mushroom trees. It is at least incorrect to say as Hatsis does, that this image isn’t in the Great Canterbury Psalter. This situation looks confusing – two copies of these pictures?
Hoffman: +1 — got confirmation of pairing mushroom trees with vine-leaf trees representing nonbranching.
There may be copies of the image in both psalters, which according to Wiki are “the Eadwine Psalter” and “the Great Canterbury Psalter”, not “the Eadwine-Paris Psalter”.
I proved that the above mushroom shapes represent Psilocybe deliberately used for religious experiencing:
The “Hanging-over-God’s-sword” mushroom-tree image by the same team is either meaningless, or represents trained, expert, peak-state use of Psilocybe as I proved.
The same team painted all these mushroom images in this work, the Canterbury Psalter.
Therefore all 65-70 mushroom plants illustrated by this team in this Canterbury Psalter, including the three mushroom trees in the above image, represent the use of Psilocybe to induce religious experiencing.
The vine-leaf trees which are coupled with these mushroom trees, by this team of illustrators, also indicate the routine, trained, efficient use of Psilocybe, to reveal non-branching of possibilities, destroying egoic possibilism-thinking.
The Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image with the trained, self-threatening Psalter reader, depicts not puzzlement over “the shadow” like today’s braggart hubristic Psilocybin therapists (Muraresku), but the opposite: the image provably depicts a Psilocybe expert-level direct engagement with the {serpentine dragon monster}, and reconciling with eternalism; learning how to deal with the pre-existence of control-thoughts, which kills, disproves, and effectively disempowers egoic control agency.
Jerusalem deals with the idea of eternalism: everything that has happened is happening right now and forever.
Could you explain your views on this?
My conception of an eternity that was immediate and present in every instant – a view which I have since learned is known as ‘Eternalism’ – was once more derived from many sources, but a working definition of the idea should most probably begin with [
[Minkowski] stated that we exist in a universe that has at least four spatial dimensions, three of which are the height, depth and breadth of things as we ordinarily perceive them, and the fourth of which, while also a spatial dimension, is perceived by a human observer as the passage of time.
The fact that this fourth dimension cannot be meaningfully disentangled from the other three is what leads [Minkowski] to refer to our continuum as ‘spacetime’.
This leads logically to the notion of what is called a ‘block universe’, an immense hyper-dimensional solid in which every moment that has ever existed or will ever exist, from the beginning to the end of our universe, is coterminous; a vast snow-globe of being in which nothing moves and nothing changes[no meta-change], forever.
Sentient life such as ourselves, embedded in the amber [rock] of spacetime, would have to be construed by such a worldview as massively convoluted filaments [snakes/worms, thread of life cut by the fates] of perhaps seventy or eighty years in length, winding through this glassy and motionless enormity with a few molecules of slippery and wet genetic material at one end and a handful or so of cremated ashes at the other.
It is only the bright bead of our consciousness moving inexorably along the thread of our existence, helplessly from past to future, that provides the mirage [eh “ego is illussion” doesn’t tell whole story, partly real] of movement and change and transience.
A good analogy would be the strip of film comprising an old fashioned movie-reel: the strip of film itself is an unchanging and motionless medium, with its opening scenes and its finale present in the same physical object.
Only when the beam of a projector – or in this analogy the light of human consciousness – is passed across the strip of film do we see Charlie Chaplin do his funny walk, and save the girl, and foil the villain.
Only then do we perceive events, and continuity, and narrative, and character, and meaning, and morality.
And when the film is concluded, of course, it can be watched again.
Similarly, when our individual four-dimensional threads of existence eventually reach their far end with our physical demise, there is nowhere for our travelling bead of consciousness to go save back to the beginning [gnostic rebirth is diffent, forgetting eternalism and being reincarnated into the egoic mental worldmodel] , with the same [type of egoic thinking reasserting/re-entrenching itself] thoughts, words and deeds recurring and reiterated endlessly, always seeming like the first time this has happened except, possibly, for those brief, haunting spells of déjà vu.
[deja vu kills; the devastating experience of remembering loss-of-control pre-existent, unavoidable; then the rescue from the fated doom-pseudo-remembering]
Of course, another good analogy, perhaps more pertinent to Jerusalem itself, would be that of a novel.
While it’s being read there is the sense of passing time and characters at many stages of their lives, yet when the book is closed it is a solid block in which events that may be centuries apart in terms of narrative are pressed together with just millimetres separating them, distances no greater than the thickness of a page.
As to why I decided to unpack this scientific [ancient archaic mystic entheogenic] vision of eternity in a deprived slum neighbourhood, it occurred to me that
through this reading of human existence, every place, no matter how mean, is transformed to the eternal, heavenly city.
2020 incl text file take time to optimize the phrases, & to manage/improve shortcuts. Page view groups the phrase by topical outline, to develop a lexicon subset for that outline item eg 10 phrases about the personal control system; unlike util app. v1 of my [acro]/keyboard shortcuts page failed bc failed to reoutline. Word made quick business out of building up an outline while sorting phrases into the outline.
v1. 1987 acro’s
v2. 2010 Mobile: Phrase/Shortcut pairs in Text Replacement in Settings: General, for touchscreen soft keyboard.
v3. 2016 desktop Replace/With pairs. Desktop sorts by Shortcut|Phrase pairs, labelled as Replace|With sort-column headings. Failed to manage and practice them, used a tiny few, very heavily; unbalanced usage, underutilized.
v4. 2020 my latest, Nov/Dec 2020 set of literal *keyboard* shortcuts. Marked a text dump of the 2016 [acro]/keyboard shortcuts, putting – or + whether it’s most excellent and recommended/useful. deleted the – shortcut/phrase pairs. added, get quicker at it and hard is making use of them, that’s why I had to go to the hassle of dumping/copying this batch to the Core Concepts page after the beneficial exercise i did of sorting the Phrases, the optimized concept-labels.
not a concerted effort to employ as impressively as my acro’s empowered by writing-thinking-reading loop in 1987.
I have not lived up to that much taking advantage to speed writing and give lexicon construct
Engineer the Optimal Lexicon to discuss (to model, to theory-construct, for theory revision, developing an explanatory framework, for demonstrated expansion of explanatory power, expanding the power and scope of seeing and understanding things that are observed and experienced in the altered state, seeing and understanding that kills the autonomous freewill-premised personal control system.
Mythemes
{impure thinking} {cannot bear to see & look} at the {dragon}, {torch light}, {king} {turn to stone for eternity} {stuck forever in the rock Hades & Persephone -ruled rock underworld of the rock catacombs sacred meals of Psil mixed-wine banquets {called and brought to the banquet by the serpent god} that made you come here to the god’s banquet
worship snake god = think in terms of levels of control, changi
The impure thinking of the {virgin child (youth/maiden)} not yet {passed through the fire} to {burn off the perishable part; become immortal; eternal life; no longer virgin; died; purified; cleansed; adult} now.
Instantaneous or a drawn-out series.
Drawn-out Series:
Ptolemaic astral ascent mysticism,
Mithraism levels of initiation,
levels of planetary orbs geocentric orbs
earth luna mercury venus sun jupiter saturn fixedstars;
outside the orbs is empyrium EMPYREUM dwelling place of God and of all the Elect.
Mythemes Triggered by Elevated Rlying-Ram Awareness to Save Prixis the Brother as Ascend Higher Lose Balance Fall Back Down to the Underworld from the elevation of the immortals who have eternal life the elect born from the rock transcend eternalism rock move the pole star of the no-so-fixed stars.
Outside the Lion ruler king is outside the sphered fate ruled hiemarmene serpent-wrapped cosmos orbs
earcht earth moon mer ven sun mars jup sat fs emp.
it really centers around fixed stars: Saturn harvest possibilism-thinking childhood model of time & ctrl, is considered the gatekeeper/filter portion of the eternalism fixed stars level.
naturally one immediately wants to brag of transcending fatedness, so the empyrium.
3 components , don’t need lower plants.
You need 3 orb-levels:the Saturn level” is really not a level but a Gateway component of the 3-item system modeled as 3 orbs by rough analogy.
the childhood possibilism mental worldmodel of time, self, possibility, and control
Mythemes
{child youth virgin maiden caught abducted climaxed, snake revealed in lidded basket by Cautopates’ torch light and cauduceus aimed highlighting the rock-carved snake-basket}
{Cautes the upward torch-light illuminator showing the higher level of fate-ruled control, Sol the unveiled male partner frozen in rock, who helps undermine and overpower the projected image of the simple autonomous control agent, virgin maiden abducted raptured wrestled submitted overpowered climaxed impreg married by the god gave birth to divine immortal child} [todo: list of ways the mind’s personal control system is like a female.] Mithraism Bride level of initiation. the church of the elect is the Bride of Christ.
child} thinking {cannot bear to see} {the rock dragon king frozen in rock powerless} the {virgin maiden is lifted swept away by the god} who [list of ways the personal control system is like a female]
child-thinking cannot bear the sight of peak-state transformation of the mental worldmodel from possibilism to eternalism.
to explain Mystery Religion initiation and Hellenistic mythology.
[acro]/keyboard shortcuts mgmt
Get faster at defining.
Spend time improving the ourline-grouped — several areas are marked where better set of phrases is needed, the most succinct way and what the heck is the shortcut? I f I can looked up phrase i can find shtct, to use/learn.
Practice sessions, drills, would be needed, as one test of the goodness merit of a usefulness of the set of phrases. Usefullness is a function of practice and management eg WordPress page ediable copy of the strings. …
define [acro]/keyboard shortcuts faster, which means using util app primarily, yet, also while defining them, sometimes, management at the WordPress page (Core Concepts).
Core Concepts window not open for editing all the time.
Do not let the heavyweight management WordPress page be an impediment; don’t do page-first/primary.
continue to use util app heavily, and but also,
do something anything, with an editable copy.
Some usage of direct util app, and some usage of the WordPress mgmt page, is more important than worrying about syncing app w/ editable WordPress page w/ the optimized concepts optimized concept-labels, Phrases in the mobile & desktop Text Shortcuts.
Unhelpfully, shortcuts are not shown with the phrases.
Limitation: this list of phrases does not include the Shortcuts; only the Phrases. Showing the phrases and seeing their shortcuts is important for management and usage, keep page open for viewing.
mgmt page editable: add notes about optimizing, where to improve, challenges of expression.
Constant flow of new best-ever phrases, but don’t get to view those.
Lazy option: Get good at looking thorugh the util app, know it well/thoroughly. Not able to outline or take notes, there.
Mobile device shares all the “Phrase” & “Shortcut” pairs with the desktop’s “Replace” & “With” column headings.
Choosing Your Religion = Creating Your Religion
If you have the moral authority and responsibility to PICK your brand of religion, then you have the moral authority and responsibility to CREATE your brand of religion.
Choosing from pre-fabricated religion brands/versions that someone else created, is equivalent to creating your own religion brand.
If you don’t have the authority to create your own brand of religion, then neither do you have the authority to select which brand of religion (that someone else created) you affirm.
No Interest in Amanita, Scopalamine, Cannabis, Opium – for Western Religious History & Mythology
The book Apples of Apollo, which I read when it was published in late 2000, didn’t do it for me, then, or now.
Heinrich’s book Strange Fruit about Amanita is at least a fine colorful picture-book.
Since 2001, I’ve been looking for something other than “analogies for Amanita”.
Ruck puts forth analogies for the Amanita plant forms, as if that is interesting; that analogy-identification is presented as if the Amanita form is the interesting, fascinating, soul-shaking thing that is revealed in the mystic peak intense altered state.
I quickly get bored with such mytheme-decoding, and come away feeling empty-handed, short-changed. It’s reductionist; the peak mystic-state experiencing is reduced down to merely a physical plant.
Plants are boring, which is why from October 27, 1985 to January 11, 1988 (Phase 1 of Transcendent Knowledge development), I never wrote about “psychedelics”, but only wrote about “loose cognitive binding”.
I’m far more interested in the mixed-wine banqueting to induce peak mystic-state experiencing, because most of the mythemes there describe the experiencing, not the plant.
Ruck’s books are all about entheogenic plants, not about entheogenic experiential phenomenology.
Ruck maps mythemes to a plant; but the Banqueting Tradition in Antiquity maps mythemes to things that are observed and experienced in the altered state.
I’m bored by mythemes describing the Amanita plant forms; I’m quite interested in mythemes describing Psilocybe effects.
{giants abduct virgin daughters of men} {men} doesn’t mean men {abduct} doesn’t mean abduct {virgin} doesn’t mean virgin {daughter} doesn’t mean daughter
the male the control-thought inserter and the eternalism-transformed mind has become one of the immortals having eaten of the golden apple in the Garden of Eden and become live forever, non dying, a thantos non-die-able because already be die’d, lost virginity at being overtaken and undermined and disproved.
{abduction/ sacrifice/ marry/ die/ give birth/ purification/ reborn/ made whole} – they are distinct concepts, but they necessarily occur in one and the same movement: When the mind was pulled upward into the Saturn/ Fixed Stars/ Empyrium level, that pulling-upward drove transformation of the model of self-in-world.
Idea Development Page Section (as a WordPress “Post”), vs. a WordPress weblog “Post”, vs. a WordPress web “Page”
The authoring experience is always narrow-column, for both the “Post” and “Page” format (middle third, when browser window is wide).
When the “Show More Settings” pane on right is hidden, the fixed-width text column is centered.
When the “Show More Settings” pane on right is displayed, the fixed-width text column scoots left but is centered within the left 2/3 of window; wrapping stays same.
The reading experience is narrow-column for the WordPress weblog “Post” format (middle third, when browser window is wide).
The reading experience is wide-column for the WordPress web “Page” format (left 2/3, when browser window is wide).
Objection to the weblog “Post” format: I doubt I want every section in this scratchpad page, to become a separate webpage.
I prefer longer pages with internal structure & navigation, and a shorter Site Map nav page.
Best general webpage length is 7 printed pages, but I prefer longer for my material, more like 12 pages.
[9:11 p.m. December 21, 2020]
When I work-up content at this WordPress site, should I do it in the form of:
A section in a long Idea Development Page Section (as a WordPress weblog “Post”).
A section in a long Idea Development Page Section (as a WordPress web “Page”).
A dedicated short WordPress weblog “Post”.
A dedicated short WordPress web “Page”.
Idea – Create an idea development page that’s implemented as a WordPress web “Page” rather than the present, WordPress weblog “Post” format.
Transitioning Articles from Weblog “Post” Format to Web “Page” Format
So far, no great glitches in the wider-column Page format vs the presnt, Post format.
I plan to copy content for 4-5 articles from weblog “Post” format to web”Page” format, keep the 4-5 orig Posts (empty), and link from them to the new, Page format. I don’t see any difference re: image width; no indication that Galleries should be moved. WordPress, for weblog Posts, has a “Gallery” format I haven’t tried.
Proof (Page started)
Criteria (need as Page)
1997 theory-spec
2006 main article – TOC links need relinking anyway.
maybe: Images of Mushrooms in Christian Art, see if it gains width for images.
Misusing WordPress “Posts” for Articles, Misusing WordPress “Post” Idea-Development Pages as Weblog Posts
Like how I have to manually add-in timestamps in the present “weblog Post” page: [ p.m. December 20, 2020] , shows I am misusing WordPress.
Should I stop using Posts and use Pages instead, for my articles/pages?
Should I stop using the present Idea Development pages, and use “Posts” as designed, instead? A section of present idea development page, would instead be a “weblog Post”.
World Ended Today on 12/21/2112 (December 21, 2112)
In the middle of my Nov 2011-Nov 2013, two-phase breakthrough toward {tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism.
It Was Clear I Must Explain Enlightenment Myself, for Everyone
It Was Clear from the Start in 1985: I’d Need to Think-Through Enlightenment Myself & Explain It for Everyone; the Books and Other Writers Got Nothing for Us
Reading others’ writing – cons: lowers IQ; gets pulled into a partly malformed perspective. I was told to read Wilber to get a broad relevant view, therefore I knew books had no explanation of transcendence.
It was all too clear what the situation was: roundabout fluff and poetic vague talk about transcendence;
I profitably analyzed Rock lyrics instead of getting much light from Pop Spirituality (closeted Pop Sike Cult).
Lots of Metal but lots of Pop FM Rock, every radio band had to have a Sike song else poser. Name a band — what’s their Sike song? What is the most Sike song from any band?
Metal bands were far wiser than Pop Spirituity.
Hanegraaff proved New Age Pop Spirituality was closeted Pop Sike culture
This is a long, densely informative book, with thoroughly documented scholarly references, and it ventures into an area that has been little explored but badly needs more coverage.
The book is too substantial; it’s daunting to review, but reviews are needed, such as describing what each chapter covers and what is significant and surprising that Rinella brings to light in each chapter. Certainly, this book more than earns its place within any entheogen history collection. It will be much-cited by other books in this area.
Entheogen scholars are discovering that visionary plants are the origin of religion. There has been a cover-up, censorship, and misrepresentation of drugs, and of the nature and origin of religion — suppressing the drug-origin of religion, and the place of visionary drug-plants in Western antiquity. This book reveals aspects of how different the truth is from the current official story of where religion has come from. Rinella reveals how various positions and conflicts between drugs and politics played out in antiquity.
The official story is crumbling and the truth of the matter is being revealed, helped greatly by this book, which had to fight its way through the publication process and which provides one model of how to meet the unreasonably high bar for quality of scholarship, to make it past the forces of censorship that maintain the current total bias and misrepresentation of the nature of religion and the central place of drug-plants in Western cultural history.
One must wonder how many other good manuscripts have been suppressed, and how much other solid scholarship has been blocked and thwarted by the official culture and its systems of approving knowledge. Multiple grad students have told me of their plight: they know there is a gold mine of paradigm-changing evidence that is well past-due to be explored formally and published, and research in entheogen history would benefit tremendously from being supported within the academic system, but for reasons of cultural politics, is not supported, but is vehemently suppressed. “I want to study this area in grad school. But there’s an extreme bias against even mentioning these ideas, against even turning our attention in this direction, of even proposing to look and see what evidence exists.”
It is as if the official culture realizes that if we permit our attention to be turned in this impermissible direction, the current conception of both religion and drugs (and Philosophy, and culture…) is certainly doomed to be straightaway revealed as resting on an entirely false “mythology of origin”. It’s as if the grad students propose to their committees that we put aside the adherence to the reigning pretence, stop burying our heads in the sand, stop denying the existence of this subject, and actually investigate and put forth this suppressed and forbidden matter into public view.
This situation is somewhat similar to sex research in the early 20th Century, and is actually quite closely related to the recent situation with the subject of Western Esotericism, which was taboo and was instantly dismissed out-of-hand, as being inherently unacceptable as a topic of academic historical research, until recently. The entire idea of “the role of drugs in our religious history” is altogether culturally taboo; the very idea is not permissible to think, mention, or countenance, according to official culture. So Rinella’s book is a major drug-politics victory, that has helped to clear the way to start to make it permissible to ask the question, for the first time, “To what extent were drugs used in our religious and cultural origins?”
/ end of book non-review
My November 23, 2011 Proto-Breakthrough Toward My November 29, 2013 Completed Breakthrough, on “{tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism”
At the end of time (which is today, November 22, 2011), all mysteries are unveiled, all wisdom is revealed.
[except for More Connections, November 29, 2013. I probably started writing at 11pm Nov 22, posted at 1am Nov 23. “Today = 22” was true at time of writing that start of post, not when posted. The intellectual work was done during Nov. 22nd & preceding days.] -mh2020]
The entire language of myth has fully opened, more than in 2001-2007 — continuing same vein as 2007, but I only had a view through the crack then, now it’s blown all the way open — the turning point was when I got radicalized in reaction to Rinella’s taking the moderate entheogen theory too far to conservative, and he raised question of the political downsides of mushroom mysteries, that harmed the demos.
_____
Actually, the contention in Athens was about the political downside & abuse of the revealed secret of non-kubernetes, and Heimarmene-dunamis, actually, more specifically than Rinella’s too-vague “mushroom use”.
_____
I told-off* the entheogenist for being weak-minded and complicit in Prohibition, in the bunk story the Establishment is coercing their weak, compromised minds into caving into.
We must think as an independent press!
Quit giving an *inch* to the Establishment!
Do the radical opposite of the view they advocate.
Purely and totally ignore them.
Refuse to be the slightest bit influenced by the Establishment view, that creeps and infests the minds of the purportedly leading-edge scholars.
Weed out that confused, inquisitional thinking from your mind.
[*not sure what I was referring to – my critique of Letcher? My Rinella book non-review was later, according to Amzn, reviewed on March 10, 2012. Heres my non-review — the book is over our heads. Requires stepping up quite a bit, to review. https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R29TWQI7705KLY/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl -mh2020]
_____
Be a pure, unchained, radical, independent thinker: follow venerable manly Edwin Johnson: per Robert Price:
How tragic; we can no longer take the received views for granted; we have to actually think, now.
_____
Set up an echo chamber — that’s how I achieved my great breakthrough Sep-Nov 2011: by making my thinking as simple and purely extreme as possible, hammering repeatedly in my echo chamber, screaming louder to drown out the voices of the Establishment contaminating my thinking, covertly inserted into my brain by remote control — and, chillingly, taking over Ruck’s brain, too, making him part of the Establishment Borg, so that we get the most sinister: revolutionary rebellion co-opted by the Establishment, complicit, coerced.
[eh, *qualified* “revolution”. Rinella’s book breaks my accustomed categories; I’m cautious about judging his book; I’d have to carefully re-read and reconsider where Rinella’s coming from — not some usual prefab stock position. -mh2020]
_____
The Establishment has infiltrated the minds of Rinella and Ruck, to corrupt their would-be “alternative” views.
Mother Jones has been bought out by Mega News Corp.
Books by Andy Letcher rushed out by big-name Establishment presses, making loud-sounding arguments about nothing in particular, a shell game, in which we nod our heads in dizzied consent that this constitutes an argument:
“The mushroom on the church door is evidence that there’s no hidden mushrooms in Christian art.
Therefore I have shown there’s no evidence for mushrooms in religion; such use is late 20th C only.”
Letcher
Yes Letcher, truly you have a dizzying intellect, I give in!
You are right (in your theory and position, whatever it is, that shifts on every other page, as needed, to give the right surface impression of something having been proved).
Any other views, all of them are wrong, whatever they are.
His book has all the logical structure of a pile of oatmeal.
_____
I haven’t seen argumentation with that level of soundness since I tore Wasson to shreds leaving nothing standing, regarding Plaincourault and related proxy issue of the supposed nonuse of mshr throughout Xn history, in Our religion.
When Hoffman was done with the temple of [Pope] Wasson, not one stone was left standing on the other.
Not to mention contributions from Irvin and Letcher toward same. [todo: review Letcher’s critique of Wasson.]
Wasson is forced to start from scratch with a *genuine* investigation of these Christian history questions this time.
_____
Ruck does well so far as he goes, in sticking to his guns even more, when the Establishment-hypnotized know-nothings say “Ruck can’t be right, because he sees mushrooms all throughout myth.”
That’s the same argument as I totally demolished from Wasson/Panofsky: “Plaincourault fresco cannot be mushrooms, because there are hundreds of what the art historians call ‘mushroom trees’ known in art.”
[the “argument-from-familiarity-with-stock-answer-to-explain-away” fallacy I wrote about below, earlier today -mh2020]
_____
That’s a kind of begging the question; of assuming that which is to be proved, with the superficial air, tone, and style of writing that tries to covertly mask-over that bunk move;
Wasson/Panofsky *assumes* as an uncritical presupposition, that mushroom-trees can’t represent mushrooms, and then uses that assumption *as if a conclusion of considered thinking*, to argue that this Plaincourault instance must “therefore” not represent mushrooms.
[Oh, but the CELERITY! the celerity with which the Top Art Historians toss-forth the Correct Party Line, PROVES they must be correct!
An argument-from-swiftness-of-spitting-forth-the-party-line, so impressive! -mh2020]
Just slather-on proving-sounding, argumentation-sounding, logic-sounding words, on top of a total non-argument.
_____
To boot, in addn, Wasson puts forth a crass brazen Argument From Authority:
“The art authorities are familiar with these m-trees and they know that these m-trees don’t represent mushrooms.”
That statement *is* the argument; there is no reasoned argument behind, under, prior to, supporting that statement; we are supposed to gullibly *imagine* such.
How weak are our minds?!
_____
Such was my hue & cry leading to my great complete breakthrough: the collapse and fall of the Myth Empire by the Diamond Hammer of Interpretation:
myth means cybernetics, heimarmene, & mushrooms
[therefore any decoding of myth must be of the form, which is a huge advantage & head-start:
“myth is a description by analogy, of {things that are observed and experienced in the altered state}:
which specific altered-state things for this particular mytheme; and what is the greatest analogous aspect? -mh2020]
I suppose I got good at myth interp as cyb/heim/mshr by 2007 (proved by [Egodeath Yahoo Group] posts & main article) — but this lang interpretation skill is a matter of degree of fluency, and I got way more fluent, literate, skilled, clear on the grammar of myth, along w/ tightening my theory-interp/technique a la defining tinier, denser, simpler, more rigid and hard-*ssed, toughened, more firmly *committed*, zealous, …
_____
I am known on the Web as “the Entheogen Fundamentalist”, take that to heart, own that, yes, we need to rise up to be that!
We must quit failing to be fundamentalists, radicals, purists, extremists — then we can as I have now fully proved break through into coherence and truth and remove the worm of Establishment programming, virus contaminating our thoughts, programmed by the Demiurge and his rulers of this passing age.
The Diamond Hammer of Interpretation:
mythos = kubernetes’, heimarmene dunamis, kai mukes.
Including narrowing the vague concept of “it means entheogens/psychedelics” to: “it means ingesting [*PSILOCYBE*] mushrooms, which make the mind perceive the uncontrollable (by executor mind) source of thoughts”.
_____
The God part of the brain, the unknown Controller X, *can* control my thoughts (directly or as creator/programmer of my frozen worldine instruction-thread),
but me/mind as local executor, control unit, cannot, can only *receive* and mechanically *read and process* the command-instructions that Controller X, via his Heimarmene-vine instruction-thread, forcibly injects and transmits into my mind, thus remotely controlling my thoughts, making me will to do things, by “his” command.
_____
I am Controller X,
[Controller X is the uncontrollable source of control-thoughts, but it’s a multi-level puppethood control hierarchy, per a Tauroctony: THATS WHY THEY NEED A *PAIR* OF TORCHBEARERS, CAUTES *AND* CAUTOPATES; TO ILLUMINATE TWO (OR MORE) DISTINCT SOURCES OF CONTROL — THUS PRODUCING LOCAL NONCONTROL — ARE MADE PERCEPTIBLE. Creator -> (Controller X is ultimately at this level) block universe -> worldline -> the control-thought inserter at a given time -> the control-thought receiver at that time
-mh2020]
and so I control and program everything that happens in the world; Controller X is me; I am transpersonal (you are deluded and crazy).
I thus insert my own commands into my mind, forcing myself to will things, indepdendently of my will.
I am the executor, the helpless reactive mechanical vessel who God forces command-thoughts into.
I am Sol, the totally overpowering Programmer, the source of all of everyone’s thoughts.
_____
I am Luna, the Executor, in whom Sol inserts thoughts. I am Mithras, who is forced to perceive the fountain gushing fecund thoughts into the loosened mind. I am the bull, discarded, dualistic, egoic thinking, and I control the power of freewill. I am the serpent of hiemarmene, inevitably led to drink the mshr blood from the receptive vessel forcefully filled with transcendent thoughts, that is neither bone, nor metal, nor wood. I am a program er. Metaprogramming is forced upon the steersman, who is made, his will is coerced and turned against itself, by entities he is forced to believe in.
_____
I am Controller X: I force my control-thoughts into my mind against its will, coercing the will, injecting my payload of control-overriding software into the helpless obedient vessel executor control unit, weak, obedient, female telepresence hardware dancing at my remote command.
Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Listed in “Pages” sidebar widget which you can turn on.
No “Prev/Next” post links at end.
No date shown at top automatically.
No whitespace on left. Same whitespace as a “Post”, on right.
todo: maybe: delete the content from the original, “Post” (weblog posting) version of my long, article posts. Replace by a link to the same content placed into a new “Page” (“Blank” template). Update Site Map to add new, “Page” links and clarification of the Post link vs. Page link.
Before doing that, try adding tons of content to the About Page, see if it malfunctions during editing like before.
Ancient History of Egodeath Site: CybTrans.com, February 14, 1997 (24 Years Ago)
CybTrans.com Page with Outline of Topical Pages
CybTrans.com, site title: Ego Death and Self-Control Cybernetics
Weirdly, this comprehensive outline page failed to link to the main, 1997 theory-spec, below.
If it’s zoomed too big, press Command+[-] or Windows+[-] to shrink text.
For questions about the site, the email address is shown: unit1 at cybtrans com
To create most of the pages at CybTrans.com, I broke up my huge Word file (often rearranged using Outline view) that contained all my writings in the early-mid 1990s.
The structuring at CybTrans.com represents a topical outline view of my giant idea-development Word file I worked-up from around 1988-1997.
Theory-Spec/Summary: Ego Death and Self-Control Cybernetics
including the final section, which was a separate post at PC site: The Egoic and Transcendent Mental Models and the Rationality of Ego Death
I wrote the article at CybTrans.com, and then copy/pasted to Principia Cybernetica. Strangely, the article is not listed in the main, detailed outline page.
Older Domains, Before Anyone Else Heard of the Web
As far as I could tell, I was one of the first 3 people at WELL dialup site to announce the World-Wide Web, probably in 1993, because I was doing research on hypertext technology, since 1989.
I want to use the Lynx character-mode browser like back then, the pre-Mosaic (on DOS-PC) days.
Web Browser History https://broadbandnow.com/internet/w/wi_browse.htm — “Tim Berners-Lee wrote the first web browser on a NeXT computer, called WorldWideWeb, finishing the first version on Christmas day, 1990. He released the program to a number of people at CERN in March, 1991, introducing the web to the high energy physics community, and beginning its spread.”
“Mosaic. Marc Andreessen and Eric Bina from the NCSA released the first version of Mosaic for X-Windows on Unix computers in February, 1993.”
The character-mode browser on which I discovered the Web, before anyone else even on the WELL:
“Lynx. The University of Kansas had written a hypertext browser independently of the web, called Lynx, used to distribute campus information. A student named Lou Montulli added an Internet interface to the program, and released the web browser Lynx 2.0 in March, 1993. Lynx quickly became the preferred web browser for character mode terminals without graphics, and remains in use today. Resources include the Browser.org Lynx page.”
Before the Web
You’d hop from one directory-archive to another, using Archie or something of that generation. So, the Lynx browser was like a character-mode improvement on that.
Email to Jerry Brown about the Evident Failure of Art Historians to Ever Critically Discuss Mushroom Trees Anywhere
Hi Jerry, Thanks, I thoroughly read the partial translation. The word ‘mushroom’ (-trees) doesn’t appear in that portion.
The translation helped me: Using Brinckmann’s “vine leaf” and “grapevine leaf” hint, I now have a new relevant solution and hypothesis: a new explanatory construct: “vine-leaf trees” (bolstering my theory that “mushrooms reveal ego-killing nonbranching of possibilities”).
Now I have a sound, coherent, integrated explanation for the pairing of the exciting mushroom trees and the boring, dud non-mushroom trees that have vine-leaves instead of mushroom caps:
{vine, grapevine leaves} = the ego-shattering perception of non-existence of branching possibilities, in the intense peak altered state.
That’s thanks to Brinckmann, whose work I am now using against Panofsky & Wasson & Letcher & Hatsis, & Wasson’s other art historian Meyer Schapiro.
The Incredible Shrinking “Art Historians Have Already Discussed Mushroom-Trees” Claim by Panofsky
The translation covers Chapter 1 of 5, and the final quarter of Chapter 5. The translation covers 1.25 chapters out of 5, = 25% of Brinckmann’s book, by chapter-count.
At most, this book could have 65 pages of coverage of mushroom trees — I don’t believe that this book has ANY coverage of mushroom trees. The whole situation is a bluff, a smokescreen.
Art historians have managed to “explain-away” the problematic explanandum/data, by reasoning using the fallacy of “argument-by-familiarity-of-explanation”: “We are familiar with these mushroom trees, and we are familiar with baselessly asserting that they must not mean mushrooms.”
The super-popularity of mushroom shapes in the art of Christendom is problematic data like the precession of Mercury, or failure of planets to follow math of the Old Theory: it’s a piece of data that refuses to fit into the Old Explanatory Theory.
Hatsis claims it’s a problematic datum, that the texts don’t discuss mushrooms – he doesn’t know how to read Mythemes though; his expertise at historical research renders him incompetent at reading mythemes (in contrast to Cyberdisciple, who reads languages including Mythemese).
The art historians by 1952 were familiar with mushroom-trees and had informally settled on dismissing the import, as “mere arbitrary random accidental stylization”. So what, so far as that goes; the sheer fact of familiarity means nothing, regarding correct interpretation and proper debate.
The art historians never critically debated the matter, either among themselves, or with the mycologists or proto- “entheogen scholars”.
The art historians merely informally settled on a folk explanation, a stock “explanation”; a rote, standard pseudo-explanation for themselves.
There does not exist any proper write-up among art historians on the pros and cons, the merits or deficiencies, of the “mushrooms mean mushrooms” position.
There is no evidence anywhere, that art historians have ever discussed or debated whether the superabundant mushroom trees represent religious use of mushrooms.
Art historians have never critically discussed the pros and cons of the “mushrooms mean mushrooms” view, despite Wasson saying “I was struck by the celerity with which they all recognized the art motif.” Big deal! So what!
Wasson’s argument-from-celerity is a worthless, meaningless fallacy, that can be turned against him, as follows:
The celerity (rapid familiarity) of the art historians actually indicates against Wasson — let me translate Wasson’s statement into English:
“All the art historians have noticed the superabundance of mushrooms in art, and so they formed a pseudo-explanation to explain-away ‘mushrooms mean mushrooms’, based on the ‘argument-from-familiarity’ fallacy.” Period. That is the situation.
For an art historian to rapidly say “Yes, we’re familiar with the mushroom trees”, provides zero evidence to deny that mushroom shapes mean mushrooms.
Wasson tries to foist on us, the ‘argument-from-familiarity’ fallacy: “We all know the pseudo-explanation for the explanandum (the dense super-abundance of mushrooms in Christian art), therefore, that explanation is correct.”
Wasson’s “celerity” sentence commits the “argument from familiarity-with-the-pseudo-explanation” fallacy.
No real “discussion” ever took place — not in Panofsky’s censored letter, nor in Brinckmann’s puny, diminutive, ever-shrinking book’s alleged “coverage” or “treatment” of the question of:
“Do mushroom shapes, manifestly popular in religious art as the explanandum, represent religious use of mushrooms? If not, why not?
On what justified basis can we deny that the strangely popular, dense presence of mushroom shapes in art, represent religious use of psychoactive mushrooms?”
I drew attention to this error in our Mushrooms, Russia & History (1957) and at greater length in my SOMA: Divine Mushroom of Immortality (1969). In this last book I quoted from a letter that Erwin Panofsky had written me in 1952: [Wasson presents again here the entire* Panofsky excerpt shown in Soma]. I checked with other art historians including Meyer Schapiro, and found that they were in agreement. I was struck by the celerity with which they all recognized the art motif. – Wasson, “The Sacred Mushroom”, letter to the editor in The Times Literary Supplement, August 21, 1970
* In 2006, I was unware that Pope Wasson had censored the Brinckmann citation from Panofsky’s letter. How could I write “entire letter”, when there are ellipses?! I was impressed by how confusingly Wasson wrote.
POPE WASSON HERE AGAIN CENSORS BRINCKMANN FROM PANOFSKY’S LETTER; SO, MULTIPLE TIMES!
Irvin’s book, per Search Inside at Amazon, doesn’t contain the word Brinckmann; Wasson very effectively censored Brinckmann from me & from Irvin, though not from Brown, who published the full, complete photographs of Panofsky’s two letters to Wasson, including the censored citation of Brinckmann’s puny book which makes a mockery of Panosky’s implied claim that art historians have properly discussed whether entheogenic mushrooms are represented in Christian art.
I was underinformed in 2006, but I was still right: there is no such discussion record, because no such discussion was ever had, and the impressive vanishing slimness of Brinckmann’s book proves it.
Art historians had nothing but a non-scholarly, golf-course agreement to explain-away the problem of frequent mushroom shapes in Christian art.
Wasson repeatedly censored the citation of Brinckmann’s pathetically puny and far-from-convincing book, which Panofsky himself calls “small”, and which provides no evidence of why we should deny that entheogenic mushrooms are represented by the frequent mushroom shapes in Christian art.
I eagerly await the English-translated pages of Brinckmann’s book showing acritical weighing of the pros and cons of the “mushrooms mean mushrooms; mean psychoactive mushrooms for religious experiencing” interpretation (which Hatsis simply rebuts by sheer fiat and by demanding literalist realist botanical depiction within non-realist, stylized art, and expecting literal discussion of mushrooms in texts).
I’m not holding my breath.
There is no actual coverage of mushroom trees in Brinckmann’s book or any other book, article, or letter.
There was only backyard over-the-fence discussions, “Gee, there sure are tons of these mushroom trees all over the place. They can’t mean psychoactive mushrooms for religious experiencing; so they must be accidental stylization.”
THAT is the alleged per Panofsky, the implied-by-Panofsky, “scholarly discussion” of the matter.
The alleged “familiarity” of “the art historians” with “mushroom trees”, amounts to NOTHING but baseless assumption and non-explanation, “It’s just a random coincidental stylization, that mushrooms are densely found in non-realism Christian art.”
The art historians have a way of explaining-away the datum, which is no explanation, and explains nothing.
There has been no proper discussion, ever, of why the mushroom shape appears so frequently in Christian art.
Celerity; rapidity of showing one is familiar that the problematic data exists, counts for nothing.
Rapidity of spitting-forth the baseless, party-line pseudo-explanation counts for nothing, and is a form of empty “argument from authority”.
“All the art historians rapidly spit-forth this explaining-away, therefore they are correct.”
Wasson’s ‘celerity’ sentence is an “argument-by-familiarity” fallacy.
No one explains why the stylization is so fond for skewing in the specific direction of mushrooms, in fantastical religious & mythology art.
Given: Religious art shows mushroom shapes densely.
Given: Mushrooms cause religious experiencing (Psilocybe ideally so; & superior to other plants or methods).
On what defensible basis, then, can art historians deny that mushrooms represent psychoactive mushrooms used for religious experiencing?
The art historians’ position, their baseless denial of entheogenic mushrooms in Christian art, makes no sense.
Their argued defense for their position against the simple alternative, has never been spelled out — not in Brinckmann, not in letters, not anywhere — because the 1952 art historians have no principled defense of their assumed stance, that can stand up to critique and scrutiny.
The art historians did not reach their position through sound justification; only through folk-explanation, sheer convention and tradition of explaining-away — a tradition which they all had to learn to respond to “with celerity“, because the problematic data is so manifest, well-known, and unavoidable, pressing itself upon the art world as a problem demanding an explanation.
“Why are there so damn many of these mushroom shapes all over the place in art?! We have to solve this problem by explaining-away these problematic data somehow — what is our ‘with celerity’ party-line, canned-response going to be, to save our Bad Old Theory from the problematic data that won’t fit our presupposition-based bias?“
It is a big problem for the art historians that there are mushrooms everywhere in Christian art, so to get anywhere in their field, they have to learn to respond with celerity coughing-up the correct pseudo-explanation, to Save the Old Theory/Position, to toe the party line — “with celerity“!
65 Proven Psilocybe Mushroom Trees in Christian Art
I counted some 65-70 mushroom trees in the Canterbury Psalter.
I proved that the hanging-above-sword mushroom tree must be Psilocybe or else it makes no sense (by my argument from “analogy-based description of peak effects”).
I thereby proved that all 65-70 mushroom trees in the Canterbury Psalter, by the same team, must represent Psilocybe — not only “Parasols of Victory”; not only “Italian Pine trees”.
I’ll let the experts Hatsis & Panofsky debate-out that last dispute, of which of the densely found mushroom trees in Christian art are Assyrian Parasols of Victory, and which of them are Italian Pines.
Not that it matters at all; not that either of them cares at all which explanation is deemed “correct”, just so long as the pseudo-explanation is: Anything-But-Mushrooms!
Thanks — Michael
Next Version of Set of Optimized Concept-Labels (Shortcut Expansion Phrases)
[ p.m. December 20, 2020] <– use this [acro]/keyboard shortcut much more often; [dts]. updated the [acro]/keyboard shortcuts: keyboard shortcut phrase: [#:## a.m. December 20, 2020]
[11:45 a.m. December 20, 2020]
todo – I’m currently dumping my “v2” set of [acro]/keyboard shortcuts — just the optimized concept-labels, not the shortcut acro’s, at bottom of Core Concepts page.
I need to get a better, outline-org’d look at them, and work on them tuning them as a set.
As I write, I need better and better phrasings, so I write out the phrasing — I try — but I need to get a better look at what’s so inadequate with the current set of expansion-phrases; the current generation of optimized concept-labels.
A correct generation numbering would be like:
April 1987 January 1988 2010 mobile multitouch expansions 2016 first attempt at defining a set of desktop keyboard shortcuts , but only learned/used like 5% of those. Nov 2020 the first truly systematic intensive attempt to define a set of phrases, essentially became the Core Concepts WordPress page.
So NOV 2020 was v1 of FORMAL SET of expansion-phrases, & literal keyboard (not touchscreen) shortcuts, so yes,
My current DUMP-AND-REFACTOR task is indeed v2 OF FORMAL LITERAL [ACRO]/KEYBOARD SHORTCUT EXPANSION PHRASES.
DUMP = extracting all my expansion phrases from util app into Core Concepts page, then outline-org’g them, to analyze gaps, better wording.
What’s defined in the util app now, is considered, the result of my Nov 2020 re-do effort, in which I put + or – in front of each expansion-phrase (each allegedly “optimized” concept-label), deleted all the – items from the util app, then continued to add MANY, MASS-PRODUCTION OF ADDING NEW “OPTIMIZED CONCEPT-LABELS”, but now it’s time to take stock.
THE RIGHT PHRASING I WANT TO USE AS I TYPE, IS *NEVER* DEFINED YET; the whole exercise is FUTILE, due to ever-improving the “optimized concept-labels”.
The futile task of carving in stone the optimized concept-labels, is the most efficient way to craft optimized concept-labels.
Since April 1987, use of acro’s was always an ongoing process; I always defined a new acro abbr in every paragraph; multiple new ones per page, for some 600 pages, April 1987-February 1988.
600 pages * 4 new acro’s per page = 2,400 acronyms defined, in 1 year.
I generate 2,400 new optimized concept-labels (phrases useful for writing about the Egodeath theory) per year.
October 19, 1988 Early-Draft Wording, from “Introduction to a New Conceptual System of Ego Transcendence”
Here are selections from my January 6, 2013 posting at the Egodeath Yahoo Group:
August 12, 1988 was my handwritten 1st-draft manuscript. The printed draft that is transcribed here was written two months later.
Since the January 11 1988 breakthrough, I had been needing & planning to write an article. Drafting such an article actually happened on a no-technology, remote vacation getaway, August 12, 1988.
____________________________
[Jan 6 2013 writeup:]
The following sections (Principles) came into my October 19, 1988 draft, after a September draft. [after my August 12, 1988 initial handwritten draft -mh2020] These show that I gained a solid, articulate grasp around that point in time, of the control instability vortex, and the difficulty of piecemeal incrementally strategically reconfiguring and destabilizing the personal control system while having to stay safe and stable. These are a few selected sentences from the sections. The content in this draft is shockingly advanced, conceptually complete with closure, and rock-solid; it was 50 years ahead of its time in 1988 and remains 50 years ahead of its time in 2013. [[2020]]
_____
To preserve the historical accuracy of these condensed excerpts, [square brackets] indicate major insertions of 2013. [[double square-brackets = 2020]] … I here remain faithful to the draft but I do condense and clarify the draft wording slightly, where necessary for flow and comprehensibility.
_____
… I’m constantly forgetting and rediscovering as though new, ideas within this domain.Forgetting mental connections remains a problem, in gaining transcendent knowledge or knowledge in any field, like you could learn a lot of electric guitar and then have to re-learn and re-practice it. This is one reason why no matter how advanced your knowledge of my Egodeath theory is, all indications are that you remain constitutionally susceptible to pride and humiliation, wrathful reminder of vulnerability to your own control-instability potential [[falling back into {reincarnation} into naive rather than qualified egoic control thinking and thus remain {mortal, impure, polluted-thinking} susceptible to ego {death}; die-able]] .
_____
By October 1988, my draft of the Theory article contained the core of the 2013 ideas [[I wrote that in Jan 2013; big breakthrough was 11 months afterwards in Nov 2013, tightening the connections I had made a year earlier, November 23, 2011 –mh2020]], already essentially fully developed and already partly applied to religious myth at that time, during the 3 years since October 1985. By October 1988, the Egodeath theory was born fully formed [[Like decoding a mytheme, there are always more connections to make, and over the years one must refresh the connections -mh2020]] seemingly at a point in time, like Athena’s birth, because the loosecog phenomena innately fit together into a coherent system [[that’s why “by coincidence” all my ideas concur with the SET of gnostic ideas as divided-out by Elaine Pagels’ first 3 boooks]], with consistent phenomena noted by sustained intensive thorough investigation.
_____
From my October 19, 1988 draft titled:
Introduction to a New Conceptual System of Ego Transcendence
with a cover page added soon after, showing the article title instead as:
The Theory of Ego Transcendence
I decided: forget the transient stupid, passing, clueless misconception of ego transcendence that the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology happened to have in the passing dark ages of the 1980s.
Mine is *the* theory, of all time, not merely “the new” theory of the day relative to 1988.
Later, as an improving pendulum-swing, I added the qualifier:
The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence
which means, as opposed to the 1988 Journal of Transpersonal Psychology’s theory of what ego transcendence is about and amounts to, which is a vague oneness unity consciousness model.
My theory, in contrast, is centered around the dynamics and mental model of personal self-control cybernetics.
It is better to be specific, ‘Cybernetic’, rather than dated and relevant to a point in time, ‘New’.
The title “The Theory of Ego Transcendence” suffers from being vague, like “Transcendent Knowledge”.
Now I could clarify further as:
The Cybernetics/Eternalism/Loose-Cognition Theory of Ego Transcendence
_____________________
From my October 19, 1988 article draft, “Introduction to a New Conceptual System of Ego Transcendence”.
Introduction to a New Conceptual System of Ego Transcendence
Principle 14: Intention
There are virtually potential futures, but only a single actually potential future. [[the branching possibilities model, vs. the pre-existence, monopossibility model -mh2020]]
Thus where a mental system has an intention-set, this intention-set was part of the single-possibility actual ground of being, and arose as such, though the style of its arising may have been as [[if]] an original product of a virtual ego conceived as a First Cause, or homunculus. [[monolithic simple egoic autonomous source of control, originator of control-thoughts -mh2020]]
If the issue is to keep some intended control, the difficulty of keeping control is none other than the difficulty of keeping the intention to keep control.
And there is no way to secure the intention to keep control.
Upon grasping this, it makes sense to pray to God that the ground of existence is such that the intention to control is to happen.
[[if you fail to keep intending to keep control, control is lost. -mh2020]]
_____
What I will (regarding my intention) will happen, but I can’t ultimately control what I will will.
Control is always limited to its own level.
There is always a level above the control level in question, which controls the control; or, which controls my intention.
[[The above is a well-articulated 1988 precursor to an expression of the idea I articulated in late 2020, that Mithraism’s Taruoctony means switching from an “autonomous simple monolithic controller” model, to a “4 levels of control” model:
Creator outside the block universe, like {lion-headed snake-wrapped god born from the rock}; the Empyrium, per Ptolemaic astral ascent mysticism.
Block universe w/ worldline of personal control-thoughts. {rock-carved snake-basket}; cista mystica.
the control-thought inserter. {Sol}.
the control-thought receiver. {Luna}.
Loosecog awareness stands outside of all this, like the sum of all of the {looking} depicted in a Tauroctony:
Sol looking at the sacrifice.
Mithras looking back at Sol.
Torchbearer looking at the {snake carved in rock} under the bull.
Torchbearer looking up at Sol behind & above the bull.
If the mind identifies the local locus of control with the control-thought receiver (Luna): 4) the control-thought receiver is profoundly at the mercy (thus, bull’s power is stabbed) of 3) the control-thought inserter, which is profoundly at the mercy of 2) the worldline of control-thoughts frozen into the block universe, which is profoundly at the mercy of 1) the Creator; the lion-headed ultra-transcendent god residing outside the fate-controlled sphere of the fixed-stars.
{Mithras} is the god-mode mind, which perceives all of this.
Think with the mind of Mithras; such mind/ god-mode thinking, by virtue of experiencing, perceiving, and understanding levels of control and dependence, necessarily sacrifices naive egoic autonomous control (the {bull}, sacrificed in the course of gaining fertile new life/ the new mental worldmodel).
I am satisfied with this decoding of the Tauroctony!!
I proudly sign my name to this decoding; this explanation of what is revealed in the Mystery Religion of Mithras.
This explanation satisfactorily AND SIMPLY accounts for the figures in the Tauroctony.
Luna also represents naive possibilism-thinking; the mental worldmodel which conceptualizes self-in-world as egoic autonomous monolithic control-agency steering in a tree of branching possibilities into an open future. -mh2020]]
Principle 15: The control vortex, the timed trap of revelation, and the wall of insanity
The advanced mind which develops transcendent knowledge must walk along the border of genius and insanity.
He has the genius to dismantle his sanity, the keys to his own self-annihilation.
Of course this situation is indeterminate and unstable, and any egoic functioning would dictate life and death wariness of this realm of forbidden knowledge.
This knowledge is like the ark of the covenant.
At this point in development of knowledge and intelligence, is it first conceived that too much truth can be detrimental, due to its destabilization attributes.
It is very likely many minds have understood or at least grasp this momentarily, but to do so is true ego death, and panic might be inevitable along with the terrified resealing of Pandora’s box [[early mytheme, in 1988]] or the resealing of the seven seals [[early mytheme, in 1988]].
_____
The virtual ego system is both necessary for life and also incompatible with truth, so that momentary correct indexing (comprehension of connected ideas) in the terrible awe of the presence of God is the best that a mind can do, and the rest of the time, the mind must for its very life, use egoic indexing. [[qualified possibilism-thinking, rather than naive possibilism-thinking -mh2020]]
If a mind continued to grasp transcendent indexing, it would risk going insane.
The test of revelation: there are filters [[gateway barriers/veils/walls]] of insanity and tabooness and control discomfort which cause any mind flirting with correct revelation to contract again into egoic functioning. [[{reincarnation}, as failure to remember & {bring back the prize of} eternalism-thinking -mh2020]]
The revealing, heroic, Michaelian, Satan-slaying mind must fight the dragon or dragons of egoic indexing and win, somehow overcoming the wall of insanity which protects the group mind’s immersion in epistemological error.
[[That’s is a rare example of a 1988 use of mythemes rather than modern scientific direct-description: Biblical, not Hellenistic: {heroic, Michaelian, Satan-slaying, fight dragon} -mh2020]]
_____
This mind must be able to draw upon any field or approach to special knowledge in order to keep walking the line of insanity/genius until the puzzle is solved, instead of going insane and failing to crystallize and retain understanding and development of it.
At first it will seem that correct indexing can only result in total disintegration of egoic functions, good and bad.
[[the problem/work to be done: must move from naive to qualified possibilism-thinking, not destroy childhood possibilism-thinking wholesale. As warned by Ken Wilber. –mh2020]]
But the mind must keep the assumption of sufficient integration as it harvests more and more correctly conceived principles.
[[harvest is a mytheme, though here inchoate in 1988. There I’m discussing increasing the number of connections, per Thagard. -mh2020]]
_____
One safety tool is controlled revelation, in which insights are seen grasped in limited number or depth from within the secure stability of egoic indexing.
[[the problem of how to steal/snatch the apple of immortality from the snake; how to obtain the fruit of insanity/non-control, without going insane/out of control; how to rebuild your hovercraft/flying carpet while riding on it in mid-air. -mh2020]]
But this intention cannot be secured, especially in the loose mental functioning binding mode, and there is always the danger of compulsive realization of the disruptive potential, forming the negative recursion potential issue.
All gaining of correct transcendent indexing implies (triggers, elicits, carries, or brings up) the problem of negative recursion potential.
Principle 16: Recursive assumption and negative recursion potential
Knowing “you can do whatever you imagine by positive thinking“, or positive recursive assumption, implies its complement.
I’m only as stable as my preprogrammed assumption of stability that is fated on my near-future worldline.
With advanced analysis in the loose mental functioning binding mode, this assumption is unhinged, and I realize that I could as validly assume I am to go insane.
Here stabilization structure becomes vividly logically indeterminate, and a properly functioning egoic conceptual system will likely run for its egoic life, go sub-genius, seeking stupidity, to quit thinking with hyper-clarity, or back out by prayer — unless it realizes that, too, is a product of assumption.
[[crawling desperately on the carpet looking down and away, and pleading not to see the loss-of-control attractive threatening monster; not to be too smart and perceptive -mh2020]]
_____
If there’s auto-assumption, there will be auto-recontraction into the egoic conceptual system, producing stability of control due to egoic functioning. [[Ken Wilber. {reincarnation}. -mh2020]]
Will there be auto-assumption?
That is logically indeterminate, if one starts with neutral assumption.
So if a temporary genius considers the stability of his sanity with neutral assumptions, he concludes that the continuing presence of his sanity is logically recursively indeterminate.
And in such manner is the negative recursion potential unavoidable, by correct neutral ultimate assumptions.
A genius finds his actions depend on his original assumptions, which have no logical basis.
Thus the sanity of the genius rests on nothing logically solid, only purely arbitrary assumptions which are logically indeterminate.
_____
Truth presents a trans-rationality problem: the truth sets you too free, free to the point of disintegrative arbitrariness. [[Terrence McFakea secretly stopped taking mushrooms because “mushrooms revealed the unliveable absence of meaning, all valuation” — that explanation by McKenna can be read as “because my self-control system lost all ballast”. Existential vertigo is related to absence of self-control stability. -mh2020]]
The mind is then out of control, as it has accessed forbidden control.
Its [[the mind’s]] greatest hazard is its own potentials, as manifested in alcoholism.
The mental functioning is stuck in a problem producing/transcending cybernetic locked loop, in which the egoic control system is perpetually challenging itself.
If I should assume pure logical analysis, I could not stop myself from contamination by this mental plague, face to face with the fact of absolute destiny, even of the details of my choosing.
[The various loosecog dangers are distinct: gaining full unguided unconstrained control brings a distinct danger; being subject to whatever is on one’s near-future worldline is a different distinct danger. -mh2013]
_____
There is no controller homunculus to constrain the control system; there is simply the control system itself. [[strains of Alan Watts’ book The Way of Zen. I need to mention more his essay which I discovered long after Dec. 1987, “Zen and the Problem of Control”. -mh2020]]
I cannot prevent myself from logical analysis, so if I should assume purely logical analysis, I could not stop myself from contamination by this mental dynamic. [[careful, might need to adjust that concept-usage, to rightly conform with the mytheme-cluster {impurity, impure, purification, contamination, pollution, purity, wash clean, cleanse} -mh2020]]
If I assume logical analysis to deal with this problem, I will find that there can be no logical solution, thus no solution in the logical sense.
It is logically indeterminate whether I will be doomed [[and blessed! -mh]] to contact the detrimental knowledge or not, and I cannot in any way secure myself from the caustic concept. [[the dragon monster guards the treasure! they are a package deal; we can’t simply call dragon-threat purely “detrimental” — the self-control disaster threat, the transcendent self-threatening potential, is that which produces and teaches enlightenment, salvation, regeneration. -mh2020]]
If fear occurs upon realizing this, it’s not correctly understood as fear of a specific event due to my loss of control, but the very state of loss of control.
I’m afraid of the state of loss of control.
The purpose of fear is to negatively control.
_____
Egoic security requires faith in personal (egoic) will power.
When will power is seen to be logically indeterminate and arbitrary, the control system becomes indeterminate, and fear of loss of control happens along with the (now endangered, in belief and actuality) state of presence of control.
In fact, there is always control, but theological indeterminacy and invalidity of control disrupts the integrity parameter of control.
[There’s always personal control present, including during divine possession in loosecog, but the control parameters change. -mh2013]
There’s an ominous widening of the “virtual potentials” or “virtual future“.
[The mind becomes more broadly capable during loosecog, able to envision great and psychotic-like capabilities and construct unconstrained harmful possibility scenarios. -mh2013]
_____
During tight mental functioning binding, the control area is sufficiently bounded and dynamically balanced that life is fairly stable.
But loose mental functioning may allow this balance to fail, resulting in mis-control, a breakdown of the control system or at least a bypassing of secure control. [[as the ram ascended up to god-mode thinking, Prixus’ sister Helle looked down from the rescuing-from-sacrificeflying golden-fleece ram, lost her balance, and fell back down into the sea and drowned, died. -mh2020]]
Control is beyond control.
Principle 17: The analyzability of the middle realm of human experiencing apart from the low quantum and high ineffable realms
[Here I render loosecog cognitive phenomenology (the realm of religious mystic experiencing and insight) independent from all other fields: Relativity, QM, Wilber’s level 12 1/2 of transrational ineffability. -mh2013]
If the arm of the virtual ego is illusory, it remains so regardless of whether consciousness is a determining factor of quantum level measurements, and regardless of the ultimate high ineffable level of the ground of being.
— Michael Hoffman, January 5, 2013, original research findings based on theory-development since 1985. Copyright (C) 1988, 2013 [[& Dec 20, 2020]] Michael S. Hoffman, http://www.egodeath.com All Rights Reserved.
4-Quadrant Diagram Before “{tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism” (January 11, 2013)
The goal is not to model the truth of physics but rather to accurately and efficiently model the truth of how the mind’s experiencing is shaped and characterized in tight cog versus loose cog
in tight cog experiencing is shaped as autonomy, possiblism with branching future possibilities, naïve realism of perception, and literalism of reading
in loose cog experiencing is structured as puppethood, non-control, 2 layer control with hidden uncontrollable thought source and helpless thought receiver, block universe eternalism with worldline monocoursal non-branching possibility, meta perception and unreality and explicit mental construct processing with pure awareness separated out from mental construct binding, and metaphoricity metaphor awareness consciousness of analogies
this the goal of good theory in the field of loose cog studies or ego death theory : efficiency not accuracy of describing individual things but rather the goal is to come up with an extremely simple model explanatory that has extremely broad explanatory power regardless of that mere facts and data and reality
the main driving concern is not truth data facts history but rather accuracy of generalization in characterizing thinking feeling and perceiving in the tight cognitive binding state and the loose cognitive binding state
what is revealed in loose cog is a mental model alternative which can be described as a single subject that is really conceived or as two or three or four or 12 subjects regardless of whether the subject of rethinking is presented as one subject or divided into two distinct subjects such as control model and time model or four subjects such as self time control and possibility or 12 subjects as I attempted in 1988 through maybe 2005
it was a breakthrough in efficiency of theory structuring to present what is changed in your mental model divided into two subjects : control and time, or personal control agency and block universe time and possibility
axiom: however many subjects you divide it into 1,2,4 or 12 these mental model areas that are transformed in loose cog always transform interlocked together
even though the topics or subjects are distinct they all change together as a system and they each arise together and arise distinctly and independently
these phenomena and thoughts and perceptions and feelings or sensations arise independently but they are mutually supporting ; the arrows of influence go every way and moving from tight cog to loose cog, it’s not only that a changed view of time causes you to have a changed view of control; also your changed view of control causes you to have a changed view of time
time feels frozen in loose cog and Control feels gone in loose cog and the feeling of non-control suggests frozen time and the feeling of frozen time suggests non-control
it is a holistic shift from the holistic tight cog mental model (and experiencing; thinking feeling perceiving ) to the holistic loose cog mental model plus the mystic does not assert in isolation the eternalism model of time nor does the mystic assert in isolation non-control
the mystic asserts the entire system as we see in myth and religious writing it makes little difference whether you depict time in myth or possibility branching or the king losing his power it is all one system
in todays breakthrough in efficiency and simplicity of theory especially a four quadrant diagram that is universally equivalent to all mythic figures of snakes kings time branching possibility all of those , and hunting searching the mind and Elevated awareness unbound from mental construct processing , and being in love and attracted to the God that kills oneself upon seeing the God’s power , and hero and monster guarding the treasure that is attractive , all of that is suggested efficiently in four quadrants
on the left is tight cog which gives egoic thinking
the upper left box is the mental model of egoic control ,the egoic mental model of control labeled Autonomy or other one word label
lower left : egoic mental model of time labeled Possiblism ( branching future)
The right side is tight [sic; loose] cog binding, which is transcendent mental model
upper right: the transcendent mental model of control labeled Puppethood (non-control, two level control: hidden uncontrollable thought source and helpless thought receiver )
lower right :the transcendent mental model of time labeled Eternalism (block universe single pre-existing future with no meta-change) [used both the tech-term ‘eternalism’ and the common language “pre-existing”]
we could merge the time model and control model in one box “the mental model of time self ,control and possibility “, but per myth and rock lyrics the most efficient way to present all the data the topics that are changed remapped in the mental model is as two groups :control and time
[todo: resume 2020 analysis of this post, or delete the below portion of the oddly long post. My motivation for retrieving this posting was just to check my planned Quadrant Diagram cover-art, vs. the Nov 2013 2-item condensed equivalent, the formula: {tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism. -mh2020]
in 2006 I thought metaphor is not what is revealed , loose cognition and mental model transformation is not whats revealed
what’s revealed is mainly not one monolithic subject but two distinct subject areas in theory of religion and in myth and rock lyrics
those two main distinct interlocked subjects are control and time
all the details of what mental model topics change can be placed into those two key fields and in January 1988 I pictured when reading “way of Zen”, Minkowski space time frames of reference possibly going back to Edwin Abbott around 1880 with roots in theology of god’s eternal perception and predestination when relativity started in 1905 [Flatland, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Abbott_Abbott]
Relativity distracted everyone from the ego death implication of Monkowski [Minkowski] space-time diagrams which clearly depict the theology eternal and some perspective and the antiquity idea of and ask experience of frozen time block universe time as space bike [time] dimension which is not an idea that requires Einstein and special relativity in modern 20th century but is self evident in intense loose cog state
The ancients knew more, and more relevant, content in cognitive science and philosophy of space-time than the stupid modern non-thinkers, single state thinkers childishly limited to the ordinary state of consciousness in the dark ages of the 20th century
what kills the ego is not [allegedy “Einsteinian” but actually Minkowskian -mh2020] relativity but Minkowski space time especially particularly time as a spacelike dimension which happens to be precisely the mystic model of time and people object to determinism but especially people object to pre-existence of the future because that above all kills the ego and [[I didn’t voice-dictate — I didn’t say “people object to Eternalism (tech-term); I said closer to “people object to pre-existence of the future (ie “people object to the existence of future control-thoughts)” -mh2020]]
people should have recognized that this is exactly what is revealed in religion and the Mystic state both the eternal model of time and yes absolutely the ramifications that go with it of non-existence of the moral agent and implies no free will which is exactly the concern the focus of religion and mysticism
but people didn’t understand religion mysticism or metaphor so they did not recognize that the adventures of a square by Edwin Abbott taken up by Rudy Rucker in 1976 first edition of the fourth dimension indeed does talk about the God eternal point of view that reduces us to puppets and snake shaped world lines frozen in space time
yes absolutely time as a spacelike dimension leading up to relativity absolutely has ramifications of ego nullity but people didn’t know enough about myth and mystic perception and theology to recognize that time as a spacelike dimension and its implication of noncontrol is exactly the heart of religious revelation in the loose cog state
The latest fad by materialist reductionism is to claim that no-free-will follows from reductionist science
they are ignorant as a rock about the mystic state and myth and religious experiencing and theology and religion or they would realize that no free will per the block universe eternalism model particularly time as a space like dimension regardless of quantum mechanics is exactly the concern of mystic religion and transforming ideas about moral agency
these scientists have a immature outsiders view a non-initiate view of religionreading it completely literally [they lack literacy at the language of Mythemese -mh2020]
they fail terribly totally to recognize that no-free-will, and the resulting supposedly problem unacceptable of personal non-control, is what is actually experienced vividly, not merely abstractly thought about, revealed in the mystic peak entheogen state that is esoteric insider religion real religion interpreted intelligently not childishly like these ignorant atheist reductionist scientists who are bad philosophers and ignorant of mystic experiencing or reading deciphering mythic metaphor [ie, Sam Harris writes a pro-entheogen Spirituality book, and a no-free-will book, and fails to perceive that they are the same subject — while he disparages religion/ Christianity, which is actually saying the same thing (articulated & described using the language of Mythemese) as his no-free-will book & his pro-entheogen spirituality book. -mh2020]
All throughout the ignorant single state modern era people [William James] stupidly only objected to causal chain determinism and time as a spacelike dimension saying these are unacceptable this view must be rejected because it eliminates moral responsibility and free will and leaves no role for the self and personal agency [see the new book reviewed at the “Society of Ancient Esotericism” (I there conflated two weak organization names into 1 good name) website .com not .org, about debates about no-free-will/fate. https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/12/ancientesotericism-org-western-esotericism-scholarship/ AncientEsotericism.comhttp://ancientesotericism.com is the website for the Network for the Study of Ancient Esotericism (NSEA), a thematic network associated with the European Society for the Study of Western Esotericism (ESSWE)
they were blind, these points are precisely the points that are revealed in the mystic state but people failed to connect these ideas because they were ignorant of deciphering myth and recognizing metaphor in which religion has always asserted time as a space like dimension, block universe eternalism and everything that implies for the illusion of self personal control autonomy and personal control power which is all exactly what is revealed in esoteric religion
but people simply dismissed that without, they dismissed these supposedly objections such as non-control without even realizing that they were exactly rejecting that which is experienced and felt and perceived in the loose cog state
I am the first modern theorist to explicitly recognize in summary the extremely efficient depiction moving from egoic mental model on the left to transcendent mental model on the right which is goes along with switching from the tight cognitive binding state on the left to the loose cognitive binding state on the right
regarding the subjects which change in the mental model it is best it is most efficient to present the monolithic change as two subjects: the control model and the time model so that:
in tight cognition the mind is programmed to hold and think and feel and perceive the autonomy control model in conjunction with the possibilism time model and
in the loose cognitive state the mind is programmed to have and think and feel and perceive structured as the puppet could control model in conjunction with the eternal is him time model
the control vortex loss of control dynamic is part of the process of mental model transformation and recognition of metaphor is part of the transformation process and meta-perception perceiving mental construct processing as such factors in
but mainly what is revealed in the mystic state is grouped under the subject heading of control and time
those are the master themes interlocked though distinct
I do not say that Eternalism is the truth and that is reality that is revealed , that the enlightened person must agree with is eternalism
rather I say absolutely and efficiently that tight cog makes you have the possibilism perspective and loose cog makes you have the Eternalism perspective in conjunction with , in tight cog makes you have autonomy and loose cog makes you have puppethood
The breakthrough today is simplifying like myth not even sentences:
Tight cog: egoic mental model , autonomy, possiblism; also naïve realism, and literalism
loose cog: transcendent mental model, puppet hood, uncontrollable thought source& helpless thought receiver, eternalism block universe worldline; meta-perception = awareness unbound from mental construct processing to look at it, and metaphor awareness, also perception solipsism the bubble of awareness like in a cave of mental constructs experienced as a small room filled with television screens
but my main most efficient most compact myth depiction ,the shortest formula most potent and efficient is:
loose cognition gives autonomy and possiblism feeling tight cognition binding gives puppet hood and eternalism feeling
Islaam is a religion in the shape of a people worshipping a big cube of marble sent down as message from heaven to earth, message of block universe eternalism together with puppet hood, personal noncontrol.
when the block universe meetyourright fell to earth it killed many heathen unbelievers in no free will and eternalism and noncontrol but by a miracle Mohammed who believed correctly in these things survived and walked away to have a future
I am a nature worshiper I worship rocks and snakes and trees especially trees without branches also sacred springs from which streams flow and caves and a fork in the path where a decision is forced to occur
Original research findings by Michael Hoffman, theorist of ego transcendence since October 1985
/ end post 6275
New Hypothesis-Construct: “Vine-Leaf Trees”, as a Companion to “Mushroom Trees”, = non-branching revealed by Psilocybe
[1:37 p.m. December 20, 2020] —
Brown thought he maybe saw an English version of the book, but I couldn’t find such. I didn’t hear back from German entheogen scholar Christian Ratsch.
I just found a significant word-mistranslation. Brinckmann actually wrote ‘grapevine’ where this translator wrote ‘vine’.
The translation is of Chapter 1 of 5, and of the final quarter of Chapter 5.
Those chapters don’t seem to have the word ‘mushroom’ — SO PANOFSKY’S CLAIM THAT “THE ART HISTORIANS HAVE DISCUSSED mushroom trees” is shrinking and shrinking, down to what, 3.75 short chapters at most?
3.75/5 of 86 pages = 0.75 * 86 = 65 pages of “coverage” of the topic, in one book by one art historian, in 1906?
THAT’S ALL YOU GOT??
No wonder Pope Wasson censored Brinckmann’s name & book, it is so puny and underwhelming coverage of the matter, the topic of mushroom trees! to try to “refute” the mycologyists (NOT Allegro!; long before him): Rolfe1925, Ramsbottom 1949 & 1953, Brightman 1966.
Allegro’s book “The Sacred Mushroom and The Cross: A study of the nature and origins of Christianity within the fertility cults of the ancient Near East” was 1970 (2009 Irvin reissue).
Wasson & Panofsky first claimed that the mycologists (NOT Allegro!!) were wrong about this one image, Plaincourault, in 1952 — 18 years (2 decades) before Allegro’s book! http://www.egodeath.com/WassonEdenTree.htm#_Toc135889188
The translation from German to English so far, is now clearly presented in my WordPress page:
How unrealistic the depicted vine-leaves are, is the same as how unrealistic (ie stylized) the mushroom stems & caps are.
Stylized mushroom-like trees.
Stylized ivy-leaf/ grape-leaf /vine-leaf-like trees. ‘vine leaves’ is Brinckmann’s term, nicely broad, including both ivy and grape leaves, as depicted by Greek images & photographs. Like I have a gallery page at ego death .com side by side muhroms and phtos mushrom art, mushroom photos, and Italian Pine photos. Similarly I need a WordPress page side-by-side:
Grape leaf photos
Grape leaf depictions in Greek & Christian art
Ivy leaf photos
Ivy leaf depictions in Greek & Christian art (including “dud mushroom trees”). Vine-Leaf Trees Depicting Non-Branching
Until I have reason not to, I’m tentatively categorizing the dud non-mushroom trees as “vine-leaf trees” per Brinckmann.
I cannot tell what his view is there, because only 1.25 chapters of 5 are translated to English.
I will try one more time to see if his german text at ‘vine’ points to a Plate Diagram image so I can see what shapes he means by ‘vine leaves’.
Brinckmann Identifies the Non-Sphere Trees, Non-Mushroom trees, to Be Vine Leaf Trees, = Non-Branching
update [12:33 p.m. December 20, 2020] —
image searches are inconclusive, neither confirming nor disconfirming, but I can conclude that it won’t be easy to disprove my hypothesis that the dud mushroom trees are — as Brinckmann seems to be saying — “vine-leaf trees“. I’m not getting definitive confirmation, I’m not getting definitive dis-confirmation. I’m spoiled, normally I get definitive confirmation.
This situation is what separates the theory-construction men from the boys. Are you able to continue developing a new explanatory framework while not having immediate confirmation; INVESTMENT IN a likely promising new explanatory framework.
To be a leading-edge winning investor, ahead of the curve, you have to be willing to invest in the new explanatory framework.
People who are never willing to invest in a not-fully-proved new explanatory framework, cannot ever be leading-edge. They are laggards, retarded by skepticism.
next todo: check German pages of the English translation, at “vine leaf” (4 hits), to see if he points to a Plate Diagram illustration to show what shape he means by “vine leaf”.
_____
[December 19, 2020]
Today, reading translated portions of Brinckmann’s book, he frequently talks of vine leaves coming out of an oak trunk. He sees it as stripped-down.
What he’s saying could be highly significant for the Egodeath theory — the Mytheme theory.
If we consider the “dud mushroom trees”, that are styled like mushroom trees except they have 3-part vine leaves instead of a sphere atop the stems, this is almost as helpful for the Egodeath theory (the Mytheme theory portion) as mushroom trees, and complements mushroom trees nicely, reinforcing the theme of “non-branching”.
Folio 92 – Does Brinckmann Consider These to Be “Vine Leaves”? Vine = Non-Branching
Would Brinckmann say the leaves of the Pink Key Tree are “vine leaves”? {vine} is a major mytheme in the Mytheme theory, equivalent to {snake}, meaning non-branching; ie eternalism.
The Correct Name of This Field: Psilocybe in Greek & Christian art & in the mixed-wine banqueting tradition throughout Antiquity
The proper name of the field is certainly not “The Holy Mushroom Theory”, or “the Allegro theory”, or “the Allegro-Amanita theory”, or “the Jan Irvin Holy Mushroom theory”, or “the ‘spread of secret Amanita cult’ theory”.
This scholarly field of research, a subfield of entheogen scholarship, is:
Psilocybe in Greek & Christian art & in the mixed-wine banqueting tradition throughout Antiquity
I Have Provided 64 Proven Instances of Psychoactive Mushrooms in Christian Art Intended for Religious Experiencing, Depicting an Initiation Training and Banqueting Tradition
[10:14 p.m. December 22, 2020] – vine-leaf trees bolster mushroom trees.
____
There are big stakes / gains, riding on my decoding of the the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image with the trained, self-threatening Psalter reader. The same team did that whole set of images with mushroom trees throughout.
My proving that the one tree means Psilocybe, therefore proves that all of the mushroom trees by that team, mean Psilocybe.
My “complete” inventory WordPress page is missing about 3 images of mushroom trees; there were too many to harvest.
There are 64 mushroom trees in the Canterbury Psalter, by the same team.
My solving, my positively proving and identifying that the Hanging mushroom tree is Psilocybe, just gained the field a set of 64 PROVEN INSTANCES OF INTENDED PSILOCYBE MUSHROOMS IN CHRISTIAN ART causing self-threatening & ego transcendence per the RELIGIOUS EFFECTS OF PSILOCYBE.
The scholarly field of research:
Psilocybe in Greek & Christian art & in the mixed-wine banqueting tradition throughout Antiquity
First I solved (decoded; explained) the hanging/sword mushroom tree with no context.
Then I solved the entire top row of the image.
Then I solved the entire image.
Then I did an inventory of all mushroom trees in the Canterbury Psalter.
The Argument “Not All Mushrooms in Art Are Psychoactive” Is an Attempt at Statistical Sleight-of-Hand
Brinckmann’s argument, to dismiss and explain-away all mushrooms in Christian art, sounds similar to a comment that Letcher made on his blog in 2016, in direct response to my writings.
I have not read anything by Letcher or Hatsis in response to my writings.
Letcher wrote: “The rule is this. Not everything that looks like a mushroom in art is a mushroom. Not everything that is a mushroom is a magic mushroom. Just because it’s a magic mushroom doesn’t mean that it was used intentionally for its psychedelic effects. Just because it’s used intentionally, doesn’t mean that it’s used for religious purposes.”
Letcher is very close to stating truth: simply invert what he wrote.
The rule that’s closer to truth, is this:
Everything that looks like a mushroom in art is a mushroom.
Everything that is a mushroom is a magic mushroom.
It’s a magic mushroom, which means that it was used intentionally for its psychedelic effects.
Because it’s used intentionally, that means it is used for religious purposes.
____________
(Though I reject the brittle distinction between “not for religious intent” or “for religious intent”.)
There’s also false implicit math or statistics in Letcher’s argument.
When he says “Not all”, he’s trying to imply a statistical fact like “Therefore 50% are not” or “therefore 99% are not”.
Ultimately, the debate comes down to arguments over percentage.
Do you agree that at least one person used mushroom in Christianity? Yes.
Ok, so now, our dispute is simply a matter of whether it’s 1%, 50%, or 99%.
We agree it wasn’t 0% or 100%. Everyone agrees that the % is > 0% and < 100%.
The whole dispute is whether the % is closer to 0% or 100%.
Is it closer to 25%, 50%, or 75%?
It is a worthless truism to say “Not 100% of mushroom shapes in Christian art represents use of mushrooms in practice, and the intention of representing psychoactive mushrooms.” Everyone agrees, “not 100%”.
Saying “Not 100%” does nothing to answer the real question:
Are mushrooms in Christian art closer to 10% intended, or 90% intended, to represent psychoactive mushrooms?
Letcher-Hatsis when pressed will say “closer to 0%”, I say “closer to 100%”. We both agree with the vague, worthless truism, “Not all…”
The “not all” argument is an attempt to cheat on the % question. It doesn’t work, on me.
I readily agree that “not all”. My position is, it’s closer to 99% than 1%.
I Am Awarding Doctoral, Ph.D. Degrees in Transcendent Knowledge, to Max Freakout & Cyberdisciple
Doctor of Philosophy in Transcendent Knowledge, University of Egodeath
Justification for Awarding Some University Degrees
This awarding of degrees is essentially serious, even if there is a joking aspect. My justification is posted in the thread linked below; thread title, I am the University.
The Egodeath theory is THE theory; THE science; the ultimate concern of universities and degrees.
What I do, Transcendent Knowledge development, comes from good private universities, and represents the paradigmatic spirit of The University; Transcendent Knowledge development is definitive of what the University is about.
The Contributions and Work in the Field, of Max Freakout & Cyberdisciple
By any reasonable (albeit informal) standard, Max Freakout & Cyberdisciple have been major, 1st generation researchers & communicators within the Egodeath theory. They could hardly have done more.
Bachelor degrees under-represent their level of understanding & contributions within the field of Loose Cognitive Science & the Egodeath theory; the Cybernetic theory; the Mytheme theory.
The below is not an attempt to specify and enumerate or list their contributions, but is merely an example of their contributions.
Cyberdisciple — WordPress pages, showing how to apply the Mytheme theory to reading ancient Greek texts. http://cyberdisciple.wordpress.com If I create a Site Map for Cyberdisciple’s WordPress site, it will become evident his greater-than-Thesis amount of contributions.
No one has done more work than, or anywhere near as much work as, Max Freakout & Cyberdisciple, within the Egodeath theory explanatory framework.
I’m not aware of anyone else who’s done major contributions to understanding, expanding, and/or communicating the Egodeath theory.
Doctor of Philosophy in Transcendent Knowledge, University of Egodeath
Congratulations.
— Professor Michael Hoffman, Doctor of Philosophy, Transcendent Knowledge, University of Egodeath (2014). Formulator and discoverer of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence and the Egodeath theory, including the Cybernetic theory & the Mytheme theory (analogical psychedelic eternalism) of religious mythology.
Professor Loosecog
3 Bachelor Degrees in Transcendent Knowledge, Granted in 2015
In the Egodeath Yahoo Group thread I am Science, Religion, and the University, at the start of 2015, I granted degrees.
BSTK – Bachelor of Science in Transcendent Knowledge, University of Egodeath
___
My motivation now is, I gave credit to “Cyberdisciple and Dr. Jerry Brown” in my Brinckmann page, but I (unusually) wanted to credit “Dr. Cyberdisciple” or “Cyberdisciple, PhD in Transcendent Knowledge”.
I am no respecter of degrees and titles; I almost never write “Dr.”, “Professor”, or “PhD”, but instead I force names into my rigid standardized pattern: you get one first name, and one last name, that’s it.
“Max Freakout” deserves more honor than something like “Doctor R. Danny Blaise Staples, PhD”. (By coincidence, I came across my obit-posting for Staples just now, when searching my archives for ‘bachelor’.)
I consider:
A bachelor’s degree indicates understanding and ability to work in the field.
A PhD degree represents significant contributions within the field.
Lack of a Degree-Granting System
There are no plans at present to award degrees, because it would take a large effort & time, to set up a proper system of awarding degrees. I don’t know anything about university policies for granting degrees and how this would apply to the Egodeath theory.
I appreciate Dan’s directing me to Irvin’s later work around 2015, and he I believe understands the Egodeath theory and is a long-time follower of the Egodeath theory.
Last I contacted him, it bounced back.
No one speaks for me, and no one has the right to pretend to speak for me. Any assertions about my experience are speculation, not established fact.
Those are the existing instances of what earned bachelor degrees, and what earned doctoral degrees.
There are no plans at this time to set up a workable system for granting degrees in the Egodeath theory; the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence; in Transcendent Knowledge.
iiswhatiis commented: December 6, 2020 “You are a Modern Day Prophet Michael Hoffman. I aspire to having you award me with a Bachelor of Science in Transcendent Knowledge. Thank you for your hard work and dedication, I would be lost without you.”
Translation of Brinckmann’s 1906 book from German to English – All Mushrooms in Christian Art Are Italian Pines (not Assyrian Parasols of Victory!)
Translation of Brinckmann’s book Tree Stylizations in Medieval Paintings from German to English — translation of Chapter I, and the final quarter of the final chapter, Chapter V.
According to the top art historian Panofsky (learned, learned!), this book proves that all the depictions are Italian Pines.
But the other expert — a trained historian, who even reads Greek & Latin (though not Mythemese, despite claiming to be a witch), says:
They are all Assyrian Parasols of Victory, not Italian Pines (even more learned!).
This historian is astute, emphasizing in a video lecture in front of an audience with Prof. Brown, that a medieval bestiary is “completely secular!” so doesn’t count. He needs to inform & correct the mistaken scholars who claim that a bestiary is for teaching Christian morality.
Which expert is right? It doesn’t matter whatsoever, just so long as it’s ANYTHING BUT MUSHROOMS! Thanks to Pope Wasson & Church Lady Letcher-Hatsis for protecting us by propping up the story, that the countless mushrooms all throughout Christian art are anything but mushrooms.
Also, the mixed-wine banqueting tradition of Antiquity, across Hellenistic & Christian religion, was, by the same token, by the same, sound, learned reasoning, ANYTHING BUT PSILOCYBE MUSHROOMS.
Baumstilisierungen in der mittelalterlichen Malerei (Tree Stylizations in Medieval Paintings) Albert Erich Brinckmann, 1906 86 pages https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_8AgwAAAAYAAJ/mode/2up The 9 plates, at the end, are copied to the present page. 6 plates with some 10 plant schematizations each, and 3 plates with 4-5 works of art: o Jesus riding a donkey (same as cover) o 2-in-1: Vegetation + small rearing horse o a) Eden tree, b) reclining/tree/horse http://amzn.com/3957383749
Graves: Food for Centaurs — Mushrooms in Greek Religious Myth
The meaning of “ambrosia,” the food of the gods, like “nectar,” their drink is: “that which confers immortality.” … At this point, I wrote down the Greek words of the ambrosia recipe, as follows, one underneath the other:
MELI UDOR KARPOS ELAIOS TUROS ALPHITA
Next I wrote down the nectar recipe, namely honey, water, and fruit:
MELI UDOR KARPOS And also, while I was about it, the recipe for kukeon [Demeter’s drink during her search for Persephone] …
MINTHAION UDOR KUKOMENON ALPHITOS …
So, if mushrooms were ambrosia, and if ambrosia was mushrooms, be pleased to examine those three sets of initial letters M-U-K-E-T-A <– ambrosia recipe ogham M-U-K <– nectar recipe ogham M-U-K-A <– kykeon recipe ogham
… ogham … what the ancient Irish bards called the device of spelling out a secret word by using the initial letters of other ordinary words.
MUKETA answers the question: “What do the gods eat?”; for MUKETA is the accusative of MUKES (“mushroom”). …
MUKA is an earlier form of the word MUKES (“mushroom”). (pages 264-265)
In the chapter “Centaurs’ Food” Graves supports the Wassons’ [Graves’?] claim that hallucinatory agents were used in the Eleusinian Mysteries with [by here providing] citations of ancient Greek poetry, plays, statuary, and vase-art.”
12 20 am dec 19 2020 giants men abduct virgin daughters – men doesn’t mean men abduct doesn’t mean abduct virgin doesn’t mean virgin daughter doesn’t mean daughter
the male the control-thought inserter and the eternalism-transformed mind has become one of the immortals having eaten of the golden apple in the Garden of Eden and become live forever, non dying, a thantos non-die-able b/c already be die’d, lost virginity at being overtaken and undermined and disproved, when the mind pulled upward, it drove transformation of the model of self-in-world.
Recognizing Thematic Matches between Old Testament, New Testament, and Greek Mythology
another site last night was weird Christian motivation, he wrote a book, that Greek myths are really the Bible myths (actual real historical events!) rewritten. I mostly disagree.
But, in the course of his confusion, he’s done what the wimps dont: he’s mapped Christian myths to Greek myths. Certainly Old Testament. New Testament? To find him I searched like: eve eden tree garden hesperides snake apple Zeus and Hera were the original occupants of the garden of the Hesperides three nymphs (= virgin maidens?) who tended the guarding serpent guarding the golden apples that grant immortality. and tended the tree.
“Nymph, in Greek mythology, any of a large class of inferior female divinities. The nymphs were usually associated with fertile, growing things, such as trees, or with water. They were not immortal but were extremely long-lived and were on the whole kindly disposed toward men.”
Fertile, female, not immortal — that’s pretty equivalent to {virgin maiden}. However, if they are divinities, this implies they know Transcendent Knowledge, therefore cannot mystically die egodeath. Ambiguous.
If they are mortal, that means by definition, they are {virgin}; that is, they have not yet been made to undergo the mental worldmodel transformation from possibilism to eternalism.
“It was usually thought that there were three Hesperides, although some sources name four or seven.
They were responsible of taking care of a garden in the western end of the world, near the Atlas mountains in Africa.
The so called Garden of the Hesperides belonged to the goddess Hera, in which there was a grove of apple trees that bore golden apples.
The golden apples were believed to give immortality [non-die-ability] to anyone who consumed them.
Not trusting the Hesperides to guard the apple trees on their own, Hera also placed a hundred headed [irony: a branching non-branching serpent -mh] dragon named Ladon that never slept.
[never slept = never closed its eyes = to see the dragon monster is to cybernetically die. This explanation by Britannica is weak: no mention of eyes, only “heads”. -mh]
_____
“A golden apple that was taken from the Garden of the Hesperides was what eventually caused the Trojan War.
Eris, goddess of strife, managed to steal an apple from the garden, inscribed the words “To the fairest” and threw it amidst the goddesses that attended at a wedding she was not invited to.
The apple was then given by Paris, prince of Troy, to Aphrodite, who promised to give him Helen as his wife, thus triggering the events of the Trojan War.”
Centaurs’ Food Graves
I swear no one has mapped parallels between Old Testament, New Testament, and Greek Myth. Hard to find?
Literalists Suck at Recognizing Thematic Matches between Old Testament, New Testament, Greek Myth
Around 2001, I was the first to match talking donkey Balaam vinyard angel of death on his way to curse the Israelites but blessed them instead = Paul on road to persecute Christians but proselytized for them instead.
Years later, I found two puny treatments in Bible scholars’ study guides.
Narrow and Broad Names of the Most Important Subfield of Entheogen Scholarship
In summary:
The short, specific field-name is better; tho it lacks the greedy broad scope, it absolutely prevents b.s. of having the wrong focus. Due to present f’d-up circumstances of all the Allegro-Amanita Orbiting, that is wrecking the field, locking-down the explicit correct central focus (Psilocybe in Greek & Christian) is much more important than greedy scope, in the name of the field.
Interesting, it’s narrow re: single-plant (hundreds of species contain psilocybin though), but where I still go broad here, is, by combining narrow “Greek” plus narrow “Christian”.
I don’t go full-broad (Hellenism + Christendom) — but that extra scope can piggyback onto the highly specific narrow field name, just fine, not a significant problem — whereas the other problem is a HUGE problem, where I fail to absolutely explicitly specify & lock down the MUST-HAVE NONNEGOTIABLE presence of Psilocybe — absolutely no bullsh*t switch-out of conflating “mushrooms” as “Amanita” may be allowed; that is TOP PRIORITY, due to the present f’d-up circumstance.
Normally, I’d choose — as the main name of the field — the greedy, general title (“mushrooms”), but due to the chronic main strategy of the Allegro-Amanita-Orbiting Bozos, their noxious strategy of always re-reading “mushrooms” to mean “the Allegro-Amanita paradigm that we imagined & strawmanned into existence, which Allegro wouldn’t even recognize, and would disavow”, it is highly dangerous and ineffective, to allow the vulnerable-to-misreading term, ‘mushroom’, IT IS UNFORTUNATELY, DUE TO BOZOS, NECESSARY TO SPECIFY ‘PSILOCYBE’ INSTEAD OF ‘MUSHROOMS’ in the main title of the field, at this time. If you have to pick just one title of the well-scoped/ well-centered field of scholarly study.
Don’t put some imagined Allegro-Amanita-Christian theory at the center of the field the star you navigate by the boundary and outer perimeter of your thought
Put the Psilocybe-Banquet-Greek-Christian theory at the center of the field the star you navigate by the boundary and outer perimeter of your thought
Did the Allegro-Amanita Bozos contribute to the field? Yes: by being such dimwits, that they FORCED the field to explicitly be named PSILOCYBE, instead of “Mushrooms”.
Both of these field-names are designed to maximally clash with, and shut down, the confusions of the Perpetual Allegro-Amanita Orbiters who try hard to pull the entire field into their orbit of confusion and small-minded thinking; their trap they are trying to set for the field.
the scholarly field of Psilocybe mushrooms in Greek and Christian religion <– very good
the scholarly field of Psilocybe in Greek and Christian religion <– good
the scholarly field of Psilocybe banqueting in Greek and Christian religion <– nice scope! specific+broad; and the central key question of Psilocybe mixed-wine banqueting conjoins at the esoteric heart the supposedly “independent” & “different” Greek & Christian religions.
the scholarly field of mushrooms in Hellenism and Christendom <– won’t work; ‘mushrooms’ will be hijacked and derailed into “Amanita”, by the Allegro-Amanita Orbiters
the scholarly field of Psilocybe in Hellenism and Christendom – ‘helle- does nothing but confuse, not clarify. Say ‘Greek’ and there are no immediate pressing questions, no tone of unclarity and uncertainty. same w/ ‘Christendom’; it raises 100 questions and resolves none. KISS; less is more.
Sometimes it seems like I do nothing but work on improved phrasings & lexicon for the field all day.
[acro]/keyboard shortcuts: rm ->
Religious mythology is description-by-analogy of repeatedly taking psychedelics, producing transformation of the experiential mental worldmodel from literalist ordinary-state possibility-branching to analogical psychedelic pre-existence.
Cautes the upward light-bearer left, handing a horn of Psilocybe wine to Sol, the fate-steered source of control-thoughts, dining with the mind of Mithras. Cautopates the downward light-bearer right, snake revealed in basket, two worldline-guided control-centers (king snake + queen snake co-controllers).
Luna doesn’t see this; or, she turns to remember to look back behind her. d/k what’s to the left.
Broad Name of the most important Field of scholarly study/research/investigation/theorizing:
Mushrooms in Hellenism and Christendom
Specific Name of the most important Field of scholarly study/research/investigation/theorizing:
Psilocybe in Greek and Christian religion
Do not go into to destroy Allegro-Amanita field. Rather, replace that field, centered on Allegro-Amanita, by the better-scoped field, centered on Greek-Christian Psilocybe.
Stop putting Allegro-Amanita-Christian at the center of the field, and instead put Psilocybe-Greek-Christian at the center of the field. Psilocybe-Hellenistic-Christian – clarifying words always add some confusion. ‘Greek’ has sufficiently broad connotations.
So does the term ‘Christian’ suffici broad — if you aren’t aspie, “well technically,
the term ‘Christian’ could be taken in a narrow sense, to exclude heretics & therefore esoterictericists”
mytheme-illiterate outsider
exoteric esotericist
exoteric would-be historian of esoteric explanandum
well technically ackshually a medieval bestiary isn’t necessarily (luxury color illustrated) Christian morality stories, it could be just a Love Bestiary rather than a Christian moralism story crafted by the same team that does the Psalters. See, it’s TOTALLY SECULAR. <facepalm> Flunkd esotericism 101 todo: clip of someone saying that, emphatically: *totally completely secular* bestiaries are genre-independent and
Christian morality teachings in the form of text descriptions.
color illustrated, in king’s gold luxury version
The benefits of nailing-down the dead center, far outweigh the benefits of greedy broad scope, because, if you specify the broad scope, there is tons of room to get mis-steered by the idiot-crowd of Allegro-Amanita Orbiters — it is wide-open vulnerable to the field-killing bozos.
Conversely, if you commit to the single-chemical fallacy, (narrowing the stated focus from ‘mushrooms’s down to just ‘Psilocybe’ … yet, broadening the evidence-base and scope challenge, of adding “Greek” religion as well as in “Christian” religion. These terms each have narrow and broad senses, ‘Christian’, ‘Greek’. It’s really the idiot Allegro-Orbiters who have the single-plant fallacy, literally. I propose any of hundreds of Psilocybin-containing mushroom species, whereas the ill-labelled “Holy Mushroom” gang is TRULY single-plant fallacy, in equating “the” theory with specifically Amanita M only. That’s a true case of single-plant – 1 specific species of musrhoom, only; no mention by this crowd of Psil and certainly not a page that co-discussees the two in the form of the Universal Hellenistic Banqueting Tradition with Mixed Wine where you are fused into the rock bench, tied to the underworld by snakes. Hercules pulled Theseus away but couldn’t pull king pirithous because the king is frozne in rock by snakes for eternity, he had to be left behind to get back up here to this level of god-thinking of the immortals ambrosia muka nectar the drink of the immortals kukeon mixed wine ~~
… I am not just disappointed in his Eden tree coverage or mushrooms in Christian art; I’m equally disappointed in his total bellyflop coverage of Greek mushroom use and myths.
If you commit the too-specific-center-of-field error, that is not a signifanct prlbl.em, becuse any broad stuff can piggyback no problem, eg Egyptian mysteries are not Greek but nothing stopping from adding-in Osisirs to Dionyssis. What problems with what weighting/urgancy need to be solved:
Factor A: desire greedy scope of explanatory framework.
Factor B: desire Psilocybe, Greek, Christian.
Factor C: MOST IMPORTANT!!, NEGATIVE GOAL: Don’t want the Allegro-Amanita-Bozos to derail the field from Psilocybe to Amanita, or to restrict the universe of thinking, to Allegro’s tiny bounded area, any more than I’d want Robert Graves’ little spot-treatment here or there (very weak, very spotty).
Allegro’s VIGOR is great; his limited horizon isn’t.
Graves has a broad horizon, but no focus, no vigor — he treats a little case here, a little instance there; no grand, bold theorizing like Allegro.
Bozos: Stop putting Amanita & Allegro at the center of “the field”. Stop treating Greek and Christian religion as if separate — simultaneously treat Psilocybe in Greek & Christian religion. Put Psilocybe in dead-center. You can whine about “single-plant fallacy” all you want; the important thing is, to get the center-focus right. The central plant is not Amanita, Cannabis, Scopolamine, or Opium; THE *CENTER PLANT* is Psilocybe. The important rleigion is no religion is not Christianity; the important religion is Mystery Religion/Hellenistic especially Greek if I have to place one at center, and Christianity. The center of “the field” needs to put 3 things in it:
Psilocybe
Greek religious mythology & Mystery Religions and the Banqueting Tradition
Christian religious mythology & initiation & the Banqueting Tradition
Where Bozos say “The Holy Mushroom”, I instead say “The Mixed-Wine Banqueting Tradition”. idgaf about greek or Christian; I only want their mixed-wine sacred meal banquet — just give me the engine, I’ll deal w/ it from there.
I’M TRYING TO GET YOU OUT OF THE ALLEGRO-AMANITA GHETTO, AND GET YOU TO STOP DRAGGING THE WHOLE FIELD — OUT OF SLOPPINESS AND IGNORANCE — INTO YOUR ALLEGRO-AMANITA GHETTO, YOUR SHORT-SIGHTED CUL DE SAC, YOUR OFF-BASE MONO-MANIA DEAD-END THAT YOU’VE CREATED FOR THE FIELD.
Hanegraaff Tries to Imply that Non-Entheogenic Methods Are Equally Effective as Entheogens
There’s no such thing as “broadly entheogenic methods that don’t use entheogens”. It’s like “Angels that are not angels but are devils”.
“Entheogenic methods that don’t use entheogens.”
Double-talking snake-oil salesman! HOLD ONTO YOUR WALLET!
oh, boo, foul! reading Hanegraaff article about Promethea, he mentions his other article which I slammed in an Egodeath Yahoo Group posting — I absolutely cry FOUL! AT THIS horrible idea, this intellectual theft, this OLD sleazy trick of STEALING CREDIT from entheogens:
I emphatically reject and condemn Hanegraaff’s proposal — an invitation to abuse which we’ve seen all the time — of “Entheogenic Religion in a wider sense”. His “Entheogenic Religion in a wider sense” is pure bull and an invitation to lie and steal credit from entheogns and falsely pretend that the “other methods” are therefore EQUAL.
He covertly embeds the assertion, the false implication, that the “broader sense” — ie non-entheogenic ways — are EQUAL TO entheogens.
Hanegraaff writes:
“Hanegraaff 2013b.
In this article I draw a distinction between Entheogenic Religion in a strict sense (defined by the use of psychoactive substances) and in a wider sense (referring to the use of other techniques for altering consciousness, such as specific breathing techniques, rhythmic drumming, ritual prayer and incantations, and so on).
For a short systematic overview of these different types of trance induction and their relevance to religion, cf. Hanegraaff 2015.
Entheogenic Religion becomes Entheogenic Esotericism if these entheogenic experiences are interpreted in terms of previous traditions currently classed under the “esotericism” rubric (for a short overview, see Hanegraaff 2013a, 18–44).”
Hanegraaff, Wouter J. 2013b. “Entheogenic Esotericism.” Pages 392–408 in Contemporary Esotericism. Edited by Egil Asprem and Kennet Granholm. Sheffield: Equinox.
Not Just Complain About Bad Going-ons Harming the Field; Define How the Field Is Done Right
policy todo: shorter, keyword-leveraging filenames & section anchor labels. The above URL should be instead: bold the keywords:
definition of new field: the maximal mushroom [psilocybe?] theory of western religion differentiate between the field of study, personalities, and theories
I’m abandoning that wording. fresh:
defining scholarly field mushrooms in western religion – differentiate field from personalities and theories
The url would be: …. easier to create the WordPress page/anchor: resulting, improved URL: [moved to above]
Dup’ing Progress into the Idea Development Page
The other night when I was moving forward at 100MPH and then I copied a historical record-snapshot of my ideas from a page to here, then I got confused by the dup section, and instantly slammed into a 0 MPH brick wall.
Instead, I just write whatever the hell, on whatever WordPress page I happen to be at.
I think of this idea development page as a kind of digest, it should be a running log of what I’m up to on various WordPress pages, in sequential/digest order.
Site Map Done
I finally made the Site Map worthy. The worst thing with “weblog” assumed design, is, it’s not topical outline accessible; it’s chronological. That doesn’t work. Like I’m thinking of outlining Cyberdisciple’s WordPress pages, because it’s opaque what’s there. I went with slight selective duplication of page entries within the Site Map page. I’m pleased with what I was able to do for Nav at my WordPress site, for Mobile (= narrow browser-window breakpoint) as well as Desktop (= wide browser-window breakpoint).
Allegro’s book is singular and remarkable, and should be considered on the book’s own terms.
The details of his work cannot be evaluated outside of the anthropological “fertility philosophy” theory and his linguistic method.
He cannot be incorporated into the field of “entheogen studies” or “psychedelic history” or whatever.
_____
Allegro’s book is a demonstration of method.
Allegro demonstrates his method of tracing Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and Aramaic words to Sumerian roots.
Each chapter is a fresh demonstration of this method.
Allegro’s method finds that words in the later languages refer to words having to do with reproduction and fertility in Sumerian.
Allegro has one trick, and he performs that trick very well every chapter, for 200 pages.
_____
Allegro is not a pioneer in finding mushrooms in Christian art.
He mentions only Plaincourault, and then only in passing.
Allegro is monomaniacally focused, hyper-focused, obsessively focused on his linguistic method.
There are no “students of Allegro” when it comes to mushrooms in Christian art because Allegro did not discuss mushrooms in Christian art.
He mentions only Plaincourault, and then only in passing.
_____
Writers err when they try to pluck out an individual topic, such as his treatment of the virgin birth, from Allegro’s book and evaluate the merits of Allegro’s interpretation of that topic considered in isolation.
Allegro’s interpretation of any given individual topic is governed by and determined by his linguistic method and fertility philosophy theory.
Writers who evaluate an individual topic of Allegro’s book in isolation from the linguistic method and fertility philosophy theory distort Allegro for their own purposes.
The book will never fit into another field, such as “entheogen scholarship” or “psychedelic history.”
_____
Allegro’s book is a demonstration of linguistic method wedded to fertility philosophy theory.
Allegro in his introduction grounds his linguistic method in the fertility philosophy theory:
“The seed of God was the Word of God.” (p. xx)
“The Word that seeped through the labia of the earth’s womb became to the mystic of less importance than the Logos which he believed his religion enabled him to apprehend and enthuse him with divine omniscience. But the source was the same vital power of the universe and the cultic practice differed little.” (p. xx)
“The names of the plants were spun out to make the basis of the stories whereby the creatures of fantasy were identified, dressed, and made to enact their parts.” (p. xxii)
“Every aspect of the mushroom’s existence was fraught with sexual allusions, and in its phallic form the ancients saw a replica of the fertility god himself… our present study has much to do with names and titles. Only when we can discover the nomenclature of the sacred fungus within and without the cult, can we begin to understand its function and theology.” (p. xxiii)
“For the first time, it becomes possible to decipher the names of gods, mythological characters, classical and biblical, and plant names. Thus their place in the cultic systems and their functions in the old fertility religions can be determined.” (p. xxiv)
“Even gods as different as Zeus and Yahweh embody the same fundamental conception of the fertility deity, for their names in origin are precisely the same.” (p. xxiv)
His book is not a work of history. Allegro openly states throughout his introduction that his wook is a book of philology, not history:
“Above all, it is the philologian who must be the spearhead of the new enquiry [into Sumerian origins of Old and New Testaments]. It is primarily a study in words.” (p. xxiv)
“What follows in this book is, as has been said, primarily a study in words. To a reader brought up to believe in the essential historicity of the Bible narratives some of the attitudes displayed in our approach to the texts may seem at first strange. We appear to be more interested with the words than with the events they seem to record; more concerned, say, in the meaning of Moses’ name than his supposed role as Israel’s first great political leader.” (p. xxvi)
“The breakthrough here is not in the field of history but in philology. Our fresh doubts about the historicity of Jesus and his friends stem not from new discoveries about the land and people of Palestine of the first century, but about the nature and origin of the languages they spoke and the origins of their religious cults.” (p. xxvi-xxvii)
“The enquirer has to begin with his only real source of knowledge, the written word… if we want to know more about early Christianity we must look to our only real source, the written words of the New Testament. Thus, as we have said, the enquiry is primarily philological.” (p. xxvii)
“The New Testament is full of problems… it is not until the language problems have been resolved that the rest can be realistically appraised.” (p. xxvii)
“In any study of the sources and development of a particular religion, ideas are the vital factor. History takes second place.” (p. xxviii)
“Of course, history now and again forces itself on our attention… [examples of historical questions about the Old Testament]… These and many other such questions are raised afresh by our studies, but it is our contention that they are not of prime importance. Far more urgent is the main import of the myths in which these names are found. If we are fight… it matters comparatively little whether these characters are historical or not.” (p. xxix)
“Ours is a study of words, and through them of ideas. At the end we have to test the validity of our conclusions not against comparative history … but against the overall pattern of religious thought as it can now be traced through the ancient Near East from the earliest times.” (p. xxx)
Complain all you want about Allegro’s lack of historical rigor.
Allegro does not care.
He tells you at the very beginning of his book that he does not care about “history.”
His book is a book of philology, not history.
[that’s like my interpretation strategy: instead of mind-reading and arguing over what some guy thought an art image meant 2500 years ago, I ask:
“How is this image most analogous to things that are observed and experienced in the altered state?”
Not “What did everyone 2500 years ago think it meant?”
Similarly, Rock lyrics mapping to the Cybernetic theory (psychedelic eternalism):
You will get the worst, garbage answer, by asking a Rock god what his lyrics mean.
Forget him; what he says is irrelevant.
What the Rock lyricist, or ancient Greek poet, afterwards says his words meant, is irrelevant.
It is a math problem: not a social-interview problem or a mind-reading problem or a History problem.
How is lyric-line L, most analogous to “things that are observed and experienced in the altered state”?
What does it mean to THE MUSE OF INSPIRATION, not what does it mean to the dumb sap that the muse used as a channel. -mh]
Pointing out that Allegro’s book is not history is irrelevant.
Allegro himself tells us that his study is not a historical study in his introduction!
_____
If you want to prove Allegro right or prove Allegro wrong, you have to talk about his linguistic method and his fertility philosophy theory.
The entirety of Allegro’s book rests on the combination of lingustic method and fertility philosophy theory.
Each individual topic Allegro discusses [mushrooms, Plaincourault] is embedded in his linguistic method and fertility philosophy theory.
_____
Allegro’s book is a self-reflexive contemplation on his linguistic method of revealing the fertility reference embedded in language:
“The seed of God was the word of God” (p. xx).
Translation: The fertility philosophy is the linguistic method.
The mind is made to sacrifice and abandon the trouble-causing “possibility-branching” mental worldmodel (literalist ordinary-state possibilism), and is simultaneously given the improved, durable replacement mental worldmodel: pre-existence of control-thoughts; analogical psychedelic eternalism.
In the Mithraism Tauroctony diagrammatic scene, the bull is sacrificed by blade-wound-insertion, due to the mind-of-Mithras turning to the right to look back and up behind, to Sol, the control-thought inserter.
As the bull is disproved, disrupted, sabotaged, and seen through, the ear of grain — the fruit, the new life — is produced.
Sending Kore (virgin maiden) to Hades’, gives rise to Queen Persephone in Hades, and Queen Demeter aboveground.
-mh]
_____
To accurately assess Allegro, we have to talk about both his linguistic method and the intellectual background of his fertility philosophy theory as a unit. Critiquing Allegro for his ‘history’ or his interpretation of visual art makes no sense, because his book is not a work of historynor does he interpret visual art in any meaningful way (besides his passing reference to Plaincourault).
_____
Allegro himself does not talk about the intellectual background of his fertility philosophy theory, and is perhaps unaware of the background.
He presents fertility philosophy theory as a conclusion derived from the linguistic method.
The two [fertility theory & linguistic method] are in fact intertwined, in Allegro’s intellectual world.
Each assumes the other, in Allegro’s intellectual world.
My article on Allegro points out that Allegro’s fertility philosophy is derived from early anthropological theorizing about religion and myth.
_____
Allegro’s book is a monstrum, a singular oddity.
Please, let Allegro go!
Read Allegro’s book if you want to marvel at a rare and wonderous creature.
{virgin} {bridal chamber} {spear} {avert eye} {bridal chamber, soul ascent} {bridal chamber} {soul ascent} {reaching level of fixed stars/ heimarmene} {soul ascent / astral ascent mysticism up to heimarmene fixed stars} {doorway} {passageway} {gateway} {heimarmene gate} {heaven gate} {password, key} {sacr child} {no egodeath virgins/ children/ youths/ maidens allowed through this door} {saturn scything the child during the ascent to reach heimarmene} {virgin} {phallus of god} {first birth vs second birth} {initial form, final form} {first form, second form} {first self, second self} {virgin} {mother} {child born} {son overthrows father} {firstborn replaced by secondborn} {stake through prometheus} {ascent} {crossing-through gate threshold cost} {male/female Mithras/Dionysus/Jesus} {athena’s tall spear} {spear dividing scene} {mortal, immortal} {spear through snake} {crossbeam} {Eve born from hole in Adam’s side} {worldline speared by the worldline, t / o shape} {control agent speared by worldline} {lion-headed snake monster created by solo maiden w/o consent of partner} {lion-headed serpent monster created by female acting without partner’s consent} {snake-headed family carved in rock} {snake through heart} {human head on snake} {spear through side/heart} {stake through prometheus} {spear in side of king on spacetime cross in heavens} {worldline sword running through God’s side} {2 goddesses} {maiden, underground queen, aboveground queen} {2 goddesses, maiden, underground queen, aboveground queen} {virgin maiden dies giving birth to god-boy} {epiphany ruler descending partway to meet rising soul} {puppet/ puppetmaster} {god-phallus revealed in maiden virgin takes virginity} {king descend heaven epiphany}
/ end of list
Record of Discovery: mythemes {Saturn, virgin, speared, 2 goddesses, epiphany, many more}
Historical Record of Discovery of How I Decoded Mythemes {virgin}, {spear}, {two goddesses}, {king descend epiphany}
This page is a backup “do not edit” as historical record of how this morning in a Chris Bennett frame of mind I decoded a bunch of “level 8 mythemes” all in one session”.
Post-session Fallout Decoding Continues
{avert eye, grovel, scrape, bow down} = try to move / stay away from flying eye of aareness seeing too much the the personal egoic control system — If I take the high god-level awareness point of view, perspective, I will undergo cybernetic self-control death; self-control death seizure.
I must lower awareness, look downward, crawl on the floor hiding my eyes from high elevated perspective, to try to avoid seeing, too much seeing how my the personal egoic control system works, or else I will have: loss of control cybernetic self-control death cybernetic self-control seizure cybernetic self-control seizure death cybernetic self-control death seizure self-control death seizure loss-of-control seizure the threat of self-control loss to resist seeing the attractive, seductive loss-of-control idea [rsaslci] loss of control [lc] to avoid loss of control [alc]
the great hunt for the perfect analogy
to look at the true controller, the king, is to die, to seize, to be made to attack oneself
Crawl for your life, looking downward to lower your gaze — try as hard as you can, to lower your gaze, reduce your too-bright awareness, reduce-downward your awareness, to avoid seeing the loss of control idea.
SIMPLE LISTING OF THE MYTHEME DECODING SEQUENCE of December 7, 2020
[2:00 a.m. December 7, 2020]
Focus right now on LIST THE SEQUENCE OF MYTHEMES WORKED ON, IN THE 6 HOURS AGO SESSION:
18 mythemes and counting, all primary-decoded in 1 session!
{bridal chamber, soul ascent} — Lead-in past 2 days: {bridal chamber} {soul ascent} etc.
{reaching level of fixed stars/ heimarmene} Start of session jackpot: {soul ascent / astral ascent mysticism reaching upward travel to heimarmene fixed stars}
{doorway/ passageway/ gateway} {“i am the (door) way”; the Egodeath theory is the gateway/doorway, “Welcome to the Heimarmene Gate — Cog Scientists: No Entry/ Pass Through this Door into Loosecog-land Without an Egodeath Credentials Pass”; No Entry into the Heimarmene Zone / Club without {sacr child}; no one gets to Loose Cognitive Science except through my egodeath theory everyone MUST (no way to get to Loosecogland except password-guarded gateway/doorway requires egodeath to pass through}; 8:45 am dec 7 2020: “no egodeath virgins/ children/ youths/ maidens allowed through this door“
{saturn scything the child during the ascent to reach heimarmene}
{virgin} 🎉x10
{phallus of god]
{first birth vs second birth}, {initial form, final form}; first form / second form; first self (possibilism-thinking) , second form/self (eternalism-thinking). pretty key idea for mythemse like virgin, mother, child born, son overthrows father, {firstborn replaced by secondborn}, sequence of two worldmodels of self[doubted, but reallly IS needed in the acro-expansion], time, posibility, control: first possibilism then eternalism. mental worldmodel of time, self, possibility, and control [mwtspc] done, test: mental worldmodel of time, self, possibility, and control ; — mental worldmodel of time, self, possibility, and control / test done. nice
{stake through prometheus} — during ascent, the crossing-through gate threshold cost = egodeath
{male/female Mithras/Dionysus/Jesus}
{athena’s tall spear} kylix Jason full-hieight goddess spear divinding the l/r side of image = Brown said (he was partial decoding in saying what he wrote — partial puzzle piece connection used toward a Complete decoding) = division between mortal/immortal realm zone. the spear thourh the worldline; HOW GO – GOT IT – SIDE — WHY SIDE, FOR SPEAR? GIVEN A WORLDLINE-SHAPED THE PERSONAL CONTROL SYSTEM, WHEN YOU PUT A SPEAR TRHOUGH A PERSONAL WORLDLINE, A CROSS. A WORLDLINE SNAKE SPEARING A WORLINE, SANKE BITS ITSELF AT 90 DEGREE ANGLE, SPEAKR THROUGH SIDE OF ADADM – 2AM SESSION ALSO decoded mytheme {eve born from hole in Adam’s side}
{eve born from hole in Adam’s side}
9:20 am dec 7 – {worldline speared by the worldline, t / o shape}, 3 days ago work on decoding ourobourous, {control agent speared by worldline}
{lion-headed snake monster created by solo maiden} somewhere in here was {lion serpent created by Sophai acting without her partner’s consent}
{snake-headed family carved in rock} osiris’ 3-snake carved family; snake through heart; human head on snake}
{spear through side/heart} – worldline running through the the personal control system, when revealed, = {stake through prometheus} ={spear in side of king on spacetime cross in heavens} (heimarmene-level) = {worldline sword running through God’s side} (worked on decoding theology of that during Canterbury Nov 2020 decoding)
{2 goddesses maiden persephone queen; woman demeter queen}
{virgin maiden eg semele dies giving birth to god-boy eg dionysus}
{epiphany ruler descending partway to meet rising soul}
{puppet/ puppetmaster} – wrote “puppet” in 1997 theory-spec/ now Completed the decoding after 23+ years. (1988 wrote puppet?) the Little Doll is You (= God-doll) = Master of Puppets = Twilight Zone, you’ve just become his brand new toy, and no escape, no place to hide, here [in Heimarmene-level-land] where time & space collide = Sabbath – Shock Wave; LOOK AROUND YOU’RE NOT THE ONLY ONE HERE,
{god-phallus revealed in maiden virgin takes virginity} puppetmaster phallus seen within mind = lose virginity
not in order yet; brainstorming the total list of mythemes for which i did major decoding-connections 7 hours ago:
Look how many mythemes I swept across in one session! Doing major missing key must-have connections else “you don’t get it”.
Key Words in Black Sabbath – Shock Wave Lyrics
for non-commercial use; scholarly analysis of mystic sh!t
can’t escape fate chosen rising in sky you’re going to die
Drink blood brew cheat this master You’re on your own going through
has taken over your mind you think you’re on your own Don’t believe you are the only one here Look around, you’re not alone — god controller phallus injecting control thoughts
Feel the forces from another world Ghostly shadows fill your mind power over you freeze, your life in time Look behind you
Somebody’s calling Someone is near there is nothing you can do
Ghostly shadows from the other world forces in your mind — god controller phallus injecting control thoughts Trapped between the worlds of life and death Frozen in the realms of time — eternalism Look behind you
You feel yourself falling, you’re at the end of the line Your body is crawling — crawling on floor to get low to avoid having the high view of the personal control system , to try to avoid seeing control-loss vortex running through your brain
/ shock wave lyrics
It feels like Soul Ascent from Caruana was the master-key to this whole jackpot of wide-ranging requiresite mythemes decoding — this morning I *GOT* the lofty high high high culture myths-decodings, i GROKKED FULLY THE HIGHEST OF HIGH CULTURE MYTHOLOGY ANALOGIES FOR BEING PENETRATED BY THE WILL OF GOD EXPOSED AND REVEALED INSIDE THE PERSONAL CONTROL SYSTEM DESTROYING ILLUSION OF AUTONOMOUS MAIDEN, FROCING/CAUSING TRANSFORMATION FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM – LOSING VIRGINITY, GIVING BIRTH TO BOY KING (“VIRGIN GIVES BIRTH TO THE GODMAN”) = AWARENESS/PERCEIVING OF THE REAL RULER, as as opposed to vecs vecs the virtual egoic control system pesc the personal egoic control system
high culture of mythology = the awareness/knowledge/ perceiving of God & wroldline stake penetrating the personal control system = transformation from possibilism to eternalism
the virtual egoic control system [vecs] done test: the virtual egoic control system the virtual egoic control system the virtual egoic control system / test/demo complete
copy of items 1-3 from at the time during the session:
1. astral ascent mysticism – {reaching heimarmene the sphere of the fixed stars} level (a got-it good idea, pass but first, 2. {Saturn sacrifice the childhood thinking, = possibilism-thinking. 3. {virgin}, mind hasn’t been made to flip mode to the mature real form underlying image projector, real power center the collapse of a false power-center. a mind that hasn’t been transformed to egoic thinking {virgin}.
SATURN SCYTHING CHILD DURING UPWARD-RISING SOUL ASCENT
STAKE THROUGH PROMETHEUS
OSIRIS SNAKE-FAMILY TRIAD ROCK CARVING (ISIS OSIIRIS HORUS???? I AM STORYTIME NARRATIVE MYTHEME-ILLITERATE)
SPEAR IN SIDE
VIRGIN
2 goddesses
epiphany RULER DESCENT MEETING UPWARD-MOVING MIND ASCENDING FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM TO MEET RULER COMING DOWN FROM ETERNALISM TO VISIT TOWARD DIRECTION OF POSSIBILISM
_________________
BRIDAL CHAMBER (NOV 2013 & DEC 2020 CARUANA SOUL ASCENT FROM BRIDAL CHAMBER)DO I HAVE CONCEPT KEY MYTHME {BRIDAL CHAMBER}???? NO – {BRIDE}, i only have 2 paragraphs in Key Mythemes page that mention chamber, — only a single hit on braces {bridal chamber}, — no Concept-entry!! MIssing enttries: {virgin}, {bridal chamber}, {spear} <– why those 3? all are very major, missing!!! 10:07 am dec 7 2020 add: {avert eye}, other items from numbered list of 20 mythemes decoded in this session.
todo: add {virgin}, {bridal chamber}, {spear} to the Egodeath Concepts Database — Key Mythemes area.
para 1 from Key Mythemes:
{returning home}
Like all mythemes, in some particular way, this represents transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism.
The mind of the gnostic, in the Holy of Holies (the bridal chamber), after prayer and ingesting the mixed-wine Eucharist, rises up through the planetary spheres through doorways with guards (demons for the lower Aeons, or angels for the higher Aeons), using “seals” with diagrams to badge-through the doorways (gateways), to return to the One; to the All.
/ para 1 from Key Mythemes
para 2 from Key Mythemes:
{touch}
To be able to steadily think about, consider, picture, mentally engage the idea, without losing control.
{touch Demeter’s snake with your right hand, without dying}
In the ordinary state of consciousness, the {snake} (the pre-existing worldline of personal control-thoughts) is completely obscured, hidden in the chest (the kiste), or completely occluded in the cista mystica (snake-basket with lid).
In the altered state, the snake comes partly out from the basket or chest, becoming visible to the elevated mind’s eye of awareness dis-embeddd from tight cognitive binding and from the egoic control system.
The mind now observes how the personal egoic control system works — and how to break the personal control system at its vulnerable opening, the cybernetic system’s {spear-wound of thought-injection, death, & rebirth}, at the veiled source of control-thoughts in the {bridal chamber}, the {Holy of Holies where only the head priest is permitted to enter}. …
/ para 2 from Key Mythemes
SATURN SCYTHING CHILD DURING UPWARD-RISING SOUL ASCENT
STAKE THROUGH PROMETHEUS
OSIRIS SNAKE-FAMILY TRIAD ROCK CARVING (ISIS OSIIRIS HORUS???? I AM STORYTIME NARRATIVE MYTHEME-ILLITERATE)
SPEAR IN SIDE
VIRGIN
2 goddesses
epiphany RULER DESCENT MEETING UPWARD-MOVING MIND ASCENDING FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM TO MEET RULER COMING DOWN FROM ETERNALISM TO VISIT TOWARD DIRECTION OF POSSIBILISM
The puzzling thing was, have I not already decoded these, but remember my recent meta-theory work, that a “complete decoding” involves not merely dumb binary “did you identify a referent for a mytheme”; a Complete MYTH-GROK involves so much more richess & “ways of fittingness” – good example is in Nov 2011 I “solved” tree vs snake but in Nov 2013 I *completely* decoded {tree vs. snake} = Possibilism vs. Eternalism — realizing the immense cultural ramifications; this morning five hours ago I had a similar — very very justifiably called — I had an {epiphany}.
I FAILED to make an entry {virgin} or {spear} and that fact is PROOF that I had NOT NEARLY “adequately written about the analogy ‘virgin’/’maiden'” nor about {spear}, for all the work I did on creating no less than TWO pages about {spear}, {sacrifice childhood}, etc, I yet had left a TON of room for…
I don’t emph the NUM… ok I am emphasizing BOTH the NUMBER BOTH emph’g both the number and fittingness (“must-have decodings”; “you suck and fail to understand this mytheme if you lack KEY connections x y z”), Nov 2013 was that “I completely get how very fitting … sry but allcaps just works better to represent my thinking
the ALLCAPS emphasis
the italics emphasis
I never think so mildly as in italics; I am an ALLCAPS thinker.
Nov 2013 = Dec 7 2020 = IT REALLY HIT ME THE FITTINGNESS APTNESS OF THE TREE/SNAKE CONTRAST, THE VIRGIN/EXPERIENCED CONTRAST {virgin vs. adult} = not transformed vs. transformation from possibilism to eternalism
This norming monr morning I stumbled upon a formula that is massivve in ramific — EMPH: I SOLVED A SEEMINGLY SCATTERED NETWORK OF ADVANCED MYTHEMES.
{tree vs. snake} = Possibilism vs. Eternalism [tspe]
_______________
Sequence of Breakthrough Decodings: Lead-in from 2 Days Ago, through Climax, through In-Session Fallout, to Post-session Fallout
It started with filling-in the seizure item in the list of “concepts conjoined in Jan 88”, on the Welcome Joe page that I made in response to Transcendent Knowledge podcast w/ Jimmy Cyberdisciple Max Freakout.
You can have many connections yet fail to catch a MAJOR MAJOR ANGLE so you failed yet to “completedly decode” that mhytheme(s). eg {virgin}| and {sperarr}. same repeat as 2011 v 2013! the setup, vs. the spike — requires… a decoding requires specific “homer” “hit out of part” particular connections/ APT-ANALOGY-ANGLES WERE MISSING. Not only about QUANTITY of connections but QUALITY — I was missing the high-quliaty connections around {virgin} from {female thought receiverr}
a Caruana gnost’m heleful connetno was soul ascent from/to bridal chamber}, and in fact , Nov 26 2013 DID have much grokiking NOT ONLY on treesnake, but also, equiv to “bridal chamber” decoding work during that “rapid idea development session”. so in fact, the visionary mindset sessions of nov 26 2013 & Dec 7 2020 INTERCONNECTED WORK .. RE: THE TOPIC OF NOT TREESNAKE BUT RATHER BRIDAL CHAMBER, NOV 26
SAT-EXAM ANALOGY EQUATION FORMAT:
NOV 2011 : NOV 2013 RE: TREE SNAKE :: NOV 2013 : DEC 2020 RE: BRIDAL CHAMBER
Key topics assembled January 1988: o The block universe o No-free-will/monopossibility o Loose cognitive association binding o Cybernetic non-control <– do not think about [i expanded riffing in here, below, leading to decoding some 7 [or 18] major/apt/mythemes including {virgin maiden}, from {bridal-chamber} lead-in from previous 2 days] o Mental model transformation o Ego transcendence.
“Non-control” of a sort: personal control is no longer thought of as coming from a local locus of personal control power operating with steering power in a tree of possibilities into an open future.
Welcome to the Egodeath Theory, Joe Average [do not alter this historical-record copy (except typos *maybe*)]
Welcome to the Egodeath Theory, Joe Average (and General Audience, and Professional Mystics, and Cognitive Scientists, and Ancient Hellenistic Initiates).
The basic ideas that anyone can understand, as I’ve presented them: Key topics that I assembled January 1988: o The block universe o No-free-will/monopossibility o Loose cognitive association binding o Cybernetic non-control <– do not think about or experience in the form of {snake} frozen in {rock}. This is the way through THE EGODEATH DOORWAY Semele light shines on her workings, dollpuppet immediately made visible as a illusion screen obscuring; it’s a virtual layer only, a projected image the personal egoic control system. The Maiden {virgin} means maiden; the maiden/virgin hasn’t been PENETRATED BY SNAKE WORLDLINE SPEARE OSIRIS DIED IN TREE TRUNK, GAVE WAY TO “THE SEONC FORM” {second form}{virgin} {maiden splits into two ruler-goddesses, one in the underworld}. to take a boy is to overpower and transformation shine the light on the underworkings of the the personal egoic control system causes necessarily a transformation to the adult from, transformation from possibilism to eternalism = {losing virginity}
“Non-control” of a sort: personal control is no longer thought of as coming from a local locus of personal control power operating with steering power in a tree of possibilities into an open future.
orig paragraphs that got pushed down by all the above idea development insertions:
I’ve been working on clarifying and focusing ideas, including the peak climactic self-control-seizure vortex and control-system transformation, since I first put together the basic core ideas, on January 11, 1988 in the ivy-covered computer lab at university.
These basic ideas which you can readily understand, that I put together in 1988, are listed in my the Egodeath Concepts Database.
this is not… my theory needs some theorizing, about “amount of reconnections” — at least I now know that decoding a mytheme is more than an isolated, simple-minded single mapping: {mytheme} = referent 3 of 4 types of connection remain:
myth>myth synonyms antonyms generalization groups myth>concept concept>myth concept>concept
Look how many different angles you can draw analogies from.
I could prove that I thought of “much of these decodings already” — sort of.
What does “sort of” mean? I had half the angles/perspectives/analogies,
compare November 2011 tree/snake work, nice; versus November 2013 “TOTALLY GETTING IT!!! OMFG” — no comparison in magnitude.
think more literally. God’s control-member is inserted covertly into the heart inner place within the personal egoic control system. The maiden has been revealed = penetrated, for the thought-inserter to be revealed covertly operating inside the local locus of control,
We see Your will revealed, the snake worldline running through our heart our mind’s adult form the virgin maiden mind hasn’t popped [“cherry” got pushed 1-screen-down] its one and only childhood-thinking mental models,
the mind gets to have 2.5 mental models, called “first and second birth”, plus consolation prize your childhood self gets to be Ruler of the Underworld of the egoic control agents that never really existed in a sense,
your initial fantasy-self, now still being used to control to now virtually control the steering among the branches,
Persephone is under there in the land of things that seemed, The Land of Initially Seemed,
local locus of control autonomous maiden gives birth to monster : lion (death-face) snake (worldline) = lion snake = impaled by Death worldline
Cause of death: impalement by worldline through his cybernetic heart/side, and the woman eve born from Adam’s side.
wound in side represents birth-opening where worldline puppetmaster is operating in your heart of your the personal egoic control system. the main image is, i didn’t arrange these ideas this way —
Mental Mode
The mind’s personal control system hasn’t popped its “possibilism to eternalism transformation revelation” cherry, in which the locus-of-control attribution shifts from illusion layer to reality-layer.
[i wrote “really feelin” near start of session — principle, I always feel an epiphany coming on, smell /sense it approaching]
REALLY FEELIN A MYTH-GROK ABOUT MAIDEN DYING GIVING BIRTH TO —
EGOIC THINKING =
NEW BIRTH OF AWARENESS OF THE MALE PUPPETMASTER INSERTED INTO FEMALE VIRTUAL ILLUSION LEVEL.
THE PERSONAL (TEMPORARY EGOIC-MODE) CONTROL SYSTEM ACTING ON ITS OWN = POSSIBILISM-THINKING.
SOPHIA INITIALLY GAVE BIRTH TO A LION-FACED SERPENT MONSTER = CYBERNETIC DEATH.
THAT’S A GOOD MODEL, CLEAR VIBES, FROM CARUANA/GNOSTICS SOUL ASCENT/ BRIDAL CHAMBER; GEOCENTRIC, PTOLEMAIC ASTRAL ASCENT MYSTICISM.
To get past a high elevated point of super-humanly, titanically high intelligence, mind of the immortals, light shining on how the mind works, how the feeling of time and control collapses upon light, watery light, the watery light shines on Semele realizing she is naked and vulnerable penetrated by the inner thought injector serpent running through the heart or lets just say running the branch Eve holds over her vulnerable spot covered by a branch; possibilism .
THE MIND BEGINS LIFE AS A YOUTH / MAIDEN – NEITHER {YOUTH} NOR {MAIDEN} IS CONSIDERED “MALE” (THE THOUGHT-INJECTOR SOURCE) IN THE HIGHER SENSE OF PUPPETMASTER / THOUGHT INJECTOR SNAKE THAT IS YOUR LIFE ALL ALONG THAT RAIL IS PROJECTED REFLECTION …. GARMENT OF LIGHT PROTECTS.
GNOSTICISM – POSSIBILISM-THINKING ON ITS OWN WITHOUT ETERNALISM GIVES BIRTH TO LION-HEADED SERPENT MONSTER, YOUR HEAD ON TOP OF THE SERPENT THAT’S FROZEN IN ROCK, CARVED INTO ROCK,
SNAKE THROUGH THE HEART AS YOU RISE UP/ ARE “LIFTED UP”, AS THE PERSONAL EGOIC CONTROL AGENT, AND ARE MADE VISIBLE INNER WORKINGS WITH SUPER LIGHT SHINED ON IT, REVEALING THE WORKINGS OF THE MIND TO AWARENESS, AND WHEN THIS HAPPENS, CONTROL ILLUSION– EGOIC CONTROL POWER ILLUSION COLLAPSES.
THE MAIDEN PENETRATED BY THE MALE GOD DIES AND IS TRANSFORMED, HER MIND’S FIRST/INITIAL/PERISHABLE, POSSIBILISM-BASED IDENTITY REPLACED BY THE MIND’S SECOND/ LASTING/ IMPERISHABLE/ IMMORTAL/ , ETERNALISM-BASED IDENTITY – THE ETERNALISM MENTAL WORLDMODEL OF TIME, SELF, POSSIBILITY, AND CONTROL.
THE ETERNALISM MENTAL MODEL THE ETERNALISM MENTAL WORLDMODEL THE ETERNALISM MENTAL WORLDMODEL OF TIME, SELF, POSSIBILITY, AND CONTROL THE ETERNALISM MENTAL WORLDMODEL OF TIME, POSSIBILITY, AND CONTROL
the eternalism mental model [emm] the eternalism mental worldmodel [emw] the eternalism mental worldmodel of time, self, possibility, and control [emwtspc] the eternalism mental worldmodel of time, possibility, and control
THE BOY DIONYSUS IS BORN, WHO IS THE “ADULT” FORM, BY ANALOGY.
THIS IS HOW THE MIND WORKS IN THE ALTERED STATE.
LOSE VIRGINITY, DIE MAIDEN, GIVE BIRTH TO AWARENESS OF YOUR MALE PARTNER WHOSE WILL YOU SEE IN YOU.
I NOW SEE THE WILL OF GOD INSIDE ME AND MY ILLUSION COLLAPSED ABOUT BEING AN AUTONOMOUS SOURCE OF PERSONAL CONTROL POWER.
THE MIND WAS FORCED TO CHANGE AND GIVE BIRTH TO THE *SECOND WAY OF THINKING AFTER “IT” HAPPENS,
THE SYSTEM CANCELLATION AND SUSPENSION AND REVELATION OF HOW TIME AND CONTROL UNDERNEATH THE PROJECTED IMAGE LAYERED ON TOP VANISHES AND NATURALLY THE MIND RECONFIGURES TO ITS HIGHER FORM.
WE ALL HAVE A SNAKE-SHAPED CROSS OF PROMETHUES WHO ROSE/LIFTED UP [TO LIFT UP AWARENESS IS TO SACRIFICE THE INITIAL KING EGO 10:56 AM DEC 7 2020; UP = SACRIFICE; {pointing up/down: moving mind up to heaven causes moving egoic thinking down to underworld}]
SACRIFICE SELF-CONTROL AGENCY TO GOD-MODE THINKING AND DISCOVERED A SPEAR THROUGH HIM.
RISE UP LIKE MOSES LIFTED UP SNAKE, THE WORLDLINE FROZEN CARVED IN ROCK IS YOUR LIFE STUCK WITH THE WORDLINE SPEAR
THE SPEAR IS THE WORLDLINE RUNING THROUGH THE KING, IS THE REAL KING REVEALED, [12:50 a.m. December , 2020]
FOUGHT THEMSELVES
todo add {throw rock}, one-eye throws {rock}, David and Golieth, Jason throws rock into army the {rock} makes them {fight}, ego fights the light of the real controller, the higher level king.
local control,
the personal egoic control system is a projected image with no real power,
she is a penetrated,
the god men are male female
they have the spear-snake worldline running through their cybernetic heart
impaled Prometheus rose to god-mode access and died and transformed,
that death is female-like: the puppet illusion we see God’s will in us. puppetmaster
the personal egoic control system is like an overpowered raptured female, helpless, no power, in light of God’s power, the maiden who WAS VIRGIN
web definition lookup:
“The word virgin comes via Old French virgine from the root form of Latin virgo, genitive virginis, meaning literally “maiden” or ” virgin ” —a sexually intact young woman or “sexually inexperienced woman“.
A GIRL WHO SLEPT AROUND BUT WAS NEVER CYBERNETICALLY OVERPOWERED BY LIGHT AND FORCED TRANSFORMATION FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM IS STILL A VIRGIN (IN THE MYSTIC SENSE).
YOU THE FEMALE PUPPET SOUL ILLUSION-PROJECTION WITH NO POWER,
YOU THE PERSONAL EGOIC CONTROL SYSTEM, ARE MADE TO GIVE WAY TO THE HIGHER UNDERLYING REALITY, THAT YOU HAVE NO POWER; IT’S PROJECTED.
TO LEARN THAT AND BE FORCED TO SWITCH TO UTTER HELPLESS DEPENDENCY ON YOUR OWN REVEALED SEPARATE HIDDEN THE NORMALLY VEILED, UNCONTROLLABLE SOURCE OF CONTROL-THOUGHTS ,
TO UNVEIL THAT REALITY OF CONTROL-THOUGHT INJECTION BY THE WORLDLINE SNAKE FROZEN SPEAR IN SIDE IN ROCK
IN WHAT DIRECTION DOES THE SNAKE RUN THORUGH PROMETHEUS.
THE MALE SPEAR SERPENT WORLDLINE RUNS THROUGH YOU YOUR PAST (TAIL) IS VISIBLE FROZEN IN ROCK AND YOUR FUTURE IS SAME; FROZEN IN ROCK
MAN’S HEAD FISH MOUTH HE’S DIVING INTO THE FROZEN SNAKE SHAPED FUTURE WORLDLINE.
HOW DID I NOT SEE IT WHEN CLEAR HEAD AND SOBER?
THE SPEAR DUMMY, THE SPEAR DUMMY, = THE WORLDLINE SNAKE RUNNING THROUGH YOUR PRESENT TIME.
CONTINUE [1:04 A.M. DEC 7 2020] I swear no one would agree that it failed failed to decode…
the two go together: the spear in the side, and sword in god’s side suggests worldline snake is running through god and he is crucified not literally dead, if the personal egoic control system = king, has a spear through side not dumbly say:
“the symbol of the spear is corrolated/ associated with… (i hate that way of talking).
“the symbol of the spear is corrolated/ associated with, is magically is associated with seizures” (my 2006 main article) misses the big, main point:
The worldline snake runs through the heart of the king, formerly known as the {evil king},
he lives, in one way; but the godmen are rep’d as female-like Jesus with God’s will stuck in him and worldline spear wounded his side,
effeminate Jesus Dionysus Mithras Osiris has God’s control-member inserted in him
he has the female trait of being overpowered by God’s light and forced to shed shine light on how mind really works, killing Semele the projected image illusion temporary powerless vulnerable illusion,
not able to stand adult light truth the child is
My original point this writing session was {astral ascent mysticism}, before decoded {virgin} and {spear} decoding, [1:13 a.m. December 7, 2020] geocentric.
Caruana’s video and glossary and finished or “took” or “got” what i wrote already about possibilism transformation from possibilism to eternalism = transformation from Persephone to
HEAVEN EMPYRIUM – DWELLING PLACE OF GOD AND OF ALL THE ELECT
Christ descends down from Eternalism-land, we rise up from possibilism-land.
Meet the ruler in the air, the epiphany, Mystery Religion. Mystery Religion.
The list of 1-3 or 1-5 or 1-30, sequence of the 3, or 5, or 6, or… mythemes I skipped among during session; I kept trying to fill-in this list during the session (note addeed 11:03 am dec 7):
Mytheme decoding sequence this session that’s ending at [2:35 a.m. December 7, 2020]:
0. Passing through the astral doorway, the price is Egodeath.
The Egodeath theory is the doorway from possibilism to eternalism.
ego death price to get to heaven-empyriem through the layer of heimarmene to outside it where God and al the elect have risen to
{the god’s epiphany down from the sky} means, vertical scale, lower = possibilism, higher = eternalism, Christ comes down from Eternalismland = Heaven = empyrium; above
Astral ascent mysticism is useful.
1. astral ascent mysticism – {reaching heimarmene the sphere of the fixed stars} level (a got-it good idea, pass but first,
2. {Saturn sacrifice the childhood thinking, = possibilism-thinking.
3. {virgin}, mind hasn’t been made to flip mode to the mature real form underlying image projector, real power center the collapse of a false power-center. a mind that hasn’t been transformed to egoic thinking {virgin}.
the Bridal Chamber – we know god inside us operating us, we are an image projection we were made to see and die, Persephone lost, –
the one thing i don’t understand: didn’t i write all this?
[in the Egodeath Concepts Database,]
I HAVE NO ENTRY FOR VIRGIN.
I HAVE NO ENTRRY FOR SPEAR.
OMFG. LOW IQ.
AND THE PRICE TO RISE UPWARD TO THE HEIMARMENE REALM FIXED … JUPITER SACRIFICES THE CHILDTHINKING (holy spirit high-flying eagle / harmless dove? = takes the mind’s virginity: eagle = power of the holy spirit to transform to adult form; THE SECOND FORM.
Every myth is transformation from possibilism to eternalism
What’s Jesus as maiden? bc transformation from possibilism to eternalism.
Why is x y? b/c x & y is analogous w/ transformation from possibilism to eternalism is like losing a child, like losing virginity, like escaping prison
OH HOW WE LOVE THE WAYS TO COMPARE THE MAIDEN FORM,
SHE HASN’T BEEN SHOWN GOD’S WILL HIDDEN OPERATING INSIDE HER YET.
HER HIDDEN PARTNER, THE HIGHER, CONTROL-THOUGHT-INJECTOR.
THE FIRST WAY OF THINKING IS EGOIC/PSM POSSIBILISM. THE SECOND WAY OF THINKING IS THE TRANSCENDENT, ETERNALISM.
SO YOU CAN REACH UP TO FULL LEVEL, HEIMARMENE AFTER TRANSFORMING TO ETERNALISM THUS DYING TO POSSIBILISM.
3. spear through, Prometheus stake worldline.
CARVED HIGH-RELIEF SNAKE IN ROCK IS A {SPEAR} RUNNING THROUGH YUOR SIDE SIDEWAYS SPEAR WORLDLINE SNAKE FROZEN IN ROCK PROMETHEUS STAKE.
BILLOWING CLOTH = AN INVISIBLE FORCE THAT YOU CAN FEEL AND CAN INDIRECTLY SEE . REFLECTION.
THE CLOTH IS BLOWING IN INNER MIND THE PERSONAL EGOIC CONTROL SYSTEM NO LONGER VIRGIN, GOT OVERPOWERED AND EXPOSED AND ILLUSION COLLAPSED, THE MALE HALF PARTNER REVEALED HIMSELF, THE HIGHER CONTROLLER.
BTW KILLS FT FREEWILL THINKING.
THE HIGHER CLOTHING, A NEW CLOTHING FOR THE SPIRIT, EXPOSED.
I already decoded “virgin”? not, surprisingly. very little. but so so much clearer it feels.
I totally get it, totally virgin, not yet transformed from possibilism to eternalism.
did i not write that post that the Egodeath Yahoo Group 2012?
That is the conversation i spewed out to a friend – back when I figured out decoded “rapture/ra/e”.
Wished I had recorded the burst of exactly-right analogies when I decoded “female” but mind has a first born self then when that collapsed no more; it was your mind’s only child-form.
Each mind gets one initial egoic possibilism-thinking, for a time, then that lower king dies, that maiden gets penetrated by Prometheus’ stake worldline running through her — the personal egoic control system is the virgin.
temporary, powerless, destined to follow Demeter, our collective i swear i wrote this in 2006. Every initiated man is Demeter-shaped, the adult-ruler.
Switch gears on the analogy — what happens when the maiden dies?
she gives birth to Dionysus, and also, she is now an adult woman, thus Queen, Adult Queen of the Dead Child-thinking realm we all share,
Demeter was a maiden but got penetrated by the snake-shaped worldline of god,
God’s spear in your side, inside your the personal egoic control system injecting secretly thoughts, now revealed as a temporary beginner-form illusion
a cheap gimmick, a projected image that collapses upon light, got it.
[1:31 am December 7, 2020]
the female the personal egoic control system soul splits upon death (transformation-away, replaced by eternalism-thinking splits into TOW NEW FORMS I GOT IT:!
NAIVE POSSIBILISM-THINKING = PERSEPHONE
ON THE REALITY SIDE, WE HAVE DEMETER (ETERNALISM-THINKING ) , ADULT FORM AFTER THE MAIDEN FORM. DEMETER IS AWARE OF SHADOW-EXISTENCE FORMER SELF, NOW SEEN AS “QUEEN” ADULT FORM IN THE SHADOWS-WORLD, PERSEPHONE QUEEN OF THE UNDERWORLD DEAD EGOS / TRANSFORMED-AWAY, ILLUSION-BASED SELF-CONCEPT.
THE SELF-CENTER SWITCHES TO A DUO MODEL, TWO CENTERS OF CONTROL: PUPPETMASTER / PUPPPET.
BRAND NEW IDEA FOR 1988?
2012 I CRACKED TONS OF THIS –
NO VIRGIN Concept-entry THO???? UNBELIEVABLE.
NO {SPEAR} ENTRY ???? JOKE, YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING.
ETERNALISM-THINKING + QUALIFIED-POSSIBILISM-THINKING = DEMETER MOURNING FOR HER LOST DAUGHTER
I ALREADY WROTE THIS/???? ON MY DEMETER PAGE?
no I’m not really finding it, maybe idea development page?
i spelled out the equations somewhere already. i’m sure.
mapping ” from from naive possibilism-thinking, to eternalism-thinking along with qualified possibilism-thinking ” mapped to “Maiden Persephone; Persephone Queen of Underworld; Demeter Queen of Real World”
from naive possibilism-thinking, to eternalism-thinking along with qualified possibilism-thinking
mapped to
Maiden Persephone; Persephone Queen of Underworld; Demeter Queen of Real World
Two Arrangements of Mytheme-Decoded Formulas
Arrangement 1: (has more info; defines tighter relations among the 6 items, than sep. formulas): {a v b v c} = A v B v C
Arrangemeent 2: {a} = A {b} = B {c} = C
the composite formula: {tree vs. snake} = Possibilism vs. Eternalism is sort of equivalent to the pair of single-item equations: {tree} = Possibilism {snake} = Eternalism
Grand Single 3-way Composite Equation
here it is! 🎉
[9:39 a.m. December 7, 2020]:
{virgin-maiden Persephone; Persephone queen of underworld; Demeter queen of upper world} = naive possibilism-thinking, qualified possibilism-thinking, eternalism-thinking
As 3 Separated Formulas (without Interconnectivity Message)
The Mapping – New Formula like {tree vs. snake} = Possibilism vs. Eternalism:
Maiden Persephone = naive possibilism-thinking
Demeter Queen of Real World = eternalism-thinking
Persephone Queen of Underworld = qualified possibilism-thinking
MAIDEN PERSEPHONE SPLITS INTO ADULT QUEEN OF UNDERWORLD SHADES LAND OF DEAD EGOS, CANCELLED/REMOVED GARMENTS OF POSSIBILISM-THINKING, AND SPLITS INTO DEMETER, THE ADULT FORM OF THE MAIDEN, ETERNALISM.
To rise to a certain threshold level of awareness the Egodeath doorway, this transformation is the doorway to Cog Sci, Loose Cog Science. to get through the doorway, the price is your child [12:27 a.m. December 7 2020], to rise up high to fixed stars, you get trapped at the .. as you fly … as the child flies up higher and higher, there’s a level at which the child-mode thinking is revealed as an illusion and the inner snake puppet-hand in you is all visible;
you experience and you see and the child-mode thinking dies;
your demon-possessed ; the female dies, the male form is born.
Semele Zeus Dionysus.
the boy was born from the cybernetic death of the female when Zeus shined his light on the the personal egoic control system with branching — o Mental model transformation o Ego transcendence.
Welcome to the Egodeath Theory, Joe Average Mystics; General Audience; Professional Mystics; Loose Cognitive Scientists; Ancient Hellenistic Initiates; Esotericism Initiates; Rock Musicians; Symposium Drinking Party Bacchants (retinue, thiasus).
Basic, Comprehensible Ideas I Pulled Together in the January 1988 Breakthrough of Explaining Mysticism
The basic ideas that anyone can understand, as I’ve presented them: Key topics that I assembled January 1988:
“A person who seeks by contemplation and self-surrender to obtain unity with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or who believes in the spiritual apprehension of truths that are beyond the intellect.” – Oxford
“A mystic is a person who has a direct experience of the sacred, unmediated by conventional religious rituals or intermediaries.” – Mirabai Starr, author of Wild Mercy: Living the Fierce and Tender Wisdom of the Women Mystics, tells OprahMag.com
The term ‘the pre-existent’ and ‘pre-existence’, is equivalent to the term ‘eternalism’, and is understandable per commonplace language, unlike the alien technical term ‘eternalism’: for example, people can understand, in the ballpark, the statement:
The possibility-branching model of time & control, versus the pre-existence model of time and control. Through psychedelics.
compare:
The possibilism model of time & control, versus the eternalism model of time and control. Through entheogens.
What is “possibilism” supposed to mean? No one has ever heard of this word. Can’t you speak English?! The Egodeath theory is complicated and abstruse, not helpful. It is a failure.
What is “eternalism” supposed to mean? No one has ever heard of this word. Can’t you speak English?! The Egodeath theory is complicated and abstruse, not helpful. It is a failure.
What is “entheogens” supposed to mean? No one has ever heard of this word. Can’t you speak English?! The Egodeath theory is complicated and abstruse, not helpful. It is a failure.
“What I mean, is simply:“
The possibility-branching model of time & control, versus the pre-existence model of time and control. Through psychedelics.
The pre-existing worldline of personal control-thoughts. the pre-existing worldline of your future control-thoughts the pre-existing worldline of future personal control-thoughts The pre-existence of your worldline of future personal control-thoughts. your pre-existing worldline of future control-thoughts
Oh, okay, WHY DIDN’T YOU SAY? Are you *trying* to make the Theory incomprehensible?
Speak plain English, not some esoteric theology-babble.
Laurence Caruana’s Gnosticism glossary shows the use of the term ‘pre-existence’:
– PRE-EXISTENCE – The state of being in the Upper Aeons, before material time and space were created in the Lower Aeons. Synonym: STAND AT REST. – The One [God or maybe the Ground of Being, block universe] pre-exists: “I invoke you, the one who is and who pre-existed in the name which is exalted above every name.” (Prayer of the Apostle Paul A:11) – The One then created images of itself, which ‘pre-existed’: “He (the Father) created the pre-existent images”
[this could include: the pre-existing worldline of personal control-thoughts]
— (Tripartite Tractate 96:24) – The Father, which is the first image or emanation of the One, pre-existed: “…through the incorruptible bosom, and through the great light of the Father, who pre-existed.” (Gospel of the Egyptians) – The Mother Barbelo, which is the next image or emanation of the One, pre-existed: “Great is the first aeon, male virginal Barbelo, the first glory of the invisible Father, she who is called ‘perfect’. Thou (fem.) hast seen first the one who truly pre-exists because he is non-being. And from him and through him thou hast pre-existed eternally.” (Three Steles of the Great Seth) – All creatures in the Lower Aeons are shadows of ‘pre-existing things’ in the Upper Aeons: – “But the creature [sounds like the virtual egoic control agent] is a shadow of pre-existing things.” (Valentinian Exposition) – Through the gnosis, each of the Elect may come to know their pre-existence in God: (Barbelo:) “If you seek with a perfect seeking, then you shall know the Good that is in you; then you will know yourself as well, as one who derives from the God who truly pre-exists.” (Allogenes 56:15) – Knowledge reveals ‘the pre-existent One’: “He who gave them (the Elect) knowledge of him (Christ) was one of his powers for enabling them to grasp that knowledge in the fullest sense is called (…) ‘the revelation of those things which were known at first’ and ‘the path toward harmony and toward the pre-existent one…’ [‘one’, read: the block universe] ” (Tripartite Tractate 127:8) – To ‘pre-exist’ is ‘to stand at the beginning’. These will know the end: (Jesus said:) “Blessed is he who will stand at the beginning. And he will know the end, and he will not taste death.” (Gospel of Thomas 18 – 36:14) – Blessed is he who came into being (i.e. pre-existed) before he came into being (in the flesh): “Jesus said, ‘Blessed is he who came into being before he came into being.” (Gospel of Thomas 19 – 36:17) – He who pre-existed shall exist afterward and always:“The Lord said, ‘Blessed is he who is before he came into being. For he who is, has been and shall be.’” (Gospel of Philip 64:10) – At the end of time, during the restoration, the Elect will return to their ‘pre-existence’: “The restoration is at the end, after the Totality reveals what it is (…) that is, the return to the pre-existent” (Tripartite Tractate)
k: causal-chain determinism, they see determinism as something causally happening throughout the univ, whereas in eternalism, no such thing takes place, there is no cause & effect, everything just already is.
6:18 Hard Determinism, Ramesh, Statistical Determinism
k: “Hard determinism is usu associated w/ Ramesh, he’ll say everything that occurs occurs to cosmic law or god’s will, you make no choice of your own.
“Soft determinism encomp’s Hawking ‘s statistical determinism, where things are not necessarily fixed concretely , but there’s a bit of open freedom to it, but nevertheless it does follow a det’ist fashion.
“You could make your way to the mall, there’s sort of like freedom on the way to get there, whereas in hard determinism, there’s only one way you’re going to make it too that mall.
“There’s a bit more openness in the type of determinism of Hawking.
“That’s why it intrigued ppl, they’re not turned on by ‘everything’s predet’d’.”
7:51 Bizzy Bone Doesn’t Understand, Acts as if No-Free-Will Is Harmed by His “Random” Movements
k: “no-free-will, ramesh, weaving nodding, that was predet’d?” flaunting his freewill in front of me, interesting,
[We should not be impressed in the slightest; Bizzy fails to understand the position & argument. I can’t believe that Kafei’s Ramesh philosophy was so easily shaken by Bizzy’s uncomprehending, completely & pathetically impotent “rebuttal” that is as compatible as could possibly be, with nfw. -cm]
“I started rethinking Ramesh, I got into Eastern phil & compatibilsm.
“Ramesh will say people ask where does fw come from, he gives a compatibilist response. daily living. al action is destined by cosmic law, he’s not… he’s not concrete & to the point, he’s not like that re: fw , you’d think he’s a hard dtist but then he’ll throw some compatist caveat but he’s not too clear on how it works together.”
Cyberdisciple: “That’s common. No-free-will is not very popular, ppl recoil.”
10:14 Whether Evil Exists Inside Meditation
Kafei: “Bizzy Bone feels he achieved greatness on his own, argumentative tone, slammed hands, ‘I’m done.’ Whether evil exists inside meditation.”
11:15 Max Carefully Defines the Exact Phrases “causal-chain determinism” vs. “block-universe determinism a.k.a. eternalism”
Max: “I won’t use the term ‘hard determinism’; I will stick to the terms:
“causal-chain determinism” vs
“block-universe determinism, aka eternalism“.”
“A good distinction between them was contained in what you just said, I’ll extract it: In causal-chain determinism, you have a process of causation occurring in time, you used ‘unfolding’, that’s causal-chain determinism. contrast that w/ block-universe determinism / eternalism: in that model of determinism, there’s no causation in time occurring, b/c all of the causation has already happened, everything has already unfolded, so you’ve got the full chain from the beginning to the end of time, or u could look at it as [length of your life] all existing at once, all in one go.
“So there’ no unfolding, there’s only something that has already eternally unfolded.”
K: “Yeah, that definitely pretty much echoes what I said.”
13:07 Causal-Chain Determinism vs. Block-Universe Eternalism
13:07 Max : “A point of confusion that happened in our last conversation is that when you were reflecting your understanding of the Egodeath theory, sometimes you seemed to be attributing causal-chain determinism to mh’s view/ mh’s theory, but other times you seemed to say that mh is expressing the other kind of determinism; block-universe eternalist model of time.”
I kind of see determinism within the model of eternalism.
Kafei, todo: timestamp
Next, soon after, at 13:47 (in Episode 26), Kafei said to Max:
(precise transcription) Kafei: “I well the reason that you said, you mentioned, ’cause you said that uh, you mentioned that Ramesh and Michael Hoffman are concluding the same exact point, so I kind of, you know, figured that maybe, you know, Michael was referring to, uh uh, causal determinism in some way, through the block universe, but you know that yes, everything’s determined, we have, you know, in the psychedelic experience itself, you don’t, you know, the mystic no longer identifies with the material body, because they see themselves as all events, occurring, you know, all time past and future collapsed into the moment, and so, you know, they have no identific…”
Max: “So which, which model of determinism would that be then, that, what you’ve just explained?”
Kafei never answers that pretty straightforward question. Why not?
Kafei only goes on to describe his own experience and view; he never answers which model – or models – of determinism he just described, and which model of determinism he’s ascribing to the Egodeath theory.
Max was expecting one of the following, clear-cut, defined, named answers:
“causal-chain determinism”
“block-universe determinism, aka eternalism”
It turns out, Max should have given Kafei a multiple-choice question, like:
“Which model of determinism would that be, that you just explained: causal-chain determinism; or block-universe determinism, which is also called ‘eternalism’?
“Or did you just describe both of those positions?
“If you just described both positions, which position did you describe first?
“Are you attributing that first position to the Egodeath theory?”
Does Kafei even *try* to answer Max’s question? No. Kafei next responds by describing (rather than labelling) the position which he himself holds & asserts.
He shifts from discussing two labeled concepts, using those two labels, to instead, characterizing the ASC experience of the block universe (without the labels).
Kafei doesn’t, next, state what he thinks the Egodeath theory’s conception of the block universe is; he only states how he himself thinks of the block universe and the experiencing of the block universe.
Kafei doesn’t employ or touch base with Max’s two terms, the two types of determinism being the causal-chain, and block-universe types of determinism.
Max: “So which, which model of determinism would that be then, that, what you’ve just explained?”
(precise transcription) Kafei: “I consider it, like the way I was sort of thinking about it is like a direct experience of the block universe, or the mind fuses with the block universe, like it becomes all, it becomes the block, and so there is no time to unfold because you know, everything is occurring at once, simultaneously, but that’s the vision inside the experience, but when you come- when you return to the baseline of consciousness, you return to space and time, the egoic illusion, but nevertheless you still have in your memory banks the vision of where, where that ego death happened, where you know, there was no longer an ego, but there was still awareness there, and it’s that awareness that you could recall from your memory banks, …” 15:25
Kafei exclaims all of the above, as if it’s different from the Egodeath theory; as if the Egodeath theory hasn’t already articulated and asserted all that. Which strongly gives evidence that Kafei hasn’t read the Egodeath theory, despite his claim to have read 20% of Egodeath.com.
After the red-highlighted phrase, Kafei seems to be trying to contrast as if:
the Egodeath theory = causal determinism through the block universe whereas in contrast,
in the loose cognitive state, experience block universe eternalism.
Kafei seems to be saying: the Egodeath theory = causal-chain determinism through block-universe determinism; but in contrast against the Egodeath theory, there is loosecog experience of eternalism.
I believe Kafei is opposing and contrasting his view – which is the “direct experience” view, AGAINST the Egodeath theory – as if he has NO IDEA what the Egodeath theory asserts.
He seems to be guessing that maybe the Egodeath theory is the same as Ramesh’s OSC-based view. It sounds like he’s critiquing Ramesh, not the Egodeath theory.
As a 5-minute cursory reading of the 2006 main article at Egodeath.com should be sufficient to make perfectly clear:
The Egodeath theory is ASC-based, not OSC-based; that is, the Egodeath theory asserts a 2-tier model: OSC vs ASC. Kafei is (inarticulately) trying to set up or formulate a 3-tier model:
OSC-based models.
Lose-Dose-ASC-based models (Ramesh, the Egodeath theory), = unfolding-in-time causality.
High-Dose-ASC-based models (Kafei, the Famous Mystics), = the Absolute; pre-existence of all events and actions
The Egodeath theory asserts pre-existing block-universe determinism (eternalism; pre-existence of everything, especially of control-thoughts), not unfolding-in-time, domino-chain causality or determinism.
“Loose Cognition” vs. “High Dose”
In the Egodeath theory, loose cognition = ASC-based, regardless of futile probing/ searches for advocacy of extreme “high dose”.
The key explanatory construct ‘loose cognition’, ‘loose cognitive association binding’, is defined as the ASC from visionary plants.
Kafei seems to categorize that as “not high dose”, AS IF “loose cognition” means OSC.
What does Kafei think loose cognition means: “not high dose”?
Kafei has some ideas about intensity that are causing him to grossly mis-categorize the Egodeath theory as if the Egodeath theory is the same as Ramesh’s OSC-based no-free-will theory.
The Egodeath theory doesn’t advocate “absolute overdose”-level intensity; therefore, Kafei categorized the Egodeath theory together with Ramesh, placing the Egodeath theory within the “OSC-based” category of explanatory models.
/ end of “loosecog vs high dose” section
15:25 tangent: memory of the experience
After 15:25, Kafei goes on a “tangent” (his word):
“alot of the research is saying the reason why it’s becoming so efficacious with all the benefits of for depression, ptsd, cancer patients, fear of death, is b/c it’s the memory of the experience, it’s not the a drug you have to take over and over, … what the pharmacists want, something expensive every day, a single memory of that experience that’s helping the volunteers therefore they don’t have to take a medication ever again, so the memory of the experience is a big thing, even roland griffiths talks about he’s never seen any other drugs in 50+ yrs that has such a vast impact on memory, mull them over until death. , once you have it. 16:32
16:37 Kafei Describes Return to OSC Experience of Domino-Chain Determinism
“When you return to the egoic baseline of consciousness, you return to this impression of causal-chain determinism… even though you’ve had a glimpse of it, where that didn’t exist at all, that’s why ppl say you have an experience that’s more real than real, DMT voluntteers & phil. ret’g to this egoic illusion, you often have this impression thta you’re returning to a kind of dream, that’s like the psychedelic exp’c was the brief moment when you woke up, the psychedelic….” “all-konwing, being able to see all things”
17:04 Rick Strassman DMT Volunteers, Roland Griffiths Psilocybin
18:25 Brahmin = Block-Universe Eternalism; the Egodeath Theory Is a Way to Explain Religion
Kaf: “when a yogi spoke about brahmin is precisely what we talk about when we talk about when we talk about eternalism and the block universe. The Egodeath theory is not a religion, it’s a theory, a way to explain religion.”
19:14 A 2-State Model: Egoic, vs. Psychedelic Block-Universe Eternalism
19:14 Max: “I want to extract the relevant point and summ’ize to point the conversation toward the Egodeath theory. … You said, a 2-state model, a 2-state cosmology:
the egoic state of consciousness vs.
the intense psychedelic state of consciousness
It’s block-universe eternalism, where everything has already unfolded in time; there’s no ongoing process of causal unfolding in time. That model of time is the one that is relevant to mystical altered state experiencing, which is the kind of experiencing from d0se”
20:22 Kaf: “Ramesh wiki: quotes , wayback machine: “The final truth as gurus and sages clearly state: there’s neither creation nor destruction, all there is is consciousness. There’s no destiny, no-free-will, no ego, just a consciousness that contains all.” (40% of words missing, todo: could fill-in the rest. Think of this transcription as a preview, to listen to the audio for the full passages.)
todo: paste here joke emailed to wrmspirit: “there is no self, no time, no ego, no change” -> no insight from shallow guru -> there is no money coming from me to you, useless “sage”
21:00 Good at Summarizing Other Writers but not the Egodeath Theory
Max says Jimmy is good at summarizing other writers but not the Egodeath theory, and requests keeping conversation in terms of the Egodeath theory, not changing to in-depth discussion of other writers, other theories that might be comparable; don’t abandon explicitly referencing the Egodeath theory.
22:30 The Ultimate Intense Mystic Experience is Control Loss, Not nondual unity oneness awareness
Max: “What you just said is that
the ultimat intense mystical exp’c is characterized by block-universe determinism, but not by causal-chain determinism , bc
domino-chain determinism / causal-chain determinism/ unfolding-in-time determinism is something that’s relev to egoic ordinary daily state of consciousness; …” (con’t next section)
Jimmy praises the opposite of the Egodeath theory: saying nothing, to win the contest of who can best ARTICULATE Transcendent Knowledge.
The instructors of mushroom self-control seizure at the Lesser Mysteries of Eleusis, and depicted in the Canterbury Psalter image with mushroom-tree, swords, and the self-threatening Bible reader in the focal center of the image, believed in teaching candidates for initiation, about how self-control seizure and transformation works.
Tthey didn’t throw up their arms and brag about their superiority from being inarticulate (though some Negative Mystics did) — it wouldn’t have worked; reverence for giving up and being inarticulate or sloppy in their preparing of candidates to become initiates, wouldn’t have worked.
An inarticulate prep program is a self-contradiction — it couldn’t have routinely led initiates to transform from child-thinking to adult-thinking, about time, possibility, and control.
In 1986, I knew that no book properly approached articulating spiritual enlightenment, and that that was a failure of effort.
I knew that there was no valid reason why no one, by the late date of 1986, had plainly articulated what enlightenment is about. People weren’t trying.
They left it to me, so that’s what I set out to do; and I succeeded at that specific, focused objective, in January 1988.
In April 1987, I set out to write the first clear, directly stated theory of ego transcendence and Transcendent Knowledge.
I read the less-than-articulate book The Way of Zen — the least bad, least-unclear book on the subject; I believed that enlightenment is real, but was needlessly poorly explained.
When I was correcting Alan Watts’ inarticulate wording in the book The Way of Zen in late 1987, I knew that a clear, directly stated theory of ego transcendence is needed.
Jimmy: “I actually am very enamored by the mystical theology of Western religion of Mysticism and Eastern Philosophy.
“The mystics that I’ve studied refer to Mysticism as a practice that’s frequented. They probably frequent the state far more than we do.
“I don’t know how often you take [them].”
Ancient Greek & Christian mushroom use in the holy agape meal/ {banquet} technique: they didn’t necessarily take 1 large dose.
Evidently, the ancients used an optimized technique of multiple rounds of mixed-wine mushroom wine during the the altered state session, thus stretching out and reducing the peaks, compared to a single-dose at start of session.
Heavy and frequent would be three hundred, three and a half days.
More frequently would be futile and wasteful.
40:30 Non-Drug Contemplation/Meditation Is an Invented Pseudo-Explanation, a Cover-Story Invented by Outsider, Armchair Academics
Some scholars think mystics use non-drug Contemplation and are in the altered state more often than mushroom users.
That is the Moderate entheogen theory of mysticism — that mystics have the ability to do Zen Meditation in caves just like Eastern authentic meditation monks, who access the the intense mystic altered state all the time through their Traditional Mystics’ Techniques — which entire story I reject as an invention, a cover story.
I won’t permit a more radical position to be possible, than mine:
My Maximal position is that:
Any time any Christian mystic had a mystic experience, it was due to ingesting entheogens, NOT due to some magic mysterious alien-psychology technique of some muddleheaded academics’ invention, of “Christian Contemplation”.
There is no such thing as “authentic Christian Contemplation traditional techniques” other than ingesting entheogens.
The notion that Christian monks and mystics sit around doing “Contemplation” that induces the intense mystic altered state just like Zen Meditators accomplish all the time, is a scholars’ imagined fantasy; an artificial invention of outsiders, an invented pseudo-explanation.
Non-drug Contemplation or Meditation does not cause the intense mystic altered state, although some people make the most grand claims.
Experience proves that Contemplation and Meditation normally and generally FAIL to produce the gigantic marketing claims, the failure of which is covered-over by the excuse:
“The fact that our product — The Traditional Non-Drug Contemplation Techniques of the Certified Professional Mystics — doesn’t actually work, is purely due to USER ERROR; there’s just something wrong with all the customers who report that our product is bunk and doesn’t actually have any effect, and fails to deliver the grandly promised “the intense mystic altered state that’s better and more authentic than mushrooms” claim, which we double-down on.”
40:30 Debatable Usage of the Word ‘Natural’, Against Jonathan Ott’s Sound Lexicon
Jimmy mentioned the phrase (maybe skeptically), something like the phrase “natural techniques/methods”, as opposed to ingesting entheogens– but as Jonathan Ott emphasizes, ingesting natural entheogens is the most natural thing in the world, flesh of Christ, the Eucharist, we require His flesh, or else we cannot be saved/regenerated.
Christian theology thus agrees, that ingesting bread and wine given to the Elect by the god ({serpent}) is required; is the only way, to access the Holy Spirit that regenerates.
Calling the ingestion of entheogens “unnatural” risks the unpardonable sin of blaspheming the Holy Spirit.
Pharmacophilia or The Natural Paradises Chapter 1: Le Paradis Naturels Jonathan Ott, 1997 http://amzn.com/1888755016
Good, per-chapter customer review: https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/RE2Z8Z1Z853Q4/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1888755016 — “Starts off with an overview of 19th century literary works by pioneers of the field such as De Quincy and Baudelaire leading into Ott’s assertion that Baulelaire’s calling of hashish and opium as an artificial paradise is not only incorrect but the exact opposite from the truth because they are in fact the most natural routes to paradise available.
“Because of the brain receptors that specifically fit the molecules that exist in the plants and our own neurochemicals that are so similar to them. In conclusion of the chapter Ott quotes Nietzsche and Gottfried Benn saying that “Inebriation is Nature’s game with man” and that “potent brains are not strengthened by milk, but by alkaloids.“”
40:50 Huge Dose, 16 Grams, “always try to take it higher”
An objection I have to this notion & value, is that some people obsess over high dose as a substitute and proxy for reading and understanding the Egodeath theory, and wrongly think that they can think in terms of high dose as a way of evaluating the Egodeath theory — instead of evaluating the Egodeath theory directly, by reading and comprehending the principles of the Theory. -cm
49:00 Nondual Unity Oneness Awareness as a Beginners‘ Stage, vs. as an Advanced Stage, of the Initiation-Series
Considering the routinized Lesser Mysteries teaching programme, and routinized exposure of Mystery Religion initiates to the uncontrollable source of control-thoughts, in some sense, completed Mystery Religion initiates or the Professional Mystics of the Canterbury Psalter mushroom tree/ swords image, Professional Mushroom Initiatescan have a different experience than Normal Untrained People — a much more organized and to-the-point experience.
Professional Completed Mystery Religion Initiates have been trained and prepared and educated ahead of time about myths…
“Candidates” means, not yet Upper Level “initiates”.
The “Two Goddesses” concept is accompanied by Kore the initial maiden; it has three parts: first, Kore, the childhood-thinking maiden; then afterwards after abduction by Hades, there are then the two goddesses: Persephone, queen of the underworld + adulthood-thinking Demeter, queen of the aboveground.
Three goddesses, speaking roughly — or,
The One Mortal and the Two Goddesses: Kore, Persephone, & Demeter.
My brand new formula, December 7, 2020:
{maiden vs. (underworld-queen + overworld-queen)} = naive-possibilism vs. (qualified-possibilism + eternalism)
Professsional Certified Mushroom Initiates know how to routinely experience the attractor/seizure vortex in the peak intense mystic altered state.
Professsional Certified Mystery Religion Mushroom Initiates have systematically been instructed and tested by Professional Self-Control Seizure Instructors; they have learned to routinely accommodate perceiving the will of God operating inside the mind.
The Professional Completed Initiate knows how to pop the goddess’ kiste trunk, lifting the lid off of the personal control system engine to see, view, and {touch the divine} higher-level controller’s {snake} (without cybernetically dying) that’s hidden-then-revealed inside of the mind’s personal control system, not perceptible in the ordinary state of consciousness.
Definition of ‘Mystics’, ‘Ordinary People’, and ‘Everyone’ (new section, Jan 18 2021)
everyone is the universal set.
ordinary people have less than some level of theoretical knowledge + mystic experience.
mystics have greater than that level of theoretical knowledge + mystic experience.
The Egodeath theory explains everyone; is relevant to everyone; applies to everyone; and is for everyone, including ordinary people and mystics.
– Cybermonk
1:00:00 A Theory About How the Mind Responds, whether a Mystic’s Mind or an Ordinary Person’s Mind
Welcome to the Egodeath theory, Joe Average Mystic; General Audience; Professional Mystics; Loose Cognitive Scientists; Ancient Hellenistic Initiates; Esotericism Initiates; Rock Musicians; Symposium Drinking Party Bacchants.
Professional Mystics vs. Completed Mystery-Religion Initiates
I described real “mystics”(?) when I extracted their routine mushroom initiation practice in the Canterbury Psalter image with mushroom tree and swords.
I have an entire area of the Egodeath Concepts Database about History, Esotericism, Mysticism, Gnostic Mushroom Initiation, and Mystery Religion Initiation.
I moved this “History-of-Esotericism” content out from my Core Concepts database (a WordPress page with Concept-entries as page sections), similar to how Max is trying to keep the conversation focused on the Egodeath theory Core Concepts (explicitly identified as such), rather than seeming to forget that and drifting off into a thousand more-or-less “great writers” of not-always-explicitly-specified relevance to the Core Concepts of the Egodeath theory.
Contrast Mystery Religion “completed initiates” vs. the professional “mystics” which Jimmy treats as a standard and point of reference — there are very different preconceptions and connotations, for “completed Mystery Religion initiates, vs. Professional Mystics with book contracts.
It is possible to compare:
How does a completed Mystery Religion initiate do conduct-of-life; what is their moral-philosophy of conduct-of-life?
How does a Professional Mystic do conduct-of-life, what is their moral-philosophy of conduct-of-life?
Jimmy has bought into the Marketing Department’s grand promises, that nondual unity oneness awareness will make your whites whiter and your colors brighter, that undergoing mystic ego death and rebirth will produce the Benefit of harmonious mundane-state Conduct of Life — somehow.
So, all the completed Mystery Religion initiates in Antiquity must have been gentle good people, in their mundane conduct of life — their literature says so:
“Only the morally pure and unpolluted may approach the goddess and touch the revealed snake (with their right hand) without dying from fatal snake-bite.”
So, therefore, we know that completed mushroom initiates must be, morally pure people in their mundane conduct-of-life.
I read it in their marketing brochure, so it must be true.
Ken Wilber wrote a lot about this fallacy, of thinking that because a guru has advanced far on one developmental line, or in one area of life, that must mean that the guru is simply, wholesale, monolithically, a Good Person all around — that’s what Enlightenment is all about, as even every non-enlightened person knows.
The Egodeath Theory Is Designed for Use by Normal People — Not Just Exotic, Famous, Brand-Name Scholars and Mystics
Pretty interesting curious difference of angle between Jimmy vs. Max, I’m trying to follow what the “angle difference” is. We all read many various writers & theories. eg I quickly added many book-pages at WordPress: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/#sbavco
1:00:00 The Egodeath Theory Is Designed for Everyone, Including Mystics and Ordinary People
Max distinguishes between “theory designed for ordinary people today”, vs. “discussion of history of mushroom esotericism”. I recently broke out 3 pages of Concept-sections: o Egodeath Core Concepts <– Max tries to focus the conversation on this. o Key Mythemes o Meta-theory including debates about matters of the history of mushroom esotericism, discussion of various scholars’ writings, mystics’ writings, esotericism researchers eg Hanegraaff; Ramesh Balsekar, etc. <– Jimmy strongly tends to pull conversation toward this. His “writers-namedropping” is the “tell” (indicator) of how very “scholar-centric” Jimmy’s thinking-style / discussion-style is.
When discussing the Egodeath theory, discussion of other topics should explicitly state how that other writer/scholar/mystic/book/religion relates to the Egodeath theory and its principles (analogical psychedelic eternalism; or: metaphorical entheogenic pre-existence).
The conversation should not focus on another topic, theory, or writer, without stating the connections to the Egodeath theory — or else, you’re no longer discussing the Egodeath theory as such; you’re discussing some other topic.
That coverage of other writers or theories or professional mystics can be good, though not explicitly related to the Egodeath theory, so out of scope for a discussion group or podcast about the Egodeath theory.
There were two types of posts to the Egodeath discussion group: on-topic, and off-topic.
Any topic is on-topic for a given topical forum if the person explicitly states what is the connection to the focal topic of the discussion forum — in this case, Transcendent Knowledge per the Egodeath theory; analogical psychedelic eternalism.
In a podcast about Transcendent Knowledge per the Egodeath theory, per analogical psychedelic eternalism, the audience expects that central explicit focus.
To be on-topic while discussing other writers: go out, but then bring the topic back in, to the show-name, “Transcendent Knowledge podcast” (Transcendent Knowledge as in, the Egodeath theory).
1:01:14 The Egodeath Theory Explains How All Minds Work when Exposed to the Loose Cognitive Association Binding State, Including the Minds of Normal People and the Minds of Mystics
Here is where they are picking up assertions similar to the above:
Max says “The Egodeath theory in that sense applies to us, it doesn’t apply toany special class of people; it applies to how Joe Average experiences … at some point in their life, but normally it’s like after age 15 or so between age 18 to 25ish roughly, most people first encounter … in a certain way and they may or may not be transformed in a certain way, and what I’m saying is the Egodeath theory is about that, it’s not about any special class of people who you might refer to as ‘mystics’”
1:01:47 How Does the Egodeath Theory Describe Mystics
Kafei: “Yeah sure I mean I figured that maybe like it could at least comment on it, from the vantage point of the Egodeath theory how would it describe mystics, or something like that.”
1:02:02 Max: “We Are Not Mystics”
Max: “He doesn’t, he doesn’t, forget about mystics, forget about mystics, bracket them off, for this part of the conversation, we’re talking about how people like us would [explore], because that’s what’s relevant to us, because we are not mystics.*”
[* Contradiction. At 1:03:00, Max says: “I’m not going to comment on whether I would say I’m a mystic or an aspiring mystic or a non-mystic.” In contrast, 60 seconds earlier, above, at 1:02:02, Max definitively said “We are not mystics.”
“A person who seeks by contemplation and self-surrender to obtain unity with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or who believes in the spiritual apprehension of truths that are beyond the intellect.”
“A mystic is a person who has a direct experience of the sacred, unmediated by conventional religious rituals or intermediaries.”
todo: put together a long WordPress article of definitions of ‘mystics’. -cm]
“Why would we be so interested in a theory about people who we are never going to be like, who we can never know what it’s like to be those people.
“We can only know what it’s like to be ordinary regular everyday people.
“And so the Egodeath theory is for us.
“Cyberdisciple used the word ‘democratizing’; I think that’s a crucial point here: it’s a democratic theory, it’s not a theory for some ultra special elite who we can never hope to understand.”
1:02:45 Aspiring Mystic
Kafei: “Ok, I do consider myself an aspiring mystic.”
Max: “The Theory Is Aimed for Everybody, It’s Not Aimed for Some Ultra-Special Class of People”
Contrast Max’s hyperbole statement elsewhere in this podcast that sounds as if the Egodeath theory fails to cover mystics.
1:05:00 Max Asks: Do You Hold that Mystics Have Perma-ASC? Kafei answers No; Transient. Only More Frequent than Ordinary People (new section, Jan 18 2021)
Do You Hold that the non-ordinariness of mystics is that they have perma-ASC? Kafei *clearly* said “NO, MYSTICS’ ASC IS A FEW HOURS ONLY, THEN OSC RETURNS. THEY JUST ASC MORE frequently.
(Kafei also makes an additional, different argument, based on bugs.)
PRESCRIPTION: EVERYONE, STATE YOUR CURRENT POSITION EFFECTIVELY. MAKE SURE THE OTHER PERSON ACCURATELY UNDERSTANDS YOUR CURRENT POSITION. CONSISTENTLY.
THE LETCHER ERROR: FAILURE TO EXPLICITLY SPECIFY VARIOUS POSITIONS AND ARGUE IN AN EXPLICIT, PLANNED, STRUCTURED WAY IN REFERENCE TO THOSE POSITIONS ON DISTINCT TOPICS/QUESTIONS.
1:05:00 +1 for Kafei – Who Is Constructing-by-Definition a Group of Perma-ASC Non-Ordinary Mystics? (new section, Jan 18 2021)
At 1:05:00 ep 26, Kafei does well – Max has been striving to match-up Kafei with an extreme position Max asks with openly leading questions, Max is striving to try to lead Kafei into an extreme position, and Kafei rejects that extreme position.
1:07:22 Max emphasizes the Egodeath theory as 2-state model. Which means Max is agreeing with the position which Kafei just asserted (naturally in the form of a citation of a Non-Ordinary, Mystic Person – the Great Mystic Wm James, who said… The ASC for mystics is ephemeral.
The ASC for mystics is ephemeral. <– Kafei’s explicitly asserted position, which he supports by citing William James. Kafei directly and straightforwardly answers Max’s question, in the Negative.
My Prescription:
First, look up definitions of ‘mystics’. Reality-check with Webster: you need to discuss proper definition of the word ‘mystics’ and how you think of mystics as being “non-ordinary” in some sense that you hold.
Max seems to expect that Webster defines:
How Max Imagines Webster Defines the Word ‘Mystics’
mystics – the set of people who fuse the altered state with the ordinary state of consciousness, per the 1-state model.
Webster
TELL US: WHAT DO IN WHAT SENSE DO YOU THINK MYSTICS ARE NON-ORDINARY. PERMA-ASC? Kafei: “No.” <– ok, so what we Max: “No.” <– have is agreement.
THEREFORE NO ONE IS ASSERTING AND DEFENDING THE POSITION THAT “WHAT MAKES MYSTICS NON-ORDINARY IS PERMA-ASC.”
Who Is Asserting that Such a Group Could Exist, in a Definable Way?
What Does “Mystics” Mean?
Are There Such “Mystics”, Defined that Way?
Who Is Taking that Position?
Who Is Defining and Who Is Asserting that Position?
What Does Max think Kafei’s position is, on the the question “Is there a special group called mystics? if so..”
If so, in what way are “mystics” special; non-ordinary?
Is there a non-ordinary set of people called mystics?
What’s Max’s position on that question?
What’s Kafei’s position on that question?
What position does Max think Kafei holds, on the question of whether there exists a group non-ordinary called mystics?
What position does Kafei think Max holds, on the question of whether there exists a group non-ordinary called mystics?
What position does Max think Kafei holds, on the question of: In what way are “mystics” “non-ordinary”?
What position does Kafei think Max holds, on the question of In what way are “mystics” “non-ordinary”?
1:07:00 The Theory Is Aimed at Normal People and Mystics
Max: “the Egodeath theory is aimed at normal people … democratic, non-specialized.”
The Egodeath theory is also designed & optimized for Cognitive Scientists, to come into this new field I’ve mapped out, the new scientific field of Loose Cognitive Science.
Writing well for a general audience is basically the same as writing well for a specialty audience.
1:07:22 Is Max Pressuring Kafei to Assert “Mystics Have Perma-ASC”? (new section, Jan 18 2021)
Kafei: Mystics are only different from ordinary ppl in frequency. The ASC is transient for mystics; mystics soon return to OSC, per Wm James citation (so, a defensible position).
Max: “the Egodeath theory doesn’t apply to mystics who have perma-ASC. the egodeath theory only applies to ordinary people; that is, everyone – except your proposed group of perma-ASC non-ordinary, mystics.
Kafei: “wut? I just said, per citation, the altered state is transient for mystics; that mystics do NOT have perma-ASC.”
Max: “The Egodeath theory doesn’t apply to special mystics, who have perma-ASC.”
Who is asserting that position: that perma-ASC mystics exist? Kafei is not asserting that mystics have perma-ASC.
Is Max asserting that mystics have perma-ASC?
Is Max asserting that the Egodeath theory doesn’t apply to mystics, and that there is a group of people called mystics, who have perma-ASC?
So we have the conversation:
Max: “So you think mystics have perma-ASC, right?”
Kafei: “No, like Wm James, I believe mystics, like ordinary ppl, have ASC only for a few hours and then return to OSC.” 1:07:22 ep 26.
Max: “I shall now deliver a lecture asserting that the Egodeath theory only applies exclusively to ordinary people who have ASC only for a few hours and then return to OSC. (Unlike mystics – defined a certain way, “having perma-ASC” – that I’ve assigned to you.)
“And,
“my main point is simply that the egodeath theory applies to everyone, not to some special, different, non-ordinary group, that I’m assigning to you.”
Kafei: “Uh.. ok ..?”
Is Max there using the word ‘everyone’ to mean ‘not everyone’?
The word ‘everyone’ always means the universal set.
If you mean to refer to a subset of the universal set, either say “ordinary people”, or “mystics”.
Do not use the word ‘everyone’ to mean ‘ordinary people’.
‘Ordinary people’ is a subset of ‘everyone’.
The conversation ought to be focused on why the heavy reliance on the magic word “mystics”.
What are Max’ and Kafei’s HEAVY PSYCHOLOGICAL HANGUPS around the magic-charged word ‘mystics’?
Discuss why Kafei thinks these dudes are worth reading.
What does Webster say about it?
IN WHAT WAY DOES KAFEI CONSTRUCT THE CATEGORY, “MYSTICS”? FORGETTING WEBSTER, WHAT DO THESE “MYSTICS” MEAN TO HIM?
IN WHAT WAY DOES FREAKOUT CONSTRUCT THE CATEGORY, “MYSTICS”? FORGETTING WEBSTER, WHAT DO THESE “MYSTICS” MEAN TO FREAKOUT?
they are CROSS-TALKING ACROSS EACH OTHER B/C MAX IS TRYING TO CONSTRUCT A DEFINITION OF “MYSTICS”, WEBSTER HAS DEFINED “MYSTICS” DIFFERENTLY ALREADY
KAFEI SAYS MYSTICS ARE NOT SPECIAL, AND YET HE TREATS THEM AS IF A SPECIAL GROUP – BUT NOT TO THE EXTREME DEGREE THAT MAX REPEATEDLY TRIES TO ATTRIBUTE TO KAFEI, AGAINST KAFEI’S REPEATED REJECTIONS
WHY DOES KAFEI SO VALUE “MYSTICS”?
IN WHAT SPECIFIC WAY ARE MYSTICS NON-ORDINARY?
I’d like to see more, in ep 16&26, prescription: STATE YOUR POSITION ON.
1:10:30 The Theory Applies to Everyone, Including Mystics
Cyberdisciple says “Our interest in the Egodeath theory is because it essentially applies to everyone, because it’s simply saying here’s an easily summarizable explanation of what goes on in the altered state; in the loosened cognition state: that feeling of eternalism[?”whats that“] and a certain feeling of not being in control of ones’ own future thoughts.”
an easily summarizable explanation of what goes on in the altered state
the feeling of not being in control of ones’ own future thoughts
“Boom; simple, easily digestible by people, by everyone.”
Cyberdisciple point outs that the word “everyone” — by definition — does not “exclude mystics”, but includes Cognitive Scientists, and Average Joe, and Professional Certified Mystics — such as Jimmy’s training-program path of coursework he’s on.
Is Jimmy expecting to put Transcendent Knowledge out of reach of normal initiates? His relationship stance regarding “famous” writers is concerning: he is too reverent and buys into their marketing-department hype uncritically, it appears.
And what’s with Jimmy dumping on trailer-park gamers? Not very “enlightened” of him.
I would never even think of putting down a gamer; or a person who lives in a trailer park; or trailer-park gamers.
I lived in a trailer right before I began developing the Egodeath theory in 1985 — 2 years 8 months before I made the biggest intellectual breakthrough of all time, a clear direct explanation of ego transcendence by combining the concepts: o The block universe o No-free-will o Loose cognitive association binding o Cybernetic non-control o Mental model transformation o Ego transcendence.
I am personally an instance of a trailer-park gamer who made the greatest intellectual breakthrough of all time; so Jimmy is 100% incorrect and wrong here, dumping on trailer park gamers.
Not very enlightened, for all his worshipful reading of “the greats“.
Trailer-park gamers are perfectly intelligent — more so, than idiot propeller-head, out of touch ivory-tower professors who write unbelievably incredible rubbish.
The acid-Metal album Ride the Lightning runs absolute circles around the clueless tripe written about mystics by academics.
It’s odd for Jimmy to imply that the Egodeath theory doesn’t speak to mystics, if or “because” the Egodeath theory is designed and crafted for a general audience.
There are some strange assumptions and attitudes underlying Jimmy’s reaction to the idea that the Egodeath theory is written for a general audience.
Maybe he puts mystics and published writers on a pedestal.
Half (or more) of what Wilber writes, and says, is clueless crap.
Half of what Watts writes in The Way of Zen is garbled inarticulate clueless crap.
I had my initial satori in December 1987 from intensively interrogating Watts in his book.
I was immediately mad at him for failing to give the key to make sense of the model that his fumbling poetic manner of expression was ineffectually, half-heartedly, inconsistently, sort-of trying hard to articulate: no-free-will; and the pre-existence of future control-thoughts.
All the big-name mystics and “famous writers” in the world, have FAILED, and have not formulated a plain, clear, direct, easily summarizable explanation of what goes on in the altered state.
No wonder their industry is plagued with their tendency to burn all their writings.
1:17:30 Freewill-Premised Quantum Branching Multiworlds Possibilities Tree
Freewill Protective Fog of Quantum Multiworlds Magic Steering Power to Create the Experienced Future While Moving Through Time into the Experientially Open Non-Existent Multi-Quantum Future – Quantum Egoic Thinking, Steering with Power in the Multipossibilities Tree
Is Kafei defining or asserting Possibilism here?
Kafei said here he had previously an idea like branching worlds worldlines: 1:16:54 the impression of causal determinism (todo: transcribe)
Everything’s fixed in time
Is this freewill thinking sneaking back in through the multiworlds worldmodel?
I am King Steersman Among the Multiworlds!
I Control the Future Worldlines Timelines Master of Reality Future
1:25:13 Afraid of Psychedelics, High Dose
Kafei: “Afraid of Psychedelics … take High Doses … Take 20 Grams” [disclaimer: the Egodeath theory has never expressed a recommendation].
An objection I have is that some people obsess over high dose as a substitute and proxy for reading and understanding the Egodeath theory, and wrongly think that they can think in terms of high dose as a way of evaluating the Egodeath theory — instead of evaluating the Egodeath theory directly, by reading and comprehending the principles of the Theory. -cm
1:31:30 Too Intense to Think, Always Aiming for that Level, No Ego There to Try to Control Anything or Grapple With
1:34:00 Egoic vs. Transcendent Conceptions of the Multiverse Concept
The egoic, possibilism-equivalent version of the multiverse concept (the ordinary-state conceptualization) vs. the transcendent, eternalism-equivalent version of the multiverse concept (the altered-state conceptualization)
The way egoic thinking conceptualizes the multiverse, is equivalent to possibilism-thinking: ego has the power to steer among branching multiverse possibilities.
In contrast, Egodeath students, or the mind in the altered state, conceptualizes “multiverse” in an eternalism-modelled way.
Max articulates and expresses “block multiverse determinism” using the Egodeath theory terminology:
“You experienced everything had already happened in this world; you you didn’t just experience block-universe determinism in the sense that everything had already happened in this world; you’re saying that it went further than that, and that you were experiencing a sense that:
Everything had already happened in this world and every other possible world; so everything that could possibly happen in any universe had already happened.
So it was ultra block universe determinism; block multiverse determinism:
Everything that could ever happen in any possible world had already happened.“
End of Podcast
Machine Transcription of Entire Podcast Episode 26
Me: “I Am Worlds Best Communicator. My Followers Are Super-Geniuses who Read My Spectacularly Clear and Simple Words.”
Max: “According to my logic, the Egodeath theory has nothing to do with mysticism. Or ego death.”
Kafei: “Interesting. According to my logic, the Egodeath theory asserts domino-chain determinism, expressed as block-universe eternalism. Thats because its based only in the OSC.”
🤯 😱 😵 🔫
Ozzy: “Never heard a thing I said (dead, dead dead)”
🤯 😵 HOW CAN ANYONE POSSIBLY SAY THE EGODEATH THEORY DOESN’T APPLY TO ‘MYSTICS’, IS NOT ABOUT ‘MYSTICS’, DOESNT EXPLAIN ‘MYSTICS’, IS NOT FOR ‘MYSTICS’ 🤯 😵
My 1997 core theory-spec, in the title of the entire Annotation, equates ego death with the word ‘mystic’: Self-control cybernetics, dissociative cognition, & mystic ego death http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/Annotations/PHILOSI.0.html –
“Schizophrenia and mystic rapture both present the sense of being remotely monitored and controlled”
“Acid-rock mysticism vividly alludes to and resonates with ego death and the dissociative cognition that leads up to it.”
“The essence and origin of religion is the use of visionary plants to routinely trigger the intense mystic altered state, producing loose binding of cognitive associations.”
“Myth describes this mystic-state experiential insight and transformation.”
“Leading mystics throughout the history of various religions have used visionary-plant sessions on-demand, with mystic-state experiencing that was largely rationality-oriented (Merkur 2001).”
“Early Christianity involved mystical, religious, visionary experiencing, including the experience of the transformative, transcendent power of the Holy Spirit at Eucharistic agape meals (Johnson 1998).”
“The figure of Paul the Apostle is portrayed as a shamanistic mystic (Ashton 2000), and the apostles are portrayed as adepts in altered-state mystic experiencing (Pilch 2004).”
“Solving the riddle of the original mystic-metaphorical meaning of Christianity requires also understanding the surrounding metaphorical altered-state initiation systems throughout Christian history. These altered-state initiation systems that were related to Christianity, include Roman religion, Neoplatonism, Western Esotericism, and astral ascent mysticism.”
“The New Testament editors utilized the era’s standard mastery of mystic-state metaphor and the altered-state experience of communal unity to direct the Jewish mystic-metaphor system into the figure of Jesus. This combination of Jewish themes, mystic-state metaphor, and the communal altered-state unity experience enabled…”
“Mystic revelation about the nullity of self-will was routine in antiquity. Roman imperial theology utilized this routinized mystic-state revelation to legitimate the Roman sociopolitical arrangement. Christianity became popular as a polemical counter-narrative about how the entheogen-accessed mystic revelation should be used for sociopolitical concerns. The figure of the ‘king on the cross’ in the New Testament is a depiction of the mystic-state insight of non-autonomous control, in service of a rebuttal and alternative to Roman imperial theology.”
“… a long-term standoff between mystically neutered religious literalism versus exclusively ordinary-state-based Science. “
“The ability to mystically climax is inbuilt, as is the mental model that is revealed, although the useful metaphors and systematic explanation that are necessary to retain the revealed mental structure must be a product of human effort.”
“Mystic metaphor both endorses and disparages the realization of determinism, because determinism is only an intermediate destination on the path to salvific regeneration. “
“Fatedness and Control in Astral Ascent Mysticism – Heimarmene or universal fatedness was centrally important in ancient astrological cosmology (Barton 1994), and was a major theme in Hellenistic-Roman astral ascent mysticism and religion (Cumont 1960).”
“Astral ascent mysticism centers around the dangerous gateway or “fatal” boundary crossing – the sphere of the fixed stars – representing the apprehension of Heimarmene and its control of one’s thoughts.”
“The defeat of egoic autonomy and power in the mystic ecstatic state was similar to the defeat of rebellious nations.”
“In mystic metaphor, misunderstanding moral agency is considered the fundamental sin and immorality; God was most angry about the king’s rebellious worship of idols…”
“Mystic-state ‘compassion’ and ‘rescue that narrowly averts divine wrath’ means that that which ultimately gives you your thoughts is intimately united with you and is good or benevolent toward you,…”
“… is found in the Roman Saturnalia and in the mystic allegory of Jesus’ trial; …”
Arbel, V. Beholders of Divine Secrets: Mysticism and Myth in the Hekhalot and Merkavah Literature. Albany: SUNY, 2003.
Fishbane, M. The Kiss of God: Spiritual and Mystical Death in Judaism. Seattle: University of Washington, 1994.
Freke, T.; and P. Gandy. The Complete Guide to World Mysticism. London: Piatkus, 1997.
Merkur, D. Gnosis: An Esoteric Tradition of Mystical Visions and Unions. Albany: SUNY, 1993.
Merkur, D. The Psychedelic Sacrament: Manna, Meditation, and Mystical Experience. Rochester: Park Street, 2001.
Every one of the 183 digest files of the Egodeath Yahoo Group postings contains the word “mystic”.
Conclusion – You Skipped the Philosophy Step, Which Is: Define Your Terms
Conclusion – You Skipped the Philosophy Step, Which Is: Define Your Terms; First Discuss the Proper Definition and the Common Definition of the Word ‘Mystics’; Get Agreement on that Word-Usage, Before Productive Conversation Is Possible, Instead of Talking Past Each Other Based on Different Assumed Definitions and Connotational Definition of the Word ‘Mystics’
Max is misunderstanding and misusing the word ‘mystics’, laboring under a severe misimpression of what the common definition of the word is, as if, “ultra-special, 1-state people”.
The discussion of 2-State should have begun in proper Philosophy fashion, by first, discussing: What should be the proper definition, and what is the common definition, of the word ‘mystics’?
They would have found – which is to say, Max would have discovered – that no one defines the word ‘mystics’ as Max assumes, and mis-argues based on, as meaning “ultra-special, 1-state people”.
According to Max, everyone thinks and agrees that the word ‘mystics’ connotes “a postulated group of ultra-special, 1-state people.” Max employs a non-philosophical stance, that there is no need to stand back and debate the proper definition and the common definition of the word ‘mystics’, because it’s simply a given that the word ‘mystics’ means – inherently and universally – “ultra special, 1-state people”.
Max holds an extremely non-standard definition of the word ‘mystics’, as if it’s the standard and only definition.
Max evidently thinks that the word ‘mystics’, by standard (and inherent) definition, refers to “the set of people who are 1-state, who fuse ASC with OSC, a very special, inexplicable class of people unlike people who are 2-state.”
That mistaken understanding of what the standard, common definition & connotation of the word ‘mystics’ is, led Max to imply that the Egodeath theory has nothing to do with mysticism, and led him to state 5+ times, “We are not mystics” – before *FINALLY* waking up, entering proper Philosophy mode [this is my ultimate point and realization/ finding] and beginning – but only beginning – to ask: What should be the proper definition, and what is the common definition, of the word ‘mystics’? And then, what definition of ‘mystics’ does Kafei hold? THE DISCUSSION about 2-state SHOULD HAVE BEGUN THERE. Max’s explanation of 2-state is good, but off-base, mis-framed as if 2-state is opposed to Kafei’s understanding of the word ‘mystics’.
Max is strenuously laboring under the delusion that Kafei, and the world, defines ‘mystics’ as “ultra-special, 1-state people”, and that that’s the only possible way to define the word ‘mystics’ – as if the word’s meaning is simply inherent, fixed, & given; and, that the word’s (fixed, given, inherent, universally shared) meaning is “ultra special 1-state ppl”.
I venture that everyone who listened to Max declare 5+ times “We are not mystics“, was puzzled, and thought:
We aren’t? I don’t think I agree.
How can you say that?
What are you saying?
What do you mean?
What do you mean by the word ‘mystics’?
What do you think the word ‘mystics’ means, to everyone? <–
What is the common meaning of the word ‘mystics’?
The common meaning of the word ‘mystics’ is not “ultra-special 1-state people”, as Max silently, uncritically, incorrectly assumes, and then mis-argues, based upon – resulting in, talking past Kafei, arguing against Kafei as if Kafei, and the world, firmly defines ‘mystics’ as “ultra-special 1-state people”, when Kafei (and the world) does not, in fact, so define the word ‘mystics’. MAX IS MISUSING THE WORD ‘MYSTICS’.
Max mistakenly thinks that the word ‘mystics’ means – to everyone – “ultra-special people who are 1-state; who fuse asc/osc”
46:00 Max says “the three of us, who are not mystics or shamans”
DOES MAX ALSO THINK THAT EVERYONE AGREES THAT SHAMANS ARE ULTRA-SPECIAL, 1-STATE PEOPLE??
Position Statement, ex cathedra: The Egodeath theory explains, is for, is relevant to, and applies to, shamans. – Pope Cybermonk, cyber-shaman.
55:25 “other people, people who are not mystics … are the people to whom the Egodeath theory is relevant” (implying – or explicitly asserting – that the Egodeath theory is irrelevant to mystics; ultimately implying that the Egodeath theory has nothing to do with mysticism or the mystic state).
59:37 “we are not mystics here”
1:00:54 “because we are not mystics“
1:02:15 “we are not mystics; why would we why would we be so interested in a theory about people who we are never going to be like“
1:02:58 “i’m not gonna comment on whether i would say i’m a mystic or an aspiring mystic or a non-mystic”
finding: Max says 2x essentially, then 3x literally, “we are not mystics”, and then afterwards, says “I’m not going to comment on whether I would say I’m not a mystic”.
The conversation is suffering from failure to define ‘mystics’ in an agreed-upon working definition.
Max holds some strange, extreme ideas about how the world defines “mystics” — the word and the concept. Max has really latched onto (locked onto) the notion that “mystics are postulated by everyone to be ultra-special, 1-state people“. Where did he pick up that firm, strong, absolute impression? Sure that idea floats around, but it’s hazy; not an official definition that’s attached, by everyone – connoted, by everyone – with the word ‘mystics’. Who thinks the word ‘mystics’ connotes “ultra-special, 1-state people”?
According to Max, everyone thinks that the word ‘mystics’ connotes a postulated group of ultra-special, 1-state people.
Significantly, Max afterwards said”I’m not going to comment on whether I would say I’m a mystic, or an aspiring mystic, or a non-mystic.”
Where did Max get the misimpression that the word ‘mystics’ means “ultra-special people, who are 1-state, who fuse ASC with OSC”?
I see no indication that Kafei, or Webster, or the world holds that definition, of the word ‘mystics’ as 1-state, but Max argues as if 1-state is “the” definition of the word ‘mystics’, the given definition, that everyone has put forth.
Max sees Kafei as holding an extremist view of mystics, putting mystics on such a high pedestal as to render mystics alien and beyond explanation. I don’t see evidence for Kafei putting mystics on that high of a pedestal – citations needed, from Max, showing where Kafei puts mystics on such a high pedestal as to render mystics alien and irrelevant and inexplicable.
Max sees Kafei as saying mystics fuse ASC/OSC – but I don’t see evidence that Kafei claims for mystics, there’s one fused state instead of two separate states – citations needed, from Max, showing where (allegedly) Kafei says mystics fuse ASC/OSC.
Even if Kafei elevates mystics so high as to render them alien and inexplicable, and even if Kafei claims mystics fuse ASC/OSC (I see no strong evidence for Kafei asserting either of those views), I would never support the conclusion that the Egodeath theory is severed from, separated from, or divorced from mystics or from mysticism.
The only way to appear to reach such a position, to give the misleading impression that the Egodeath theory is severed from mystics, is by employing malformed pseudo-definitions of the words ‘mystic’ and ‘mysticism’, which, by my accounting, everyone rejects:
Max asserts and puts forth a mal-definition of ‘mystics‘ as alien and inexplicable, and who fuse ASC/OSC. This is not Kafei’s definition of the word ‘mystics’; this is Max’s definition of the word ‘mystics’. We need to explicitly label that definition as: “Max’s definition of the word ‘mystics'” [the problem w/ doing that: more the root of the problem: latest finding: Max is under the misimpression that this is the world’s normal standard unanimous definition; Max thinks that the word ‘mystics’ itself, really does mean, “ultra special 1-state ppl” – he’s making a mistake of “given definition”, of assuming that a certain definition is a given. He’s not consciously taking ownership of the act of defining words, and debating best-definitions. He’s taking a passive, received-view stance, “that’s just what the word means”. Max doesn’t think he is defining the word and advocating or “pushing” his definition; he thinks that the word ‘mystics’ really means, in and of itself, inherently, — not by convention of definition-debates, but inherently – a certain meaning. Max is not taking an “ownership stance” regarding definition. The word just means what it means, and no one can do anything about it. So there’s no need to take a stance of establishing the best definition – the word simply means what it means; its meaning is “god-given” and there’s nothing we can do about it except passively receive that given, inherent, universally held definition.
Max fails to go into philosophical word-definition responsibility-ownership mode, but instead argues as if the meaning of the word ‘mystics’ inherently universally means, “ultra special, 1-state people”.
Max implicitly claims that Max is extracting that definition from Kafeis’ held position – or from the world, as if the meaning of the word ‘mystics’ is set, fixed, god-given, inherent, and thus shared by everyone – but the machine transcription of this particular conversation appears to indicate that Max is picking up that extremist stance from someone other than Kafei (or creating the definition himself), and Max is then attributing that extremist position to Kafei, against Kafei’s protestations and corrections.
It’s only at 1:02:58 that Max finally enters “Responsible Philosopher” mode, stops simply repeating “we are not mystics” 5+ times, employing the undefined word ‘mystics’as if the meaning of ‘mystics’ is simply a given, and he finally speaks in proper Philosophy mode, saying “I’m not going to comment on whether I’m a mystic”. He’s here, finallystarting (but only starting) to raise Question Number 1: “What is the proper meaning, and the commonly held meaning, of the word ‘mystic’?”
Do some writers assert that the definition of ‘mystics’ is: “the ultra-special, ever-inexplicable people who fuse ASC & OSC”?
What writers assert that definition of ‘mystics’ that Max is vigorously asserting and then tilting at? with the outcome being the implication that the Egodeath theory has nothing to do with mysticism. 😵 “Truly, your logic is dizzying.”
I don’t see Kafei asserting that extremist definition of ‘mystics’; I don’t see Kafei as explicitly asserting that mystics are ultra-special people who we can never hope to explain or experience like.
I see Max explicitly and vigorously asserting the latter definition of the word ‘mystics’: that ‘mystics’ are, in fact, ultra-special people, who are, in fact, beyond our experiencing & understanding, and who the Egodeath theory in fact is not for, and in fact doesn’t explain or address; and who are, in fact, the set of those people who really have fused the ASC & OSC.
Kafei demonstrably, repeatedly rejects that mal-definition – citations are provided below, to show Kafei rejecting Max’s extremist definition of the word ‘mystics’.
I reject that mal-definition.
Webster rejects that mal-definition.
Everyone in the world rejects that mal-definition.
SURPRISING FINDING: 🤯 THE GREAT MYSTICS OF EGODEATHHAVE HEAVY PSYCHOLOGICAL HANGUPS AROUND THEIR MAGICALLY-CHARGED, EVER-UNDER-DEFINED WORD ‘MYSTICS‘ 🪄, AND SO ARE UNABLE TO COHERENTLY CONVERSE ABOUT THIS MYTHICAL EPIC ALLEGED GROUP TO WHICH THEY MAY OR MAY NOT SECRETLY ASPIRE TO PUT ON A MORE OR LESS HIGH PEDESTAL AND THEN CONJOIN THEMSELVES WITH, AFFIX THEMSELVES TO.
These adherents to the word ‘mystics’, these who style themselves the Grea🍄 Mys🍄ics of Egodea🍄h mistakenly think that they desire to develop the Perennial Entheogen Philosophy, but that pursuit is just a substitute wish fulfillment project; their actual wish is to __ on fire, per Freud, who people should stop laughing at 🛋🪑😢 <- 😄
🛋😞🗒🖋️️🤔🪑
Why is Max striving and working strenuously hard to put forth a mal-definition of ‘mystics’ that everyone in the world rejects as bunk and mal-formed, being not even a definition, since it is purely negative?
Does Max desire to cast off and condemn mystics as alien, irrelevant, and unfathomable?
Why is Max so alienated from mystics as to write them off as beyond readership, beyond explanation, beyond relevance for the Egodeath theory – as if the Egodeath theory has nothing to do with mysticism?
Did Kafei’s elevation of mystics too high, cause Max to want to write-off the whole lot of them?
Did Max mistake my dispute with explanations of mysticism, as being the same thing as writing-off mystics as inveterate irrationalists; aliens who are beyond all explicability?
Why did Max assert 3 [update: 5+] times, “We are not mystics”, and yet, he also subsequently said “I’m not going to comment on whether I would say I’m a mystic, or an aspiring mystic, or a non-mystic”?
🗒🖋️️ DIAGNOSIS & PRESCRIPTION
The Grea🍄 Mys🍄ics of Egodea🍄h are talking past each other, floating freely, ungrounded, because they lack an effective, stable, determinate, agreed-upon definition of the central term, ‘mystics’, and then of the inversely derived key term ‘ordinary people’, and strict consistent definition of the term ‘everyone’ as referring to the universal set.
– Dr. Cybermonk
Max keeps bringing-in the topic of 2-states, AS IF Kafei were asserting a 1-state definition of ‘mystics’ – which I’m barely seeing Kafei assert.
IS MAX COUNTERING SOME 1-STATE POSITION ABOUT MYSTICS THAT KAFEI ASSERTED IN SOME OTHER, TEXT EXCHANGE? MAX SURE VERY MUCH ACTS LIKE IT. PUZZLING.
THE CONVERSATION PARTICIPANTS HAVE NO CONSENSUS ABOUT THE DEFINITION OF THE WORD ‘MYSTICS’.
MAX VIGOROUSLY PUTS FORTH AN EXTREMIST DEFINITION OF THE WORD ‘MYSTICS’ (PICKED UP FROM WHERE?), AND KAFEI REJECTS THAT EXTREMIST DEFINITION AND PUTS FORTH A MORE MODERATE DEFINITION.
BUT THE EXCHANGE ENDS THERE, AND THE CENTRAL TERM REMAINS UNRESOLVED; WE DON’T END UP WITH AN AGREED-UPON DEFINITION OF THE CENTRAL TERM, ‘MYSTICS’, THAT ALL PARTIES PROCEED TO USE IN THE SAME SENSE, WITH THE SAME ATTACHED POSITION-ASSERTIONS OR DEFINITIONAL CONNOTATIONS.
A PRELIMINARY CONVERSATION IS NEEDED, TO PRODUCE REASONABLE CONSENSUS ON THE DEFINITION OF THE CENTRAL TERM, ‘MYSTICS’ (ALONG WITH THE FOLLOW-ON DERIVATIVE TERM ‘ORDINARY PEOPLE’, AND DEFINITIVELY DEFINING THE WORD ‘EVERYONE’ AS REFERRING TO THE UNIVERSAL SET, NOT A SUBSET).
Once you have those 3 terms locked-down as determinate, and actually agreed upon by the conversation participants, then you can viably link other terms to that determinate set of reference points, such as the terms ‘democratic’ and ‘elites’, so that they too are stably defined, instead of slipping all over the place and just exacerbating the confusion.
If Episode 16 was the Bizarre episode, this episode is:
Start of Complete Machine Transcription of Episode 26
Max: “hello and welcome to the transcendent knowledge podcast episode number 26
and this episode is going to feature both jimmy and cyber disciple in a three-way conversation so fingers crossed that the technical side of this is all going to to work
so i would like this episode to be a follow-up to the last conversation that i had with jimmy but also involving cyberdisciple
so jimmy and i recorded a couple of different episodes together and the topic of the record the topics that we covered in the recording were quite spread out um diffuse all over the place.
And over the subsequent recordings it became clearer and clearer what the key topics we need to cover are in order to i-
i think that the ultimate aim as i see it of these recordings are to get jimmy into a place where he can accurately paraphrase the ego death theory
Focus: Determinism & Eternalism
and i think that for this conversation i would really like to focus very squarely very centrally on the topic of determinism and eternalism
so in light of that um i just want to mention one thing
so jimmy i listened to a recording on youtube that you made recently with uh speed of sound also c- mike bruzenak right on his youtube channel
and you did actually mention your conversations with me and also the subject of block universe determinism which as i said that’s the core concept that i want to cover today
um and you you paraphrased it quite accurately um but i just wonder if you could repeat for the purpose of this podcast what exactly does the word determinism mean to you
/ end of Max’ intro
Kafei: “uh let me see well in in light of if you consider eternalism uh you know determinism i would relate it to what plato called you know the moving image of eternity uh we have this illusion of uh time and space but i i think you’ve heard i’ve heard you speak about it as like a holographic illusion that’s created within the block universe and you know and that’s really all i could really attribute it to like uh to say from the standpoint of the eternalism uh the tournament determinism might mean a word that refers to the illusion the illusion of matter of movement in matter
Kafei: uh i don’t know if that’s uh clear i can try to you know put it a bit more uh i’d be more articulate about it let me see
Max: can you just clarify what do you think in the concept of determinism, what is it that is determined?
Kafei: well uh a lot of times when these you know when people have these discussions it’s usually they speak of the the will being determined
uh you know it’s always a discussion surrounding will uh free will and and uh no free will and uh i think that’s you know what interests people most in these types of discussion uh free will and and the lack or the lack of it and uh
within um you know it’s determinism like like uh
i’ve been hearing the podcast throughout the year and um i’ve heard you mentioned that uh you know michael hoffman switched uh from using determinism to eternalism because you have so much misconception surrounding that term and
i think that’s why it’s hard to you know uh pin it down in a discussion like this relative to eternalism uh
Kafei Seeing Determinism within the Model of Eternalism
Kafei: i kind of see uh determinism uh in in within the model of eternalism uh
I kind of see determinism within the model of eternalism.
Kafei
[That’s remarkably similar to what I said in today’s recording [download link is in idea development page 10 ], wondering what kind of determinism could fit w/ eternalism. todo: identify what kind of determinism or QM could fit w/ eternalism. [January 21, 2021] -cm]
the best you’ve probably heard the term hard determinism uh you know
the way kind of einstein referred to it as the atoms as billiard balls just you know flinging their way in the only possible way they can according to cosmic law and yeah
that’s kind of what i’m getting at but it’s it’s uh hard to speak of that because you have to speak of the motion of matter when in when in fact from the vantage point of eternalism there is no such thing occurring there is no movement everything is frozen you know from beginning to end hence block universe
you know but uh i don’t know
i don’t know if that’s getting to it at all so far i don’t know would you agree with any of that
Max: “i think that what you just said does incorporate uh both both causal chain determinism and block universe determinism and i’m quite keen to distinguish between those two separate models and i wonder if do you have a clear understanding of the difference between
Kafei: “yeah that’s why yeah causal chain is another way i’ve heard it put and i i think people who believe in uh like a type of hard determinism or causal chain determinism you know believe they see the determinism as something that’s uh you know causally happening happening you know throughout the universe uh
whereas in uh in eternalism that no such thing takes place uh it’s there is no cause and effect; everything just already is
um you know that i don’t know maybe you could articulate a lot better than that uh the distinction
Max: “i think you’ve got it right i think you you do understand uh the difference between so you you use the term hard determinism and i’m not sure which model you were referring to in calling which one you meant was hard
that’s it’s usually associated with uh ramesh barsakar you know um he will say that uh you know every uh everything is that occurs there’s a occurs to cosmic law or god’s will, that everything is you know uh according to god’s will
you you make no choice of your own
um you know that that type of that’s usually what’s considered harder to the reason [trans. glitch?] why it’s considered hard determinism as opposed to maybe soft determinant determinism is because uh you know
softer determinism uh sort of uh encompasses uh with um ah the physicists that died recently stephen hawking will talk about um uh statistical determinism where you know things are not necessarily fixed concretely but they there’s a bit of open freedom to it
so you know he uh but nevertheless it does follow uh a determinist fashion in other words like uh you can make your way to the mall for instance but uh there’s there’s sort of like freedom on the way to get there or something like that
whereas in hard determinism, no there is only one way you’re going to make it to that mall uh i don’t know there’s kind of like a a bit more openness in in the type of determinism that stephen hawking was talking about
uh you know and
i think that’s why it intrigued a lot of people because uh i guess they’re not really turned on by the idea that everything’s being predetermined
you know you remember i don’t know if you remember
i had mentioned last time that i spoke to Bizzy bone about that and um you know i one thing i had brought up to him because i would just after my p experience
i was being so influenced by ramesh balsa car i was speaking in these terms of like no free will and i remember pitching that to busy bone and
he came back and came back at me and he started like weaving and nodding his head to the side and he would go that was determined that was predetermined that was predetermined you know bobbing his head to the side like kind of short kind of in a way i guess he thought of it as flaunting his free will in front of me
[flaunting his low iq more like -cm]
you know and uh it was real interesting to have that experience because here i am telling busy bone about how there’s no such thing as free will and yet he’s over here flaunting it in front of me you know this and this uh it’s a meeting that i never would have expect to happen me sitting in front of this you know legend in hip-hop and uh
he got me to thinking when i went home i’m like man i’d started rethinking like ramesh and all that and uh you know that’s i think that’s what i when i finally got led into um eastern philosophy and and uh compatibilism uh you know and and uh ramesh if you hear ramesh he’ll say like i don’t know if you hear a lot of his talks but
he’ll say uh people will ask him well what does free will come from then and he’ll sort of give this like compatibilist response and say uh fear free will is what god was forced to give you so that daily living can happen you know daily living cannot happen unless yet every human being is free to do whatever he wants in any situation but nevertheless he maintains that all action is destined by cosmic law.
you know um he doesn’t he’s not real um like uh like you want him like in the way he kind of want me to say something very concrete and and to the point like he’s he’s not like that with uh when it comes to free will and and his view because he you wouldn’t think he’s a hard determinant just by hearing him speak but then he’ll say something like that and then he kind of throws some compatibility you know caveat out there at the same time but he’s not too clear on how it works together
Cyb: no i think that’s common; the idea of no free will is usually not very popular many people recoil against it and we’ll kind of shut down a conversation or we’ll you know want to
yeah and and to add yeah because there is something i wanted to say add to that that uh i’m glad you brought that up it’s it’s because uh you know what
i was thinking about Bizzy but i’m like man i’m thinking you know this guy he achieved all this you know he he feels in his own ego that he achieves all this greatness on his own you know like all the songs that he ever did and you
and then some guy just comes in a pizzeria and tells him he has no free will you know and it’s some insight he got out of p and and uh yeah i guess yeah he i think
from that point or not that point on he kind of like they kind of went into an argumentative like uh tone between him and i and that’s i i think i mentioned i don’t know if i mentioned it last time but he slammed his hands on the table he said i’m done after that last question he asked me about whether but whether um evil exists inside meditation and he took off
went to go order a drink but it was interesting man we had a whole uh crowd surrounding us and uh we were having this conversation and then when he slammed on the table like everyone kind of just went their own way it was it was interesting
Max: “right i
i just wanted to extract from what you just said
what i see as the central concept in distinguishing between – i’m not going to use the term hard determinism, it’s too unclear what that means
i’m just going to stick to two basic terms, which are causal chain determinism on the one hand and block universe determinism which is also called eternalism on the other hand
Max: “right i want to very clearly distinguish between these two concepts and i think that
a good distinction between them was contained in what you just said so i just want to extract it
what you said as i understood it was
in causal chain determinism you have a process of causation occurring in time which in the last time we spoke you used the word unfolding and i took i took it to mean the same thing right so that’s causal chain determinism
and then you also said to contrast that with block universe determinism or eternalism as michael hoffman now calls that that in that model of determinismthere’s no causation in time occurring because all of the causation has already happened it’s already everything has already unfolded so you’ve got the full chain from the beginning to the end of time or you you could look at it as the beginning of your life to the end of your life all existing at once, all in one go so there’s no unfolding; there’s only something that has already eternally unfolded.
[i see the merit of Max using phrase pattern: foo determinism vs. bar determinism It can be good to call both positions “determinism” instead of changing one of them to ‘eternalism’.
Imagine keeping the two contrasts separate by using these concept-labels:
causal-chain determinism vs. block-universe determinism
branching-universe possibilism vs. block universe eternalism
The latter suggests interesting terms that use common terms, not tech-terms:
branching universe vs. block universe the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image would probably label those: branching universe vs. non-branching universe
-cm]
right does that make sense to you
yeah that definitely um you know pretty much echoes what i said yeah definitely
right so i think that the uh a point of confusion that happened in our last conversation is that when you were reflecting your understanding of the ego death theory sometimes you seemed to be um attributing causal chain determinism to michael hoffman’s view michael hoffman’s theory, but other times you seem to say that michael hoffman is expressing uh the other kind of determinism determinism block universe eternalist model of time
well i mean okay do you agree or
i i well there is something that you said you mentioned because you said that um you mentioned that ramesh and michael hoffman are are concluding the same exact* point so i kind of you know uh figured that maybe you know michael was referring to a causal determinism in some way through the block universe that you know that we yes
[probably not exact same – does Ramesh agree w/ the Egodeath theory’s pre-existing timeless block-universe eternalism, that the future exists? including future control-thoughts pre-exist. -cm]
everything’s uh determined we have you know um in the in the p experience itself you don’t uh you know the mystic no longer identifies with the material body because they see themselves as all events occurring uh you know all time past and future collapse into the moment and so you know they have no identity
Max: so which which model of determinism would that be then that what you’ve just uh explained
start of pullquote source
Kafei: i i consider it like the way i was sort of thinking about it and is like a direct experience of the block universe or or the mind fuses with the block universe like it becomes all it becomes the block and you know so there is no time you know to unfold because you know everything is occurring at once simultaneously um
but that’s the vision inside the experience
but when you come and you return to the baseline of consciousness you return to space and time and egoic the egoic illusion you know uh but nevertheless you still have in your memory banks the vision of where your that ego death happened where you know there was no longer an ego but there is still awareness there uh and it’s and it’s that awareness that you know you could recall from your from your memory banks
and you know a lot of the the research is saying the the reason why it’s becoming so efficacious with all the benefits of where you know depression and all that and uh ptsd the cancer patients fear of death is because it’s the memory of the the experience it’s not the a drg you know they always emphasize it’s not a drg you have to take over and over you know what the pharmacists want you know the something that’s really expensive and you have to take every single day uh it’s just a single memory of that experience that’s helping the volunteers therefore they don’t have to take any medication ever again you know um so you know so that i mean
memory the memory of the experience is a big thing you know even roland griffiths talks about he’s never seen any other with any other type of d in his experience like 50 years plus experience uh with that has such a vast impact on the memory uh you know people are i and you know people who have this experience and they will um mull them over on to death i think once you have it um but matt i probably got off a tangent right there but uh uh well i guess i was trying to emphasize you know yeah “
headings by cm:
The relationship between OSC, Possibilism, freewill model, and causal-chain determinism model:
THE ORDINARY STATE OF CONSCIOUSNESS = tightcog = Possibilism-thinking = the freewill experiential model, sometimes taking one step forward toward Eternalism-thinking by switching from freewill thinking to causal-chain determinism thinking. causal-chain determinism is a step away from Possibilism but still mostly Possibilism, …
Does Kafei make a Mistake Here? ASC = experiencing block-universe determinism; OSC = causal-chain determinism? <– what? crossed ideas? mixed up? OSC = experience of freewill possibilism-thinking , not OSC = causal-chain determinism.
causal-chain determinism is closer to {OSC, Possibilism-thinking, freewill thinking} than to {ASC, Eternalism-thinking, no-free-will thinking}
when you return to the egoic uh you know the baseline of consciousness you you return to this impression of causal chain determinism* even though you had a glimpse of it where that didn’t exist at all and i think that’s why
[*error? expect him to instead say “baseline = return to the impression of freewill Possibilities-branching“]
a lot of people when they have the experiences they say that the p experience is more real than real you know it’s the most real experience they can have and and
this is like invariably amongst the volunteers that’s it’s emphasized you know rick strossman talked about it with his dmt uh volunteers ronan griffiths talks about it with the psilocybin volunteers and um you know they i think and so like returning to this egoic uh illusionthey all you often uh have that impression that you’re returning to a kind of dream
you know like uh that’s like the
the p experience was the brief moment that you woke up or as others actually put it the mind at large that you know our brain right now is a filter on reality and what the p does is remove those filters and you know you become like the r hat in jainism
or i don’t know if you’ve ever heard of the cave of juliana i probably i don’t know if i’m butchering that pronunciation but it’s the uh you know they say
at the core of everyone’s soul is omniscience, of all knowing, being able to see all things
um and that’s you know that’s to me
that sounds aligned with all you know of course all the other major religions you know god is within uh brahman or even you know i i because i really think that you know what hindus were speaking about is no different from kind of our discussion but
we’re just kind of speaking about it in a more refined fashion um
hopefully you know that is the goal too i think um that you know when uh what a yogi said when he we spoke about brahman is precisely what we’re talking about when we speak of eternalism and the block universe uh there’s just kind of two different ways of describing it
but i i really like uh the igor theory man i think it’s a real uh you know because it’s not a religion in itself it’s just it’s a theory and on and it’s an expan it’s a way to explain religion and you know i i i you know i find it really attractive man it’s one of the reasons i wanted to have this discussion with you not only that because i find these topics infinitely interesting “
Max: sorry uh cyber disciple did you want to add anything to that
Cyb: no i was going to i was going to see what you were going to say
Max: right right so to be clear i just want to again try to extract the relevant point and summarize uh summarize in to point the conversation towards the ego death theory
what the picture that emerges in what you just said is
a two-state model uh a two-state cosmology i guess you could say where you’ve got
the egoic state of consciousness on the one hand and then
the intense p state of consciousness on the other hand and as i understood what you said
it’s eternalism or block universe determinism where everything has already unfolded in time, there’s no ongoing uh process of causal unfolding in time that’s block universe determinism that model of time is the one that is relevant to mystical altered state experiencing which is the kind of experiencing that happens on like doze it
[I marked-up my orig transcription higher in page -cm]
am i correctly characterizing what you said there jimmy
yeah i mean what you said it reminded me of like uh they used to be if you go to ramesh’s wikipedia page he has some quotes there you probably have to go in the wayback machine now to find him but uh it says uh is to say like something like the
the final truth says you know maharash and anisegata all said and all the sages before them have clearly stated is that you know
there’s neither creation or destruction, neither birth or death, neither destiny nor free will, neither any path or any achievement; all there is is consciousness
and i you know i think that’s what they mean by that you know it’s uh if there’s another
there’s no destiny and there’s no free will, because there’s no you know there’s no ego there to have a destiny nor free will
it’s it’s
there’s just a consciousness that contains awe in a sense [glitch?]
um if that reflects anything of what you said
Max: okay so i think that as far as possible please can we try to avoid referencing thinkers and writers because we can we can do all that later but so i mean i agree ramesh bolsakar is highly relevant to this conversation but he’s also not fully relevant to this conversation um and rather than trying to pick out the relevant parts of ramish bolsakar i would rather just eliminate these external thinkers and writers from the conversation as much as possible and just focus on this one
because i just want to make a point jimmy like you’re you’re very good at accurately paraphrasing many writers and many theories um such as ramesh bolsakar, alan watts, paul tillick, etc, but you cannot yet accurately paraphrase michael hoffman’s ego death theory and it’s that point that i’m trying to reach through these conversations so let’s try and keep it focused just on this on this one theory and this one set of ideas that the theory involves
so i was talking about the difference between causal determinism and non-causal block universe determinism
and as i understood it what you just said earlier was that:
the intense mystic experience, the ultimate mystical experience is characterized by block universe determinism but not by causal chain determinism
because causal chain determinism i i took it you correctly identified is something that is relevant to the egoic state of consciousness or the ordinary day-to-day state of consciousness
but in the … altered state … the experience that you have fits in with the block universe idea
is that right
Kafei on Acedia
Kafei: “oh yeah definitely that’s that’s definitely what i experienced
i i think ah one uh interesting thing you you left i was episode 16 i think we last spoke on and and uh at the very end yes you told me to look into acedia
and uh you know i because i had mentioned that uh because you know there is this impression that you get of the block universe or the omniscience of uh everything have already been done uh when i was coming down there was a like i guess my when the ego was coming back you know uh um you know when i was when you were turning to the baseline uh there was i guess almost like a mesh of the two states that was occurring that like i felt this extreme boredom that if i couldn’t like if my ego couldn’t escape this intense uh ennui
you know it was almost like because everything had occurred or because it was like deep um boredom and knowing everything a kind of intuitive knowledge uh that was occurring
[SAME REASON MCFAKEA SECRETLY STOPPED USING – YET CONTINUED ADVOCATING; MISREPRESENTING HIMSELF –cm]
and i remember thinking like man if i don’t if this doesn’t end i i’m probably liable to commit suicide because it’s it’s overwhelming um you know and luckily i mean
eventually it wore off and at that point i was able to sit up because i thought the whole time i don’t know if this happens uh happens to you when you take doze like uh it the it drags you down like you feel like magnetized to the ground like i think
terence used to say the major program to be executed is like hanging on to the ground and um yeah that’s that’s what i remember like i remember when i was able to sit up that’s when i realized oh okay i’m coming down like
this is it’s getting out it’s you know it’s finally wearing off but
it sounds like it it’s like you wanted to prove that you could do something
i was thinking what you’re saying about the the ennui and the boredom and the suicide ideas like the suicide suicide ideas like they’ll prove you can do something even if it’s canceling yourself out ending yourself
oh yeah
it’s like this attempt by the ego to prove that it can will something
i see what you’re saying yeah uh oh who else uh there’s a i think
sriniv talks about that too like uh
people who not even in the context of tripping but people who commit suicide anyway are still trapped in the illusion that they’re an egoic will that’s able to do anything at all
well i think that there’s like a distinction like an important distinction here between
experience of something in the altered state and then our
the way we talk about it afterwards
and i think
Cyb: that’s also uh speaking to some of what max is bringing up about other thinkers and just the whole also being able to describe things and summarize things you know
there’s like the experience of eternalism, or block universe determinism, whatever term we use like – what is that; what do we mean when we say we are experiencing that as opposed to having an intellectual discourse about it like we’re doing now but what does it mean to actually experience that; what was that like for you
Cyb continues: the the uh well for me uh and
it’s tricky because we are automatically back into discourse right on we’re trying to describe it but it’s kind of like trying to get at like what was that like you know what was that like to when we say experience a block universe or something like that
Kafei: um man let me see like uh when when it occurred for me one thing’s the some things that i do remember that stood out uh is that whether my eyes were closed that are open
there was a point where uh this mandalic vision completely encompassed uh you know everything that i guess my mind’s eye could see it was you know bright very vividly colored it was it did have motion in it like it wasn’t something that was frozen
it was something that was kind of uh i guess you could a lot a lot of mis uh yogis are here seeing uh religious scripture that god is is uh unchanging and i guess in a sense you could say that the mandalic pattern was unchanging in that it it it kind of pulsated in an unchanging way it was a pulsating energy that just kept on going and uh but it
[see LP back cover of Caress of Steel 12″ image: river, tree, roots undulating; & album title Permanent Waves –cm]
it represented and somehow there was an intuitive feeling in my consciousness i guess where in staring at this mandalic pattern it represented uh every possible pattern that could be and in other words like when they when uh when you hear in scripture a lot of times that that god is outside of space and time with uh you know people mistakenly imagine you know the bearded white man uh you know bearded figure that’s outside the continuum you know that’s completely outside the continuum but they fail to see that what outside of space and time really means is inclusive of all space and time that’s that’s what it means and and that’s
in staring at the mandalic pattern that’s what it felt that almost as though i was seeing the undergird of every single possible permutation that could manifest in reality
i was seeing where the source of it you know like um every single thing was there, every sound, every song, every you know, every experience, every you were every person every everywhere everything every everything that ever was
um you know i think i mentioned mac to max last time uh that you know
maria sabina would would say uh you know it’s the place where everything is known you know was her metaphor for it but uh that was the impression that i got in it it was um almost like my consciousness itself you know i no longer at a point there was a certain point where i no longer identified with the ego the ego wasn’t there anymore it was just that mandalic pattern that represented all things you know uh the prayer roma in gnosticism or uh the all you know there’s many names for it in religion but uh that at least i mean if i had to say something about it it’s a bit more than just metaphor uh to add you know a visual aspect of what was going on that’s what i would say
and how did that i think the rest of my question has to do with how did that relate to um your sense about say the future because i think that that’s a big concept of that we’re that we hang out with a lot and and hanging out with the igor theory is this concept of what’s going to happen in the future and what’s my relation here and now to that idea of the future
no you’re right and that’s what i was trying to tell max that like when i came down it wasn’t some immediate thing that i suddenly had a revelation like ramesh basically you know the revelation he had was that everything was you know this causal determinism you know this everything was fixed in time uh you know that ramesh had it like uh like it was revelatory for him but uh what i came down with after having that experience you know it was like seeing it wasn’t like i came back and said oh this this world line is the one specific world line or um i i was i didn’t know exactly how to think about it but i had for some reason i had a slight intuition that i’m like man what if like you can have the reason why you can have an experience of everything like that is because that you know everything is fixed in time you know there is really while everyone while we think we’re doing things and performing actions you know everything’s really just occurring um you know in the one fashion that it could and you know that’s what got me to google p experience and um you know uh i guess lack of free will or no free will or determinism and that’s when i found ramesh basically and then when i was searching ramesh bastar i really interested in ramesh basically that’s when i started that’s when i found michael hoffman’s website because he lists he lists uh rahm spastaka he cites from his foster car and so i was reading Balsekar’s citation from michael hoffman’s website and then i’m like what the hell am i reading and i look at the website i’m like Egodeath.com?
i had to go to the main page Egodeath.com, i’m like whoa is this you know like i my eyes lit up man
i was like this is ex it just resonated completely that’s how i got into it
but it wasn’t something that i realized right away it kind of just it took some edging a little bit that’s what i was trying to tell max
yeah yeah yeah well again there’s that there’s this thing between what we experience and then how we conceive of it and how we talk about it um
and it’s funny because i i you know i also i met max knows that i i listen to a lot of uh alan watts and and uh you know he he
he talks about these zen masters that are all trying to you know each one of them one of our having a contest who can articulate the void the best like
kind of like what we’re trying to do here
who could say who can uh articulate the block universe the best right
and and uh so
they’re having this contest among amongst the zen masters and then they turn to this like zen master that hasn’t spoken yet and they ask him and he says nothing and he wins the contest
you know because he doesn’t say anything and they’re all freaked out like holy [ __ ] he just uh he you know he blew our minds
but um you know but to to say something about it i think uh man i don’t know
there’s also zen like huang po i don’t know if you’ve ever read hong kong’s quotes but he he is real insightful and speaking on you know the the zen or whatever you want to conservatory
um but yeah yeah i mean yeah to i guess uh
your line of questioning sort of invoked already what i wanted to say about that uh cyber
oh right i was just going to say um just to be clear to kind of again summarize to bring it back to the main point jimmy
what what you seem to be saying which i would agree with is that
the intense altered state experience is like block universe determinism it feels as if everything in time has already happened
there’s no further unfolding there’s just one eternal moment of time when everything happens
and then you go back to the ordinary state of consciousness and the the block universe determinism model doesn’t apply to ordinary experience
so we have a two-state model here right where the intense altered state is you can model it by block universe determinism in in the sense that the phenomena that you experience in the intense altered state are suggestive of block universe determinism
it feels as if block universe determinism is the case when you’re tripping very hard
but then in the ordinary state of consciousness the other state when you’re not tripping … it doesn’t feel as if everything has already happened and block universe determinism is the case, because in the ordinary state of consciousness you get the sense of a flowing time and a future that has yet to happen
yeah i don’t know
i completely agree i was going to say one aspect we haven’t touched on i mentioned it uh i mentioned that email i said to you a like a couple hours ago i meant to send that like a man a week ago man i just hadn’t had the time um but i one thing we haven’t touched on is uh because
accompanied with this mandalic pattern and you know this uh feeling uh this intense uh transformation of consciousness into uh the block universe or what you know what have you there’s also a company in all this uh agape you know that’s a greek spoke of it or it’s also mentioned in christianity uh a deep infinite unconditional love uh that also was part of the experience uh that i that i recall man and i know we haven’t really touched on the emotion like um you know because we’re having this discussion where who’s speaking right [now?] if everything’s the block universe and so in the-
Max: yes but remember that we said but but jimmy i must interrupt you there remember that we what i was saying it’s a two-state model not a one-state model so
as we are having this conversation now we’re not tripping we’re not in the intense mystic experience so therefore from this point of view, block universe determinism is not the case
so it’s actually quite easy to answer your question right now it’s us that are talking right there’s there’s no mystery to that because we’re not having mystical experience
oh no no i agree but you know like i guess what i was gonna get at was that um you know
a lot of mystics who which you know have mystical experience they return you know they uh they still don’t they don’t uh identify their ego with the material body [what does “the material body” signify to K? –cm] you know they in have in having seen uh the unitive state of all all everything being part of the black universe uh they identify as as the block itself and you know they
they talk about in religion original sin where you have this impression in your consciousness that your sep your separate entity that you know the what we spoke of last time of
alan watts the skin encapsulated ego you know so uh we have these uh assumed roles right these assumed uh encapsulated egos and so we could see it as though you know each skin encapsulated ego speaks to another uh but
for like i suppose the mystic it’s really the where instruments are vessels through which the block universe itself you know wills its cosmic law
and uh you know
so for the mystic in experiencing that unconditional love they’re gonna speak they become like a you know an instrument or a music instrument through which the the mystical experience whistles through
you know the the you know that’s why the love aspect and so forth but uh
i don’t know if you wanted to take it in a different way i just had a thought there that that what if they don’t do that i think that that’s something that’s been bouncing around in my mind recently that that it’s not,
it is perfectly possible i think to have sort of a mys- what we call or calling a mystic experience and then not lead one’s life any differently
Cyb?: a mystic experience does not equal someone then living their life according to some sort of lesson that they are basing out of that mystic experience
and i think that we are like that’s often throughout the say the 20th and 21st century a lot of the discourse i’m familiar with about mysticism often assumes that that will be the case:
that people will take some sort of lesson from that and then live their ordinary state life differently and that’s one thing i find um interesting compelling say for example my time with the ego death theory is that it doesn’t really do that; it it really stresses what max has been stressing here, that’s two states that
there may not be a connection between one’s experience in the altered state and then how one lives one’s life, because they are two different realms they’re like uh they’re two different modes of operating and a lot there there is certainly some people who want to say i mean there is certainly there are people who want to say well we’ve had this experience we should base our lives off of it in x y and z way but that is a bit different from from kind of defining the experience or having the experience um you know then you get involved in sort of cultural project or sort of moralism or sort of ideas about how to lead one’s egoic life
um do you see what i mean that there that
there could be people who just i mean it actually reminds me of some of that you know all old kind of very familiar often kind of like
zen thing about like the chop would carry water thing right where you um you have the experience you have you become enlightened and then you go back to doing what you’re doing beforehand anyway; just in it the only difference is that now you’re enlightened and that’s it that’s like i see these and koans i believe
K: um no yeah i’ve heard it uh the well i mean i
i actually am very enamored by the mystical theology of western religion of mysticism and eastern philosophy
the mystics that i’ve studied like you know they refer to mysticism as a something of practice it’s frequented
so like when i imagine uh a mystic i i see someone as they probably frequent the state far more than than we do
uh i don’t know how often you take p but i i’ve always restricted it for myself once a year
i don’t know why i do that i don’t know if it’s just a tradition or something like develop but um i’ll
i’ll take a doze like once every year i haven’t done it this year but i think my my last one was something like … and i always try to take it higher
and um you know but i imagine the mystic is someone who develops uh because i know you know there’s an ego death theory there’s um it can’t be accessed naturally [OBJECTIONABLE USE OF ‘NATURAL’ PER OTT –cm] and so you know if you consider like sometimes i consider not
maybe there is natural methods like hezekiasm i don’t know if you’ve heard of that but uh you know these types of contemplative uh retreats that these mystics would have and or the prayer closet
and you know they would constantly refer to this for answers for moral guidance
you know so like they were going back at it pretty quickly i think even terence talked about where like uh you know he would advocate herodosis but he didn’t recommend him very frequently he said if you your fear taking like 70 milligrams every other day of dmt you’re by the end of the month you’re gonna find yourself a very completely different person
you know and even in uh the man
the research like uh they talk about that it’s like a it’s a social threat you know um to society but it might be a good threat because uh it might disrupt the orderof things uh but of course
[“CAN”, “MIGHT” – careful w/ disrupting structure, bc everything also “might” turn to sh*t –cm]
the world is not obviously in great order right now to begin with you know it could be a good thing but um i i don’t know man i i feel that they’re different definitely influential i mean
even in the research you know the benefits and so forth like the cancer patients they’re they completely lose their fear of death
you know there is a if i may if you don’t mind i don’t
have you guys seen the “Revealing the Mind: The Promise of P“?
Cyb: well i just have to admit i’m very opposed and skeptical to the therapy the p for therapy okay all right all right i have studied it and but that’s that’s really another conversation
i think i think what i’m again the point i’m trying to summarize is that i think that
There’s like mysticism as like a social practice so to speak or a cultural institution and then there’s experiencing that we often describe as mystical
And they’re not the same thing; so
the researchers at hopkins and nyu and places like that are doing a model of mysticism as a social practice and saying it has x y and z benefits and things like that
whereas we’re in the more we’re much more in the like almost pure theory theoretical area and in a way i view that as more democratizing because it does not ask you to change your life and give up your lifestyle and start doing i don’t know what doing whatever you know going to therapy centers joining a cult you know whatever these things happen to be
no i agree i i mean
even in the research that they speak of you know one single dose that they’re giving volunteers that have these lasting effects
but uh you know i think it’s i i’m really referring to maybe early mysticism like you know for us practice you know between first century onward uh where you know it it seems as though mystics were frequenting these these states and and you know i
i don’t really see that today
i don’t see anyone doing that today including myself i don’t i don’t take i mean
if i was uh uh you know aspiring mystic i think i would frequent the p state maybe more often or uh maybe practice be a little bit more healthy or you know have a greater probity with my with concerning or morality um you know but uh i i yeah i know you’re right i think like
even it’s kind of ridiculed like you know the people who are taking mushrooms today are not scientists or these people who we think should be taking them it’s you know it’s teenagers that live in [ __ ] trailer homes playing xbox and you know stuff like that like uh yeah it’s real diminished like it’s not um because i really think it at one point in like you know
long ago years ago thousands of years ago even though even amongst the shamans like you know the the mayans and so forth like they probably went they probably went into it a lot greater uh you know a lot more frequent than than we do
i think um so
Max: can i just point out a dynamic that i observe here is that you jimmy are focusing on what you refer to as mystics and you just use the wordshamans as well as if mystics and shamans are a special type of person who use p d in a special type of way – they do it more often than us common folk and so it affects the mystics and the shamans differently to how it affects us common folk, people like the three of us who are not mystics or shamans
[in ep 16 or 26, Kafei says “Per Wm James, I think mystics return soon to the OSC. –cm]
we’re just regular everyday people who sometimes use p d
and i think cyberdisciple’s point is more relevant to the ordinary folk [exclusive sense; excluding mystics –cm] taking p
whereas you jimmy are just focusing on on how mystics and shamans are affected by taking p d and i think what what the ego death theory does it’s more about how ordinary people non-mystics non-shamans who are not special who don’t necessarily take p every day or every week maybe they just have a handful of experiences um in their late teenage years something like that uh it’s it’s more relevant to those people rather than the mystics and the shamans
K: okay no no i agree i i think the reason maybe i emphasize mystics or something is because i’m i’m obviously obsessed with mistakes or shamans
i have you know so many references bookmarks or books on it uh you know i
i’m very intrigued by mystics and and and what they have to say man because i i really feel that they spoke from directly from those experiences um so so
Max: it may very well be the case that there is such a kind of person as a mystic or a shaman and when they take p d and they trp out, either because of something that’s special about them or because of something that’s special about the way that they use p d, and what you the quality you refer to is the frequency of their use that they may use it more often than us ordinary people and that for those special people these mystics they are affected by p in a different way to the way that us ordinary folk like the three of us are affected by taking p do you agree
[K stated just above, that the reason he likes mystics writings is bc those writings are from within the state – he did not say he likes mystics writings b/c mystics have experiencing that is diff than ord ppl have in the ASC–cm]
K: uh well yeah i mean they uh i think we’ve we’ve touched on this once before where um i i mentioned uh uh mercy my uh
marcilio uh facina i think is his name with uh you know he saw himself in uh as uh in time with a a whole row of mystics throughout history that were eventually uh inevitably going to realize this uh you know revelation
um you know uh so there was man if you don’t mind i know you said don’t quote uh
there’s one quote from meister eckhart uh i don’t know if you’ve heard him speak he says uh well
Max: would would you would you class him as a mystery as one of these special people or would you cl right okay so go ahead what’s the quote
K: i he says um you know uh simple people imagine as though uh when they when they meet greet god that god’s gonna stand there there and they hear
he says no no such thing takes place; the eye which i see god is the same uh with which god sees me
uh you know he says uh the knowledge of god – god and i are one in knowledge
you know that uh you know that that’s the way he spoke on the divine and uh you know he was speaking of towards a non-duality
and um you know that’s another thing i wanted to mention because uh i know last time in the email um
michael hoffman uh wrote that he felt that non-dualism was a beginner approach and man i was interesting i don’t know if he knew anything about that of why he would say that but uh what i think meister eckhart was expressing right there was a non-dualism the you know the collapse of the subject object dichotomy uh that occurs at the heights of the
[I question whether Max is accurately representing Kafei’s view below; I doubt Kafei holds the view of “special people” that Max is defining as Kafei’s position/conception –cm]
experience so so jimmy it sounds like what you’re saying is that
when you’re talking about these special people these mystics, the two-state cosmology doesn’t really work because for these special people the two states pretty much collapse into one
[where does Kafei assert the above? CITATION NEEDED –cm] [below, K says (exact machine quote): “i don’t really think there’s much difference between ordinary people and mystics except that maybe mystics just have the experience more often“]
yeah and i wonder why that is yeah i wonder because like uh you know
a lot of gurus will say that you know you could call the maharaj and he’s gonna respond “Yes?” That’s his ego responding you know that they’re so like uh i
i see what you’re saying like
Are they always in that state of mind, or or do they have this uh distinction themselves?
uh man from from what i read they i
i don’t really think that they speak from that i think they speak with their identity in that but i think they they i they have to have some egoic impression, because a lot of the the speeches or the quotes are in response to people who you know what i mean they’re
they’re in response of the of duality
so i i think they have this experience that we experience that you and i are speaking to each other in uh but they’re i think they lose their identity in the material body [Kaf completely loses me when he brings in, out of nowhere, this construct “the material body”. What are his mental connotations of that? –cm] they they don’t you know uh they don’t place their identity there and
[does Max start spkg here?] they don’t get it back they don’t get their identity back when they stop trpping is that what you’re saying?
yeah or uh where when they define
when they try to define themselves they won’t place it in the skin encapsulated ego they’ll see all as one and i think
that’s what you know uh you know that’s what morality overcomes in like if you see everything else as yourself then you can’t uh perform any sin upon it you can’t steal from it you can’t read from it maybe you heard me say that to speed of sound that you know um as long as you have this impression of a division then you can get a one-up on reality but if everything is one then you’re only hurting yourself by hurting the perceived other
you know um so like the
that’s why the mystics are often renowned for their probity because you know they they they’re speaking from that place they’re speaking from an identity where everything is one, where there’s love for all
and and so forth um you know at least that’s so that’s what i get out when i read it
so what i would say is when you’re talking about these mystics um the way that they experience and react to this strong ultimate mystical experience is different from the way that people like us respond and react to the strong mystical experience
Well I’ve, I mean there, I don’t really think there’s much difference between ordinary people and mystics, except that maybe mystics just have the experience more often, uh or something like that.
I don’t really think there’s much difference between ordinary people and mystics, except that maybe mystics just have the experience more often. – Kafei
you know i think the the
the experience they enter into is one of the same with with any person can into enter into because it’s a potential in all of us
uh but you know the but there is you’re right there is a point to people doing it nowadays i i think even the way i i do it is maybe detrimental like i i probably should do it more frequently than once a year um you know i i it would probably benefit me more that way uh i think so i don’t know because i i i’m kind of falling back into unhealthy ways man like drinking a little bit more often stuff like that but um you know but
every individual today i i think it could help it but i don’t think everyone um i think just because people have this experience like i i would consider myself an aspiring mystic i don’t i definitely don’t see myself as a mystic but uh it’s something a potential that i would like to uh possess
man like i think uh you know i think it’s
the experience is beneficial definitely for people, but i don’t think everyone has the calling for that you know to to frequent it, to learn more from it uh to act to you know to allow it to guide your actions and so forth um that i don’t know that
maybe uh there’s a reason why certain people become mystics and some don’t
you know there might be more to it than that and uh there might be you know i i there’s nothing obviously in psychology we can pin down you know, i’ve never read a study that would explain that but i i made i know
terence mckenna would often say you know maybe it’s just a higher calling for some people you know
so what i would say is that
The Egodeath theory isn’t a theory about how these special people these mystics [I question whether Max defines the group “these special people, these mystics” in a way that matches Kafei’s conception –cm] have psyched have um intense mystical experiences and then are changed in in whatever way the way that you’re characterizing it is
that you’re saying that these mystic
these mystics have um intense mystical experiences and then afterwards when they’re back in the ordinary states they live their lives differently or they experience things differently even after the the state has ended
yes? right?
[I don’t hear Kafei affirm that Kafei holds the view that Max is identifying and attributing to Kafei. Kafei does assert, above, that mystics, after returning to OSC, “don’t identify with the material body, skin-enc ego” –cm]
but the ego death theory is more yeah right
but the ego death theory is not really talking about that
that as i said that
that phenomenon might exist; it may very- there may very well be these special people [I am skeptical that Kafei holds that there are such “special people” as Max defines –cm] out there in the world who are transformed in this way so that they come back from their ex their intense tripping experience and then they live differently or they act differently or they perceive differently or something like that yeah
other people people who are not mystics or shamans, they are the people to whom the ego their theory is relevant, right
the ego death theory is talking about how normal people like me and you and cyber disciple and michael hoffman how we would experience p d and then be be affected by it afterwards right
so do you understand the distinction there
Kaf: yeah no i do i’m i’m just kind of like i’m surprised to hear uh you know i guess uh a disagreement there or not a disagreement but i i think
The Argument from Bugs
cyber said he’s not uh too keen on the benefits in the research um i i want to say something i don’t know if you guys can relate to this but one thing that happened another thing that happened to me was uh
i find myself unable to kill insects afterwards
like uh
whereas i used to like swap flies and you know kill them and stuff, i would find myself directing them out the door or or same thing with like a roach or something like that
or i i don’t know if you guys experienced that and like um i remember richard saying something like that he wanted to do a study to see if people how they behaved with insects after the experience because he uh a lot of people were reporting that they were more gentle with insects that they weren’t killing them and stuff like
it was just coming up in the reports and so he wanted to run a study but i remember that occurred with me and like
i remember also reading in jainism like the if you read about the jains they were naked people that that uh worship this you know mystical experience that it was uh you know a practice they engaged in often and uh they were people that had such respect for life that they wouldn’t even harvest potatoes in fear of harming or killing insects you know so i don’t know i’ve always thought of like the jeans
Max?: but but jane’s don’t necessarily they james don’t become jane’s because they’ve had a p experience right they’re probably raised like that that’s a tradition you know they’re raising no they don’t have anything to do-
K: right no i i agree they’re raised like that but that’s what i’m saying it was a it’s a society that was raised in this fashion to cultivate mystical experience and not all of them became arhats the not all of them perfected it like you know um the arhat was the perfected jane um you know someone who mastered the the mystical experience
[reference the masses of completed mystery-religion initiation; routine, everyone can reach mystical Completion –cm]
Max: but what i’m saying is these jainist people who have such a respect for life that they would never kill an insect they don’t become that way because they’ve had a mystical experience right they become that way because that’s how they are raised within their culture and that that’s the moral code that is inculcated into them by their parents and their upbringing and their schooling that kind of thing it’s not as a result of having a massive profound p experience in say your late teenage years right that’s not ever the implication that that’s why someone has become a jedi that’s i mean i was sort of thinking of it in that way that that when you say it’s because the tradition the parents well what were the parents doing but entering into these states you know like there were whole generations of people who cultivated this and that’s why their tradition became that uh at least that’s the way i was interpreting it i mean i don’t know if you were like trying to make a distinction right there
yeah because you you’ve just shifted from saying that it’s you might have a mystical experience and then in your own case you gave the example of yourself you had a mystical experience and then afterwards you stopped killing insects but with jane’s that’s not that’s not typically what a how a jane decides to not kill insects; it’s nothing to do with a strong mystical experience they’ve had it’s just because that’s the moral code
K: oh yeah no i see okay i see the distinction then yes okay yeah now right so
Mx?: that’s that’s the point i’m i’m
I’m really trying to make a sharp distinction between this class of person that you have uh that you are talking about [to the contrary, Kafei stated above: “i don’t really think there’s much difference between ordinary people and mystics except that maybe mystics just have the experience more often” -cm] which is people like meister eckhart you named as a specific example of a mystic um we are not mystics* [instance 1 where Max says that][that depends on what definition – or mis-definition, or mal-definition – of the word ‘mystics’ you use -cm] here, we’re us, having this conversation; we’re not people like that; [like what? what definition? unclear -cm]they are different from us [“] they are special; we are we are not in the same class of people as as mystics* are [what def’n of ‘mystics’ are you holding? no one agrees w/ that def’n -cm] and what i’m saying is the Egodeath theory applies to us rather than applying to mystics*.
[*what def’n of ‘mystics’ are you holding? no one agrees w/ that def’n -cm]
It’s not a theory about how mystics*respond to mystical experience; rather it’s a theory about how the ordinary mind responds to mystical experience
K: oh okay sure i i would figure that maybe it could extend to that being um i i you know i never thought of it as specifically a theory on ordinary minds but –
[the Egodeath theory is not a theory “specifically” <- another ambig word! – The Egodeath theory is a theory about explaining everyone, it is written for everyone, including both subsets of the universal set ‘everyone’: ordinary ppl, and mystics – where ‘mystics’ is defined in a way that people agree upon -cm]
[The Egodeath theory is written so that everyone, including ordinary ppl and mystics, can understand Transcendent Knowledge.
The Egodeath theory is not “specifically” a theory on ordinary minds; the Egodeath theory is a theory on *all* minds, and is constructed & written to be understandable to ordinary ppl as well as understandable to mystics.
The Egodeath theory is a simple, universal theory about how the human mind works in the altered state – regardless of any poorly defined, unstable, not-agreed-upon sets of definitions of the words ‘mystics’, ‘ordinary people’, and ‘everyone’. And variant alternative words such as ‘special people’, and ‘democratic’.
The only person I hear going on and on about “super duper ultra special people that are absolutely beyond all explanation“… is not Kafei. So I don’t know what this conversation-aspect is trying to accomplish other than the apparent goal of being able to say — meaninglessly, irrelevantly, and misleadingly, the implied utterance: “The Egodeath theory has nothing to do with mysticism.” – so long as the word ‘mysticism’ is mal-defined in a way that everyone involved, or maybe even everyone in the world, along with Webster, has rejected.
The Egodeath theory explains how people like us three would experience and respond to the intense p state of consciousness
right okay
Kaf: uh yeah i could see that uh i , i suppose you’re we’re speaking of a mystic* as we’re uh not too sure how they experience uh have have experienced because it may be different from an ordinary mind um yeah because
[*problem term! DEFINE THE KEY TERMS OF THE DISCUSSION SO AS TO GET AGREEMENT ABOUT THE DEF’N. NOT DONE here, so, TALKING PAST EACH OTHER -cm]
Max: exactly you got it exactly right
we don’t know firsthand [we don’t? how do you know? –cm] how mystics* trip and how they* live their lives after they trip and that kind of thing because we are not mystics*, [instance 2 where Max says that] right we are not in that special class of people [but who is defining that class? how does max define it, how does kaf define it, how does max think kaf defines it, etc –cm] we’re just ordinary people who can take p d and have these very amazing experiences and then come back to normal life again and the Egodeath theory in that sense applies to us; it doesn’t apply to any special class* of people; it applies to how Joe Average [I’d say, “Joe Average mystic” –cm] experiences taking mushrooms
[*malformed conversation: there is no agreement among Kafi, Max, & Cyb on Max’s def’n of “there exists a special class”, which Max uses as the (sandy, unstable) foundation of his argumentation -cm]
at some point in their in their uh life but normally it’s like after age 15 or so between age 18 to 25-ish roughly most people first encounter p d
and then they experience it in a certain way and they may or may not be transformed in a certain way and what i’m saying is
the ego death theory is about that it’s not about any special class* of people who you might* refer to as mystics*.
[*or might not–cm]
Kaf: uh yeah sure i mean i i figured that maybe like uh it [the Egodeath theory] could at least comment on it you know what i mean like what would
from the vantage point of Egodeath theoryhow would it describe mystics or something you know what i mean something like that
but uh yeah
Max: he doesn’t, he doesn’t; forget about mystics* forget about mystics* bracket them* off for this part of the conversation we are talking about how people like us would would trip because that’s what’s relevant to us right because we are not mystics* [3rd instance of Max saying this, relying on a term-def’n that there’s no agreement on -cm] why would we why would we be so interested in a theory about people who we are never going to be like [Kaf, Cyb, & Max have not reached agreement on that], who we can never know what it’s like to be those people* [Kaf, Cyb, & Max have not reached agreement on that]; we can only know what it’s like to be ordinary regular everyday people* [poor category definitions; the conversation participants have not established definitions of the categories –cm] and so the Egodeath theory is for us*, Cyberdisciple used the word democratizing* [NEED TO DEFINE PER SET-THEORY; DO YOU MEAN the UNIVERSAL SET, OR, EXCLUDING ELITES? ambiguity of key terms! –cm] and I think that’s a crucial point here: it’s a democratic* theory; it’s not a theory for some ultra-special elite* who we can never hope to understand.
[I hear Max defining this “defined as undefinable and impossible-to-explain” group; I don’t hear Kafei or Cyberdisciple agreeing to Max’s definition of the two groups/subsets of people.
In podcast 16 & 26, every time I hear the idea of “an ultra-special elite”, it’s always Max who is talking, not Kafei.
Whose idea is it, that ‘mystics’ are so alien as to be irrelevant and unfathomable and not an audience or explanandum of the Egodeath theory?
I don’t hear Kafei expressing that extreme idea – citations needed.
Kaf: okay i mean I don’t know if you heard me say earlier, I do consider myself an aspiring mystic.
[Kafei states his disagreement with Max’s subset-definition of ‘mystics’.
Max said 3 times “we are not mystics”.
Kafei says, to the contrary, “I consider myself an aspiring mystic.”
Max also says “I’m not going to comment on whether I would say I’m a mystic, or an aspiring mystic, or a non-mystic.”
And Kafei said “I don’t really think there’s much difference between ordinary people and mystics except that maybe mystics just have the experience more often.”–cm]
but i okay i accept that i mean if you uh
[Kafei doesn’t accept that –cm]
Max: so so you’re so you’re somewhere in between ordinary people and mystics [that’s evidence of failure to effectively define key terms and reach consensus on those def’ns–cm] right I wouldn’t particularly okay
Max, 3 times: “We are not mystics.”
Also Max: “I’m not going to comment on whether I would say I’m a mystic, or an aspiring mystic, or a non-mystic.”
– the result of employing undefined key terms with no consensus.
I’m not gonna comment on whether i would say i’m a mystic or an aspiring mystic or a non-mystic [RED FLAGS! that’s huge evidence of failure to effectively define key terms and reach consensus on those def’ns–cm]
but i am certainly the target audience* of the Egodeath theory
[* The target audience and the explanandum of the Egodeath theory is everyone; how the mind works; the universal set.
The fact the the Egodeath theory is written at 8th-grade level, does not mean that the Egodeath theory isn’t written for post-docs.
The Egodeath theory is written for 8th graders, so that it can be read by everyone at all levels above 7th grade, to explain all minds: how the ASC works, to explain how the mind works in the altered state – which is independent of vague & unstable definitions of the word ‘mystics’. –cm]
i’m i reacted to the p experience in the same way that any any person could i didn’t need a special* badge of being a mystic* [whose definition of ‘mystic’ are we presumably using in this conversation? –cm] to get what i got from p experiencing so i’m just trying to um point out the democratic* element of the ego death theory it’s not- it’s aimed for everybody*
[DANGER: AMBIGUOUS word; do you mean the universal set, or a subset? -cm]
it’s not aimed for some ultra special class* of people; that’s really the point that i’m making [you didn’t succeeed at making your point, b/c you relied on ill-defined terms, sets -cm]
The Diamond Hammer of Interpretation
Kaf: okay no i i definitely hear that and i mean i know uh in your just
you mentioned in your discussion with troy like the diamond hammer interpretation to get straight to the point so no i respect that man
[My semi-mythology-compliant construct, “the diamond hammer of interpretation”, doesn’t mean “getting to the point”, it means: use the strategy of forcing the data (the explanandum) to conform to a firmly committed-to interpretive framework.
Most recently, turn the gem while shine a torchlight through it, to see add’l mytheme-mappings/connections / ADD’L ANALOGIES, like a fractal, you can never identify ALL the analogies of a mytheme. -cm]
Max Emphasizes Two-State as if Kafei Asserts One-State, Fusing ASC/OSC (Citation Needed: Where Does Kafei Take a Position Other than 2-State?)
Max: right so having said that i bring it back to earlier in the conversation what i’m saying is that when we’re talking about ordinary people* very much a two-state cosmology applies which is what the ego death theory brings out which is to say that
we experience time and also control but we’ll get to that later
we experience time and causation in a certain way and then we take d and for a few hours we experience time and causation in a different a very radically different way and then a few hours after that the p experience wears off and we return to the the same experience of time and causation as we had before we tripped
but now we have a memory of the experience that we didn’t have before
so do you agree with with that shape of how ordinary* people take p and experience them
Kaf: no yeah absolutely everything would be set up to that point was i think pretty much sums up what we were talking about
Max: right because i felt like when you started to involve the subject of special people*, mystics* into the conversation you collapsed the two-state distinction
[CITATIONS NEEDED – Where does Kafei “collapse the 2-state distinction?”
Kafei said “I don’t really think there’s much difference between ordinary people and mystics, except that maybe mystics just have the experience more often.” -cm]
and I want to keep that two-state distinction alive [who is saying otherwise? citation needed -cm] because because it’s relevant to us it’s relevant to the way that we experience p
there are yep sure
Kafei: i didn’t mean to imply that it’s permanently collapsed
i mean even in the writings of William James they always speak of the mystical experience as ephemeral as you know short-lived it’s not something that is permanent
In the writings of William James they [mystics] always speak of the mystical experience as ephemeral; as you know short-lived; it’s not something that is permanent. – Kafei
uh and and you know yeah there’s a lot of uh talk in you know and uh mystical uh amongst theologians there’s arguments and stuff uh i don’t know if you’ve heard of um like whether christ was fully man or fully god or or both in between or so on and so forth you know they they
the reason they i think they have these arguments is because they don’t they’re they either are maybe unaware of the mystical experience or they see they are they don’t they’re not too sure of the nature of it
you know i i
I think William James is right, it’s [the mystic altered state is] ephemeral; it’s not something that’s permanent. You couldn’t- You couldn’t act if it was permanent.
like uh you know right so so william james
Max|Kaf? In that sense William James is correct and his thinking is in line with the Egodeath theory in specifying that the intense mystical experience which you get when you take doze is ephemeral; it’s time-bounded.
You experience ordinary the the ordinary state and then you temporarily experience the altered state and then you return to the ordinary state.
And for most people people like us we have lives to live we have jobs to do we can’t spend all of our time in the intense mystic state.
It’s a limited thing that you might do once a year you might do it five times a year whatever but you’re not in it all the time.
So the two-state model clearly applies right. [who is saying otherwise? citation needed. cm]
you cannot escape from this reality of two separate states of consciousness: the one that you’re in by default all of the time; and then the one that you’re only in for a small minority of your waking life which is the p experience
so all i’m i’m really trying to hammer this concept that the Egodeath theory is a two-state theory [where did anyone say otherwise? citation needed -cm] and that that’s the only way that it could be practically and realistically relevant to ordinary people* which are after all its target audience* it’s not aimed at some special class* of people that we can never be; we could we could aspire to be, but we may never succeed in our aspirations.
[* HUGE PROBLEM, UNDEFINED TERMS/SETS, & subsets, WITH NO CONSENSUS AMONG THE CONVERSATION PARCIP’S.
THE CONVERSATION is officially jumped the tracks, in the weeds, left the road. UNDEFINED SETS/SUBSETS OF TERMS/PEOPLE -cm]
🐐🐑🐄🐮🚙 🐐🐄🐄
[Kafei has asserted that mystics are subject to two states. Does he ever deny that? CITATIONS NEEDED. -cm]
Max: it doesn’t, the Egodeath theory doesn’t demand that* of us, it just asks that we be ordinary people* experiencing d the way that any normal person* would experience including um you referenced earlier like people in a trailer park who play xbox all day well it might be slightly more refined people that than that people who are maybe like you who don’t just sit playing xbox all day but aside from your regular life where you work and you have your relationships and your family that kind of thing you also like to be an autodidact and to read a lot of books and inform yourself um
the Egodeath theory is relevant to [so, the Egodeath theory is irrelevant to mystics? this train has certainly jumped the tracks -cm] that broad swathe of people which inc which includes people like yourself the the smarter people the the autodidacts the readers among us and also to the the trailer park people who don’t necessarily read a lot of books but they just play xbox all day but they might also take mshrms sometimes in their life right
so the ego death theory is democratic* [= the universal set, or a subset excluding elites? UNDEFINED KEY TERM -cm] whereas the model of mystic* i wouldn’t say mysticism* rather mystichood*, being a mystic* is not very democratic* because it demands that you be a part of this ultra special elite class* of people
[Who is defining a special class, and how are they actually, defining that class? I only hear Max striving strenuously to define an emphatically super-special group… and then end up nonsensically implying that the Egodeath theory has nothing to do with mysticism.
Citations needed, for where Kafei allegedly defines a super-special group, that Max strains to define and then attach to Kafei, against Kafei’s repeated protestations.
Is Max referring to Kafei’s Argument from Bugs? -cm]
Max: right does that make sense
Kaf: yeah that makes sense and i i mean
i’m not too sure you know mystics become mystics by their own you know um uh it could be you know by their own uh volition
you know like sometimes i think for them
for some of them it’s just it’s natural like a mystical experience becomes natural to them or or but i mean some of them go through hardships like some of them will lock their stories like anthony the great he locked himself into a hut for like over 30 years and he would get food from a little hole in the wall and people thought that he was going to emerge like mad and you know like you know crazy but he came out healthy serene and enlightened
so yeah i mean it took him a while but i mean he you know he became a mystic that way
but it’s i don’t know i just that’s why i find mystics interesting
[Kafei rejects Max’s set of set-theory definitions:]
i don’t think they’re necessarily like an elite class of uh i i think um there
they may be just being aware of people when that that they somehow find that they listen to that higher calling
like like i was mentioning earlier uh you know like um because
I don’t think you necessarily have to be some elite person to be a mystic.
I don’t think you necessarily have to be some elite person to be a mystic. – Kafei
uh like a lot of the mystics were developed in the early ages by uh poverty uh you know they didn’t want to live poorly inside the town so they retreated to the the hills where they had the mystics had temples and stuff like that and they would accept them in so you know and and sometimes it would become a mystic that way so you know there’s it gets really deep man like uh i think some of max’s point here is that that would still be a small percentage of a population who would do that and thus it is some sort of identifiable group right whereas we’re our are like interested in the theory as it potentially applies to everyone
because it’s simply saying here’s a quick explanation for easily summarizable explanation of like what is what goes on in this altered state of consciousness and the loose-sinned cognition state that feeling of eternalism and a certain feeling of not being in control of the future of one’s own future thoughts
boom simple easily digestible by people by anyone but when you say apply to everyone of course you’re excluding mystics or no i’m not i don’t mean to exclude mystics i think some of um some of the stuff some of the thoughts i’ve been having in this conversation have been about the um you know mysticism as a social role as a cultural role that there’s and maybe even a mode of writing for example a lot of our ideas about what mysticism is comes from certain texts well that’s also a genre of writing to write mystical literature is a genre of writing that has certain conventions ways of talking etc um and
there can be a tendency to say well that that’s all that mysticism is is the genres of is you know it’s what has been written down about mysticism
and i think
that’s something that max i find really appealing about looking at the egodeath theory is that it stands outside of that; it looks at that, and kind of can talk to it, talk to those genres of writing, and all these definitions of what mysticism is, um and address it; but it also stands outside of that and is kind of its own
yeah i know i i agree that and you know that when you say democratize that it’s you know it’s probably more relevant to speak of ordinary people because that’s the majority of people are ordinary people and you know i mean
the only reason i mentioned i would mention mystics is that i find a lot of the you know the terms in mystical theology interesting like i’ve mentioned i i mean i i said i don’t think i mentioned the term but hypostatic union uh you know that uh where they’re discussing whether christ is uh both the in the both states at once or are completely in the other state and so forth you know like they
there’s interesting discussion that goes there that i i thought that might be relevant
but uh no
i don’t mind taking in the direction of just speaking towards ordinary people because that is more relevant to most people
right right
so given this sharp distinction between the mystics and the ordinary people and we’ve said how the ego death theory is really only relevant to the ordinary people looking at that then what the ego death theory is saying about ordinary people is that the two-state model of uh
Max’s Extremist Definition of ‘Mystics’ as “the 1-State Model”
[Max is evidently using this set of definitions, which I doubt anyone involved agrees with:
‘mystics’ = 1-state model. fuse asc/osc. <- where the heck is Max picking this up??
‘ordinary people’ = 2-state model.
For Max, to assert and discuss the 2-state model, is to not discuss the hypothetical group he calls “mystics”. The egodeath theory asserts the 2-state model, therefore, according to Max’s misguided definition of ‘mystics’ as 1-state, he can then say the misleading statement, “The Egodeath theory doesn’t apply to mystics.”
What the heck is Max reading so as to get this firm, complete impression of “mystics are the people who fuse the altered state & the ordinary state”?
I sure don’t see that extreme position coming from Kafei; extremist citations of Kafei are needed, from Max, to counter the moderate citations of Kafei which I highlighted in this machine transcription.
If Kafei is weird the way he keeps running-off to “high d0se” (probably in episode 16), Max is being weird in this episode that way he keeps running-off to the topic of 2-states, AS IF Kafei were asserting a 1-state definition of ‘mystics’ – which I’m barely seeing Kafei assert.
IS MAX COUNTERING SOME 1-STATE POSITION ABOUT MYSTICS THAT KAFEI ASSERTED IN SOME OTHER, TEXT EXCHANGE WITH KAFEI? MAX SURE VERY MUCH ACTS LIKE IT. PUZZLING. -cm]
there’s the ordinary state and the p state is firmly fixed you can’t escape from it you’re in the default state of consciousness ordinarily all the time from when you wake up in the morning to when you go to sleep at night and it’s only when you take mushrooms and then for a few hours you experience this very different state of cognition um which is also a different a different feeling of the way that time and causation works to how you do when you’re in the ordinary state of consciousness that’s a central point that the ego death theory is bringing out and explaining okay
right and and furthermore it goes into more detail than that because it further specifies that the ordinary state of consciousness is characterized as uh what what you’ve said is like an unfolding in time from when i wake up in the morning to when i sleep at night i feel this constant onward moving progression of events which seems to be linked by certain causal rules which which um determine the outcome of certain causes so things tend to go only in a specific way like i know that if i uh flick the light switch that the light’s gonna turn on and i would be surprised if it didn’t happen that way that’s ordinary causation and then that is sharply contrasted with the way that causation appears in the mystic altered state the p intense p state of consciousness where again as you have said with reference to your own experience that model of causation doesn’t apply anymore because if you’re tripping hard enough it can feel as if time has already fully unfolded and that there is only one eternal moment when everything happens right which is the as we also identified that’s the block universe determinism model which is also called eternalism and it’s very profoundly radically different from the model of determinism that applies to the ordinary state which is ongoing progressive causal unfolding right so there’s a two-state model i’m really hammering that point home for ordinary ordinary people the way that we experience p it divides life into two separate states of consciousness most of the time you’re not tripping causation works a certain way in this limited space of time when you’ve taken d you are tripping and for that limited period of time where your body is metabolizing the d causation works a different way does that all make sense no i really like the way you put it there man i agree with all that um there was um i one thing i guess when cyber was talking to me earlier about this distinction um i wanted to mention that in that state where you said you know all time has already unfolded um and then you could return to the baseline he returns to the roadline you know uh the causal determinant determinism or the impression of it and
when i was in that experience i i didn’t necessarily have the insight that when i when i returned to the baseline i was returning to this one world fixed world line uh and because in that experience it almost felt as though uh the my perception was of all world lines that could ever be you know so it was kind of hard to come back and realize oh everything’s just one world line
uh you know like or
the impression that i have in and now is that um you know that uh cosmic law that everything’s fixed in time
and i it was
that’s what i meant by it wasn’t readily discernible uh when i when i returned to the baseline uh
but it was um it was something that was in the back of my mind though it wasn’t it wasn’t something that was revelatory in the front of my mind you know like as in ramish’s revelation but uh
it was something in the back of my mind that i had a suspicion of and you know
that’s what caused me to to go to google and and find ramesh and michael’s website
um i mean that’s all i wanted to add to that so
what you call it what what you call a suspicion can i ask
do you think that the re that you could equally say it’s a memory that you have you have the suspicion that there’s this other way that things could be but it’s because of the memory of the altered state, is that right?
yeah you know it was right and i think i don’t know if you remember i think of my the first email that you told me to throw at you if even if it was unfinished i i did that and um you know like i think uh i i had mentioned
in some talk where terence talks about uh belster i mean i don’t know if you’ve heard bells theorem or like they said that uh every atom that was ever associated with each other like that would mean everything because at one point all atoms were supposed to each other in the big bang no matter how far they’ve come apart in time and space are still instantaneously connected somehow and this is a bell’s theorem
and so he thought well you know something like that must exist to account for the informational content of the p experience i
in that very same spirit or fashion i feel that i felt the same way towards uh you know um i guess eternalism like uh even though i had glimpsed it inside the memory of that the experience um i
i had glimpsed you know like i said it was more i i i had the impression that everything could probably be part of one world line because i i had a an impression of seeing all possible world lines in the experience
but it wasn’t uh it wasn’t something that i recognized right away i guess that’s the only thing i was trying to say it wasn’t something that uh hit me with with force it was something that i kind of had to um be pushed into a little bit and but i the whatever influenced me you know
obviously there was something there because i was influenced to search determinism i was influenced to somehow find ramesh and and michael’s website so there had to be something there they had you know
this decision the suspicion um of eternalism
uh you know i i don’t know if you get what i’m saying man like it wasn’t directly the insight wasn’t directly to return and realize this one worldline because the insight was seeing all possible world lines you know like in any universe in any universe that occurred not just ours like that
that was the impression i had in the experience that it was just every single possibility that could ever be like you said all time um unfolded already but but uh you know
it wasn’t necessarily i
i didn’t necessarily have the idea of any specific you know world line when i came back
uh uh you know i it was uh that somehow uh got influenced later when i started reading ramesh and i i it just appeared to make too much sense to ignore
uh that’s how it hit me i don’t know how i mean i i think you spoke about how you got introduced in the first episodes of the Transcendent Knowledge podcast with uh cyber
Cyb: jimmy can i ask if can i ask you a question about that since you’re talking about that experience more was that accompanied by i mean
did you hmm feel you feel any sense of panic about that about seeing all those world lines
do you feel a sense of um unease or discomfort or a sense of uh lacking your usual kind of your usual way of of being able to make decisions and alter the future and things like that
Kafei: i i i would say
it only occurred before the height and after because at the very height i wasn’t able to do much at all you know i was just uh my body was just basically lying there on the ground but my mind became that fractal mentality pattern like nothing else there was nothing else that existed
but that you know and uh and so like uh
but prior to it oh yes man i feared for my life i thought i was gonna die man
i uh i was begging my brother to stick his fingers on my throat so i could vomit the mshrms but he he didn’t have any compassion he was like man if they’re already in you if they’re going to kill you they’re going to kill you he didn’t want to put his fingers in my mouth
and um you know and
afterwards like i said i had to see that what max related to acedia that it was like overwhelming
[McFakea secretly stopped using, for the same reason (while continuing to broadcast the recommendation that everyone else should use extreme intensity “like i do”, misrepresenting himself): -cm]
it was i guess it was like egoic minds trying to return after you know after the experience and there was this overwhelming boredom you know like because everything already had occurred there was nothing to do like so i i wanted to end that and the only way i could perceive ending that or a chance of ending it was suicide
but before before that became a possibility i i realized the reason that that whole thought process was even occurring at all was because i was coming down and uh yeah i was finally able to sit up and like uh return to to the baseline
Cyb?: so you were you were worried about your capacity your capability to even do anything
Kaf: oh yeah yeah at the height i wasn’t yeah everything became the mandala
Cyb?: about even your thoughts about what thought would come next what you would think of next what you could be made to think
Kaf: oh yeah yeah i mean that all that all that completely disappeared yeah that’s why i always thought it was weird when terrance would talk about the the d-t statement i’ve never had … i don’t know if you’ve had … but i’ve only had ps and you know of course it is much more long-lasting it lasts hours as opposed to minutes or seconds and uh
i’ve parents would often say that … the part that you consider yourself is intact like the egoic mind you’re able you’re still able to think but you’re just like what the [ _ ] happened to reality you know and
i didn’t really have that with suicide been like um either i think there was a point at the very height where the that egoic chatter just is silent you know and it’s just it becomes just the the mandalic fractal that represents eternalism or what have you
um that’s at least how i experienced it and i every time i do it i try to i try to achieve that when i take p you know like that’s what i want to happen
um
but you know i’m every time i do it i’m i still get nervous i’m still afraid like you always have you know a lot of people are afraid of like whether you’re not going to come back you know you’re not going to return to the baseline
like i don’t know if you did you did you have that fear yeah i think i have that fear every time i do it
but uh you know because i you
i don’t know if you read about the monks that that uh that meditate in the mountains and they freeze to death i always wonder like why that happens could it be that they just they enter the state and don’t return you know and they get frozen in that posture
um you know so that i mean i don’t know i’m just speculating but but uh it’s speculation like that that keeps me afraid of p man um i you know i’m not uh i i still take high amts uh but i uh you know like i i i plan to … 2020 but i haven’t gotten around to it man because because of everything that happened but you know it’s whole stupid uh you know v… but uh i i mean it’s still uh still on the bucket list it’s
Cyb: the story you mentioned there about the monks freezing on the mountain and the earlier one about anthony the great locking himself in a s i think he said a stone room
those sound like very uh there’s some like good stories to interpret in the uh as analogy for altered state experiencing in which one is trapped in the block universe and perhaps freezes to death when it’s frozen there and dies on the mountainside on the rock while you’re meditating or in the altered state
yeah yeah i agree and the same thing that the anthony that anthony’s story would be a story of everyone thought he was trapped in the room and wasn’t going to survive but miraculously he survived and emerged enlightened this can all be that can fit my my analogy interpretive mind is going now as you’re mentioning these stories
that’s i mean to me that’s the value of a lot of these stories is the imagery of them uh to not so much about how we’re going to actually behave in our day-to-day lives but the imagery thereof to uh to express the express what happens in the altered state
Kaf: no i agree i absolutely agree that’s well you know that’s one of the reasons i mentioned mystical theology because they do have stories that can bring insight into a discussion like this
because imagine if you didn’t have the Egodeath theory, well you know, what would you rely upon you know and uh you know you would have to of course look towards scriptural source uh you know i practice hermeneutics and things like that like very intensely uh exegetical you know readings of scripture uh you know i things like i look into things like lectio divina you know the way the mystics would read text they wouldn’t simply read text they would be practicing you know these uh altered states and then come back to the text and they wouldn’t uh read it and try to intellectually interpret it they would now resonate with the text now having had the experience because the entire scripture is based out of the experience
you know there’s a lot of mystics that spoke towards that that you know the text ultimately doesn’t matter because it it’s something uh that’s that’s uh just a a remnant or a a byproduct of the experience itself of direct experience that’s what’s truly emphasized that’s what really if you pay attention i mean if you’re really paying attention i think what all religions are pointing to are is one’s direct experience of it
Max: right but jimmy so um that pushed the conversation slightly into the domain of analogy or metaphor which is a thing that we haven’t really touched on yet which i think we need to touch on later on in this conversation but just to bring it back a bit in response to the question that cyber disciple asked you
he was basically asking the experience that you had did it include these features which are not feeling like you’re not in control and also feeling fear and panic and i think that you emphatically answered yes to both of those questions you in this first mshrm trp that you had where you took … you experienced uh a feeling of block universe determinism and you experienced a feeling of fear and panic and you experienced a feeling of not being in control would you agree that you experienced those three things
Kaf: i agree and and i i think even the i was even more fearful than control like i you know to lose my volition uh really wasn’t i what was being sucked out of my life at that point was mystery itself it was like mystery was being sucked out of life
and and uh you know and if i i guess when i came back from that experience what you realize right away is like wow i i didn’t realize like yin and yang ignorance is very necessary to have any experience at all
that’s what i became grateful for because you see if if you were omniscient in some intellectual sense there would be no reason for me to speak right now because he would know every single thing i was going to say so it’d be no point to that
[why McK secretly stopped using:]
uh so you know that’s like you staying in that state of mind there’s no reason to stay in the state of that state of consciousness that’s kind of what it taught me and like so um what i feared the most was like all mystery of life disappearing because that’s what felt like was happening like all mystery was just being sucked out of life completely and so it until there was no mystery left
and um you know so uh it wasn’t necessarily like the will that was being emphasized but it is it’s in a way the same thing you know if
if there’s no mystery there’s there’s nothing to do there’s nothing to will there’s you know that it’s there’s nothing to control
so it is i think it’s just one way of saying the same thing it is fear of uh uh the mystery being gone is also a fear of you know losing control i think they’re one of the same thing
right right it sounds like what you’re saying is that in your particular experience that one time there was le you wouldn’t really strongly characterize it as a feeling of loss of control
but you would still characterize it as an experience of block universe determinism where everything had already happened and as you said there’s no more mystery to life because there’s nothing new that could possibly happen everything has already happened
plus coupled with a feeling of um it sounds almost like depression that you’re describing but also you had a feeling of a feeling of suicidality and panic
Kaf: yes i think that was uh like like i said i think it was more on the climb and in the come down rather than at the height because at the height like it was just the experience itself like there wasn’t i don’t think there was an ego any anymore there to fight with the experience of what was going on or to try to try to control anything um everything just became the
oh right okay yeah right so there is there is an element of non-control in this peak of the experience you you just said
yes exactly okay so i mean that um it certainly sounds from from my point of view like that that experience you you are describing is classically typically in line with what the ego death theory explains which is that you can model the intense p experience in terms of loss of control and block universe determinism
there’s nothing i hear in your description of the experience that contradicts that
it’s only when you start bringing in other thinkers other writers people like ramesh balsacar these mystics like um meister eckhart these people that you start to try to veer off of this um this very narrow limited and precise characterization of what mystical experience is about
if you’re just talking about your own experience it’s very clear that what you experienced was block universe determinism all time had already unfolded panic attack and suicidal feelings wanted wanting to end your own life also desperately wanting to end the experience by by inducing vomiting um and uh yeah and yeah panic fear
these are all the the core phenomena that the ego death theory identifies it’s so i’m saying it’s only really when you start to try to interpret it in the light of other writers that you have um read and other ideas that you’ve heard that you start kind of veering off that
yeah i mean it’s it’s hard not to uh i mean i i do have i guess my own understanding but uh you can’t be led astray by semantics especially you know of other writers uh or even like uh man i mean uh
King Ego Steering Among Branching Possibilities in a Tree – Quantum Multiverse Version: I Am the Creator of My Future Worldline, Now with Multiverse Hyper-Drive Power Added
something we haven’t maybe we’ll talk about it later uh i mean i’ll i’ll mention it real quick but i mean i’m pretty sure you you’ve heard of the multiverse or the um you know many worlds theory and it says like uh theories that say that not only does every decision you make uh create a different universe but it extends to like every collapse of a waveform every collision of atoms every event no matter how minuscule or insignificant that we’re not even aware of proliferates multiple time frames uh you know it doesn’t make sense obviously we kind of wrap our heads around it and uh it may be that we’re not confined to one timelines we could be living some uh timeline simultaneously or infinite number of timelines uh you know the idea of fractal universe infinite amount of fractal universes is that they’re constantly changing and moving like a type of cells a type of cells just washing over the world just you know back and forth never ends but why not right why reality
Max: i think uh jimmy if i could just try and bring what you’re saying now into more into this the terminological lines of the ego death theory what you’re saying is that to clarify or maybe extend the concept of block universe determinism in in the light of your own personal experience
when you tr-p … what you’re saying is that you didn’t just experience block universe determinism in the sense that everything had already happened in this world
you’re saying that it went further than that and that you were experiencing a sense that everything had already happened in this world and every other possible world so everything that could possibly happen exactly in any universe had already happened right so it was ultra ultra ultra block universe you could almost say maybe block multiverse determinism yeah anything that could ever happen in any possible world had already happened is that what you’re saying
Kaf: no no you got it you hit the [ _ ] now on the head man that’s exactly what i’ve been trying to articulate the past maybe hour or so but i i think you’ve you’ve said it really man i i couldn’t have said it might better myself yeah that’s exactly what i’ve been trying to say that
i didn’t get this impression of one world line; i had this impression of every single world line that could ever be and and so like uh it wasn’t yeah like i said it wasn’t readily discernible that that we know that this universe only consists of one possible worldline but it was this world
Max: yeah right right okay um with that i would actually quite like to wind this conversation up um in case my my brain turns to much but i would like to revisit this i i think we should do this again ideally another trialogue as soon as possible if that’s okay with the both of you
oh i’m totally cool with it max i love i love speaking to you man uh yeah i definitely would love to do it again man i’d be happy to yeah this is great
new page: Cognitive Phenomenology of Mind Manifestation – w/ the Cybermonk treatment: headings, tons of white space, this is not for a backup but is for interspersed commentary and bolding. Article by Author.
new page: he asked me “Can we have stable control?” THE question!
new page: announce fairy fare. w/ Dr. Secret & the Evil M. Hoffman
at sgc page invite ppl.
Houot page: every time say name as: Houot (“Ooh-Oh”)
read aloud voice recording Houot article about surrenderism Pilot Ship.
” huge red flag: why no ‘surrenderism’ discussion??!! compare Janikian’s good book giving folk surrenter advice”.
search link add in categs in site map
add site map section A. M. Houot
fill in bk review template for Hermetic Spirituality and the Historical Imagination: Altered States of Knowledge in Late Antiquity, by Wouter Hanegraaff, 2022
fill in bk review template for Rise of the Psychonaut: Maps for Amateurs, Nonscientists and Explorers in the Psychedelic Age of Discovery, A. M. Houot (“Ooh-Oh”), Feb. 3, 2025, https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DPSJGMFR (paperback, ebook, & audiobook)
Older than March 23, 2025:
Hatsis Methodology – add my comments at start & end of Egodeath Mystery Show Ep81:
Ep81a 1:58-2:48 –
“I just posted the Thomas Hatsis Guide to Exemplary Historiographical Methodology. A new page at the site. So if you’re interested in professional-level ideal historian conduct, how to omove the field forward most effectively and collaborate harmoniously with other leading-edge thinkers in the field, be sure to read my page, where I’ve extracted carefully, what makes Hatsis so ideal, such a model of exemplary historiographical methodology? And I think I’ve got it nailed, I’ve managed to extract and carefully study the ways that Hatsis conducts himself that makes him the paradigm of historiographical methodology of how to, how to get, reach 100% efficiency at collaborating with others to push the field forward on a sure-footed way, using his water-tight methodologies.”
Ep81b: 2:01:44-2:02:03 –
“My most valuable thing I’ve ever written was I extracted Thomas Hatsis’ exemplary Historiographical Methodology. This really blows away any enlightenment experience I’ve ever had was figuring out Thomas Hatsis’ methodology is empowering me far more than any study of Transcendent Knowledge.”
Per Site Map’s Scheme:
Finish implementing and testing this scheme.
Learn and leverage and explain WordPress’ Category scheme. This Site Map probably amounts to a custom re-implementation of WordPress’ Category scheme, where each webpage can appear in multiple categories.
Egodeath Mystery Show – Clips Episodes, Standard mp3 Filename Pattern
Rename Episode Feb 8b to Add Keywords “Drums on the Wing”
Rename/re-upload: “2021-02-08b Egodeath Mystery Show.mp3” as “2021-02-08b Egodeath Mystery Show – Drums on the Wing.mp3″
Removing Critique from 02-10c Dancing Stability (low-pri)
“2021-02-10c Egodeath Mystery Show – Dancing Stability.mp3” – remove critique of the 8b clip; paste fresh copy of cleaned-up clip. Finding: After the critique of the 8b clip, I restarted the 8b clip from the beginning. This reduces the priority of this item; I didn’t ruin the playing of the clip, except by prepending a random sampling/critique of the clip prior to playing cleanly the entire clip.
Rename Episode “Feb 8b Clips” to Add Keywords “Drums on the Wing”
Rename / re-upload: “2021-02-08b Clips – Egodeath Mystery Show.mp3” as “2021-02-08b Clips – Egodeath Mystery Show – Drums on the Wing.mp3″ Add intro/outro? Need a “Clips” piece/leader.
Make Utility Clip that Says “Clips”
Make a “Clips” piece/leader, for “clips” episodes versions.
Do Another Remix of Cleaned-Up Clips from “Drums on the Wing” Episode
Remix (reverb + eq) the clips- (better than “2021-02-08b Clips Fx – Egodeath Mystery Show.mp3” to form: “2021-02-08b Clips Fx2 – Egodeath Mystery Show – Drums on the Wing.mp3″
Could Remix Cleaned-up (1st half only; first 16 minutes; Feb 27) Mic Recording of track “clips 210210_2242” in: “/Volumes/TK Audio 2/Egodeath Mystery Show/2021-02-10c Egodeath Mystery Show – Dancing Stability/” “2021-02-10c Egodeath Mystery Show – Dancing Stability.aup”
Possible Topics for Egodeath Mystery Show
EQ demo. Phaser.
Cognitive Phenomenology of Psychedelics article
Demo technique: live reamping of mic, or “live re-miking”.”02-08b clips” (in DR-05’s Playlist)
“02-10c v2 clips” (in DR-05’s Playlist)
live incoming .wav (mic deck DR-05)
razor-blade slicing/sequencing the blades recording :”02-10c v2″
audio editing adventures. fluff words.
Hanegraaff’s irrelevant Western Esotericism.
breaking apart run-on statements.
How it went, with realtime revoicing experiment.
Testing the new show-template approach. Reducing show overhead while keeping structure available.
Deprecated the Agenda page. Work within the idea development page instead. Address the scrolling problem by using breadcrumbs.
Moved episode template to dedicated new page.
Todo list, in the idea development page & Todo page.
Top pri: give keywords to the 02-08b files: ” – Drums on the Wing”
Re-release “Feb 7 Plastic Cloud” episode of Egodeath Mystery Show.
Created new audio project file: “2021-02-07a Egodeath Mystery Show – Plastic Cloud.aup”
Conjoin the two Eleusis satire readings at the end.
Re-export mp3, re-upload, announce.
Research how Communication = Cybernetics.
Connect my miking/voicing research, incl double-reading, to Cybernetics.
Log of library of voice recordings of multiple types.
p0 Clean up Transcendent Knowledge Podcast pages.
Do read-only assessment sweep, note problem spots here.
Fix those spots.
Note other spots.
p1 vocalization practice: vary pitch exercises, eg read text aloud.
p2 PRIORITIZE TODO items, clean up.
p2 Build-out the Announcement pages (Home Pages) for each component-theory of the egodeath theory:
Add the std subsections, incl linked TOC entries. 80% done. Core Concepts, Key Phrases, Key Mythemes, Theory Concepts (Meta-Theory). Like done in loosecog page.
Fill-in something — leads, to more research — in each subsection of all 1+2+8 pages = 11 pages. 30% done.
p3 Check email.
p2 Clean up Proof/Canter/Methodology article:
p0 List the ramifications of the image and of my having decoded it.
Record the history:
1. I added Vial rebuttal in Hatsis book page.
2. Brown inquired if Egodeath community doc’d Criteria.
3. I created the Criteria article.
4. That spawned the Proof article.
Date on which I rebutted Vial.
DATE ON WHICH BROWN ASKED WHETHER WE DEFINED CRITERIA.
DATE I STARTED CRITER ARTICLE.
DATE I ADDED CANTER TO CRIT ARTICLE.
DATE I MOVED CANTER SECTION 11 PAGES INTO SEP “PROOF” ARTICLE AFTER THE LITTLE SECTION GREW TO 11 PAGES AND RISING FAST. HOW MUCH HAD I SOLVED, THAT WAS LIKE 6 HOURS OF DECODING-WORK ON THE BLURRY YELLOW NO-CONTEXT CROP OF MUSHROOM TREE.
HOW MANY DAYSS TO (MOSTLY) SOLVE TOP ROW?
HOW MANY DAYS TO (MOSTLY) SOLVE WHOLE IMAGE EG HE’S DUMBER THAN AN OX.
p3 Find Samorini’s Plaincuourault article. Maybe email Brown & Cyb.
p3 Find when I solved Heph = solved Hatsis Salam “dancing man”. End of 2015?
Precursors to that: turn right to remember, limping king, Hephaestos.
Postcursors: applied dancing-man decoding, in Nov 2020, to decode and crack open and then fully decode/transcribe the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image.
p3 Site Map: Check placement of supporting articles for Proof article.
p3 Further decode myth story: Agraulos Herse Cecrops Athena Hephaestus GIRLS SEE SNAKE ROCK CLIFF SUICIDES. Been posting about that for some time.
Maybe create a page to bring my decoding writings together, gather the work. Or just a fresh treatment writeup.
Format for a Mytheme-Decoding page: In a protected section of the page, keep a CLEAN, comment-free version of the story; stop the awful losing of the story b/c of my inserting commentary.
p3 Trace trajectory of decoding {tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism, 2011-2014. What diff’c Nov 2011, Nov 2012, Nov 2013?
p3 Add my latest Simplified Summary Statements of the egodeath theory.
Related to Digest 183 of the Egodeath Yahoo Group.
From local file ED_topost.md or ED_topost2.md.
Scope out what’s in those text files, including posts that didn’t make it into the digests of Egodeath Yahoo Group.
p3 (Std formatting of WordPress pages) Breadth-first sweep: in pages that have empty TOC template, add only two headings (linked) — no more than two.
p3 Replace the word ‘Hatsis’ by the phrase “Resolute/ Committed Deniers of Mushrooms in Christianity“; “(the) Mushroom Deniers“; allow Letcher and Hatsis to change positions.
Move the focus of the field from Amanita, Christianity, Surface Form, Low Esotericism to Psilocybe, Greek+Christianity, Experiential Effects, High Esotericism
Keep the substance of the arguments, delete the namecalling & emotion, but try to keep 100% of the strength / clarity of assertion, eg:
Keep neutral wording such as “illogical, self-contradictory, unjustified presupposition, conflict of interest”.
Mockery is legit form of argument. “Travesty”, “makes a mockery of scientific historiographical methodology”.
A NEUTRAL, POLITE, SOFT-SPOKEN TONE MEANS BEING FEEBLE AND INEFFECTIVE LIKE ROBERT GRAVES — IN EFFECT, HAVING NO MESSAGE.
Clean up the page that I sent (as URL) to Hatsis.
My main point lately: move the central focus of the field from “Amanita per Allegro in Christianity” to “Psilocybe in Greek and Christian Religion”.
How Ahistoricity factors/complicates/tangles.
Tighten the outline of Hatsis’ errors (most are errors of a school of thought, the Committed Deniers of Mushrooms in Christianity) eg Brinckmann-Panofsky-Wasson-Letcher-Hatsis) and corrections of those errors; what Hatsis needs to do instead.
Error 1: Hatsis’ (or, the field’s) mistake: __. What Hatsis (or, the field) needs to do instead: __.
Error 2: Hatsis’ (or, the field’s) mistake: __. What Hatsis (or, the field) needs to do instead: __.
Search terms: near mushroom images in all pages, put search terms such as:
Psilocybe cubensis mushrooms
Liberty Cap mushrooms
Amanita muscaria mushrooms
mushrooms in Christian art
Christianity mushrooms
Christ Amanita muscaria
Christ Psilocybe cubensis mushrooms
Christ Liberty Cap mushrooms
Christ mushrooms
Jesus mushrooms
angel mushrooms
Greek art mushrooms
Greek mythology mushrooms
Group the entries in Core Concepts page, Key Mythemes page, & Theory Concepts page.
Nest the TOC dup entries.
Then move the entries into that order. Link either the main phrase, or all of them.
Use Synonym-list entries more; use dup entries less. Merge duplicate Concept-Section Entries. Indicate clearly that they are multiple label-phrases & acronym-handles of a single concept.
Pri3: In IP page, fill-in names of the component-theories. Announce-pages.
Pri3: Update TOC in idea development page 8.
See if these sections would be good to create a new page. “against mysticism writings”
glean from the Egodeath Yahoo Group whether I read World Mythology books before announcing the maximal entheogen theory of religion.
History of my Caduceus decoding – CHECK FOR POSTS NOV ~29 2013 TODO WHEN DID I FIGURE OUT CADUCEUS, ADD THAT TO THE HISTORY DATES PAGE.
Pri5: Does the whole university library system REALLY lack Allegro’s book?
Develop streamlined approach to podcast commentary comments.
Pri4: email Freke, no reason
Pri3: Document the Diamond Hammer of Interpretation 🔨💎🔥🔦📖 incl shining light at different angles (a useful new twist today [January 6, 2021])
Pri3: Listen to more of Max’s Psychonautica podcasts.
In my Podcast page, in the new, Psychonautica section, add link to my audio spot: “You’re listening to PSYCHO, Nautica, with Max Freakout Freakout Freakout”
PRI3: DATE LOOKUP PAGE; ADD SOME DATES TO IT.
P3: Clean up new “LOG ENTRY” page.
P2: MOVE/HIDE INCENDIARY CRITIQUE OF:
CLEAN UP HATSIS PAGES.
THE PAGES ARE POOR ORG’D, PORO POOR COMMUNIC
CUT THE WORDCOUNT. TIGHTEN. MOVE NOISE TO idea development page.
Design a formatting for my Podcast Commentary pages. 90% figured out, 60% impl’d.
Clean up 16 & 26 (the two Kafei podcasts that are non-ahistoricity).
STEP BACK, GET A VISION OF WHAT PODCAST PAGE COMMENTARY SHOULD LOOK LIKE (incl specifically 16 & 26).
OBJECTIVE: SUPPORT TIMESTAMP LOOKUP in TOC. In TOC, SHOW TOPIC AT EACH TIMESTAMP.
done March 14, 2022: Inventory the Canterbury Psalter mushroom trees (also note lifted garment, vine trees)
done: EMAIL PODCAST ANALYSIS TO SHOW-HOST.
email audience QUESTION ABOUT WHAT CONTRIBUTION) &
STRAP GUEST INTO CHAIR & FORCE-FEED the MAIN ARTIC PARA’S.
Host keeps recorrecting the course again and again:
Stop (ie reduce) talking in terms of other writers.
Start talking in terms of the egodeath theory.
Read the egodeath theory. Discuss it.
Speak explicitly and consistently in terms of the CONTRAST between unfolding-in-time determinism vs. timeless frozen block-universe eternalism. State which position is which, re: the egodeath theory — explicitly. Not formless incoherent direction.
P5: LONGFORM HISTORY PAGE IS FINE AS-IS, NOT A PRI.
Create hourly log page. done
Create year-lookup page. done.
Criteria article: Add Ack section, maybe dedicate to Brown, or Dedication note.
Proof article: Add Ackn’s. Done.
Criteria article: Add Ackn’s. Done.
Done: Psychonautica podcasts: Add links in “Transcendent Knowledge podcast” page.
Done: Create WordPress site containing only the 183 Egodeath Yahoo Group Digests.
done: In Proof article, add a Red Initiate section, with this fresh cropped image. done
done: Proof article: add: Pink showing his empty right hand is equivalent to sticking out his tongue to display a dose, then closing his lips & swallowing, then sticking out his tongue to display none. Proof article: add findings about palm up and facial expression of Pink at banquet – summary of material dumped to bottom of Methodology article.
LET Cyberdisciple KNOW I FOUND / GOT MY COPY OF RUCK-EDITED BOOK HOW MUCH DID I READ?
unpack the 15-30 books retrieved.
email wrmspirit’s comment, from the removed article “The Fallacy “the Higher the Dose, the Better”, to show-host. Drafts folder.
In Podcast Commentary pages, link to the Nav page: Podcast section, or to the Podcasts page. Try both ways. Minimize spaghetti-linking.
Done: Put TOC template in every page.
NEW DESIGN SOLUTION INCLUDES CONSISTENT PRESENCE OF TOC IN EACH PAGE. WORKS TOGETHER TO NAV DOWN INTO SUBSECTIONS OR UP INTO THE SECTION OF THE NAV PAGE (SITE MAP PAGE).
Make sure Julie credited in phtos from The Psychedelic Gospels in miain page.
Clean up headings links toc in Samorini. eg the above item.
At top of every page, link to its section of Site Map page. Star nav (actually, new design is specifically HIERARCHICAL STAR Nav; full top-to-bottom-to-top hierarchical nav), not Spaghetti nav!
Done, in Entheogen Scholarship section. OMG that (together w/ TOC at top of each page) is so much better for nav, & for exposure of relevant articles! No damn spaghetti links; eg no list of 20 links randomly at bottom of each page.
how i support amanita – add to “is amanita phase 1 of entheogen scholarship, perish the thought?”
Done: Make new phrases expressing: (marked groups of concepts as “Hot Area”)
transformation of mental worldmodel of agent-in-world from: {king steering in tree} -> {wine} -> {snake frozen in rock}
Done: Improve Site Map page/nav.
Done: Re-outline the Site Map page. Duplicate page-entries as needed.
Done: Create additional sections.
Done: Dissolve or re-frame “Good Articles” section; or at least dup those items into topical sections.
Done: Get rid of “Flagship Articles” section, or re-frame, as “Highlights pages”, or dup the items into topical sections.
Problem: need rapid managing/creating/tracking of new keyboard shortcuts, entering Edit mode is too slow.
Done: Remove shortcuts from Concept-entry pages.
Done: Rely purely on the Keyboard: Text app to manage shortcuts.
Done: Create a set of optimized concept-labels & [acro]/keyboard shortcuts, and formalize the construct/ concept of “the Egodeath Theory Concepts Collection“. 3 types of concepts so far:
1) Egodeath Concepts (core concepts only; not meta-theory here; not mytheme theory here; not mythemes here);
2) Key mythemes (that’s MOSTLY clear-cut what that means, what’s in scope/out of scope: gray-area problematic are the semi-literal mythemes eg “banquet” “initiate”, astral ascent mysticism…) ;
3) Egodeath Meta-Theory,
Mass-production-create keyboard shortcuts for — and concept page-sections for — the following phrases/concepts/ optimized concept-labels: keyboard shortcuts done:
concept page-sections [cps]
the concept-section entries [cse]
Egodeath-Theory Concepts Collection [etcc]
concept-section entry in the Egodeath Theory concepts collection [cseetcc]
concept-section entry in a WordPress “Concept-Section” page [csewcsp]
WordPress “Concept-Section” pages [wcsp]
Egodeath Meta-Theory concepts [edmtc]
Concept-section pages [csp’s]
Concept entries [ce’s]
Concept entry [ce]
“Egodeath Concepts” page of the the Egodeath Concepts Collection [ecpecc]
new Concept entry in the Egodeath Theory Concepts Collection [nce]
Egodeath Concepts Collection [edcc]
new Concept entry in the Egodeath Theory Concepts Collection [nce]
Egodeath Concepts Collection [ecc]
Concept entry in the Egodeath Concepts Collection [ceecc]
formalized high-performance concept-creation with optimized concept-labels + [acro]/keyboard shortcuts [fhcc]
formalized concept creation with label and shorthand [fccls]
rapid idea-development through formalized named-concept creation via optimized concept-labels, with [acro]/keyboard shortcuts [rfls]
rapid formal concept creation with optimized concept-labels plus shorthand acronym-handles [rcc]
Plan what to do for two phrases for one concept, in the the Egodeath Concepts Collection. finding: need 2 keyboard shortcuts for the same expansion-phrase; eg: can’t decide if the word “Egodeath”, in an optimized concept-label, is shortcut-abbrev’d as ‘e’, or as ‘ed’ — can simply cover both shortcuts -> same expansion.
Many-to-one relations in fields in the Egodeath Collection or in a field of a Concept entry in the Egodeath Concepts Collection
1 Concept, = 1 Concept entry, = multiple optimized concept-labels. 1 optimized concept-label = multiple keyboard shortcuts eg “Egodeath” in the middle of an optimized concept-label, might be both abbr’d as ‘e’ & as ‘ed’.
Scenario: One Concept in the Egodeath Concepts Collection
Scenario: One Concept in the Egodeath Concepts Collection, with Multiple “Optimized Concept-Labels”
TOC Design
TOC design: How many links?; what design – how of entries at TOC listing at top of the WordPress page?
Ans: 1 link, but maybe list all the phrases there (if non-obvious), non-linked, and grouped as one unit/ syn-list.
How Many Concept entries?
Ans: 1 Concept entry, with a Synonyms: section.
Pri1 todo: Using the definition/design above, MERGE the DUP Concept entries in the IN THE “EGODEATH CONCEPTS” PAGE (the #1 main WordPress page constituting the implementation of the Egodeath Concepts Collection).
Finding: poor differentiation between o implementation (WordPress pages containing H2 sections) vs. o The abstract concept/purpose, which is: formalized high-performance concept-creation with optimized concept-labels + [acro]/keyboard shortcuts
concept-section entries in the Egodeath-Theory Concepts Collection [a concept-section entry in the Egodeath Theory Concepts Collection no; bad; that jumbles implementation (sections in a WordPress page) so as to detract from the main, driving, abstract idea.
That should give enough variants (useful optimized concept-labels/ phrases, & their keyboard shortcuts, to start working with. Notice/expect/plan-for: YOU ALWAYS NEED MULTIPLE SLIGHT VARIANTS. That’s why, in a given Concept entry, there is usually needed, a Synonyms: section. But don’t create a Concept entry for each synonym-phrase/label; instead… todo: Pla
Book: The Hidden Passion: A Novel of the Gnostic Christ Based on the Nag Hammadi Texts
Book: The Hidden Passion: A Novel of the Gnostic Christ Based on the Nag Hammadi Texts Laurence Caruana, 2007 http://amzn.com/0978263707 “This is the tale of the Gnostic Christ, based on the ancient sources.
In a compelling narrative, L. Caruana seamlessly weaves over 1500 sayings from the Nag Hammadi texts to recount The Hidden Passion of the Gnostic savior.
Wandering round Galilee, increasingly hailed as the Messiah of the Five Seals, the Gnostic savior preaches divine awakening through compassion.
But he must still contend with Judas, his dark twin, and Magdalene, his promised bride.
At once earthly and spiritual, the Nazarene’s love for these two is finally transfigured into a higher, hidden passion.
Each page of this novel rings with the authentic message of the lost gospels.
By combining numerous narrative fragments from the Nag Hammadi texts, The Hidden Passion makes the Gnostic Gospels come alive.
Complete with a map, diagram and glossary, this novel elucidates the Gnostic worldview in an eloquent , engaging narrative.”
All of Caruana’s Books, in First-Edition Chronological Order
A First Draft of a Manifesto of Visionary Art (2001) The First Manifesto of Visionary Art (2010) Confirmed the Copyright dates: 2001 – 100 signed copies, titled: A First Draft of a Manifesto of Visionary Art 2010 – per Copyright page Jun 19, 2017 – Amazon date on author page: “Publisher : Recluse; 1st edition (June 19, 2017)”
“A journey to the primordial language at the source of all dreaming, art & mythmaking…
In 1945, on a hill overlooking the Nile, a Gnostic text was accidentally unearthed after having been buried for seventeen hundred years.
Within its aged pages there appeared the mysterious fragment: enter through the image.
Taking this as his starting point, the noted Visionary artist L. Caruana guides his reader through a labyrinth of imagery, exposing the forgotten image-language at the root of all dreaming, art and mythmaking….
Drawing examples from a diversity of ancient cultures (Buddhism, Alchemy, Gnosticism) and from contemporary Visionary art (Dali, Fuchs, Johfra), many beautiful and intriguing symbols are illuminated with crystal clarity.
Retracing the steps of 20th century mythmakers (Hesse, Kazantzakis) and scholars (Jung, Campbell, Eliade), Caruana opens our eyes to the ancient mythic patterns underlying our lives.
[false – should read: “opens our eyes to the ancient mythic patternsunderlying things that are observed and experienced in the psychedelics-induced altered state” -mh]
[20th century mythmakers = acid-inspired Rock lyrics; Matrix movies -mh]
As many fascinating dreams are offered and decyphered (Baudelaire, Descartes), a new key is given to us for the elucidation of dreams.
[false – rarther, this new key is useful for eleucidation of things that are observed and experienced in the psychedelic altered state. -mh]
richly-illustrated study
our daily experiences are heroic adventures culminating in rare moments of epiphany.
[false! {hero/adventure/epiphany}ONLY happens in the entheogen-induced altered state, NOT in the mundane ordinary state of consciousness, nor in dreaming. -mh]
“We discover that our own lives are a gradual unfolding of the Sacred.”
This visual presentation of the Gnostic Worldview is given in three parts: I. A Scholarly Introduction – Gnosticism in Context (2:19) II. The Gnostic Myth of the Creation (42:55) III. The Gnostic Saviour and the Soul Ascent (1:22:30) — I transcribed much of this section, at my page:
[I’m a little uneasy with his wording, using the word ‘soul’; ‘soul’ connotes the “freewill power in branching-possibilities”-premised, egoic personal control system that is, the possibilism-premised personal control system
Not sure I’d create a phrase/concept/WP page-section called “the Soul Ascent”, though I’ve added it to the Key Mythemes page, the {astral ascent mysticism} Concept/section, as merely a Synonym (not as a Concept-section with label “the Soul Ascent” as Caruana would suggest). Possible phrases/ concept-names/ optimized concept-labels: astral ascent mysticism Ptolemaic astral ascent mysticism the Soul Ascent (Laurence Caruana’s phrase)
Filmed at The Vienna Academy of Visionary Art on March 4th 2019, this lecture was given by Academy Director Laurence Caruana, author of several books with Gnostic themes. It is illustrated with works by Visionary artists, both classical (Blake, Michelangelo) and contemporary (Fuchs, Venosa, Alex Grey etc). More information on L. Caruana’s books: https://www.amazon.com/L.-Caruana/e/B…
L. Caruana is an artist and writer [scholarly researcher] living between Paris and Vienna.
Born in Toronto Canada of Maltese descent, he graduated from the University of Toronto with a Philosophy degree specializing in Hermeneutics (the study of Biblical Interpretation).
He also studied Classical Techniques of Painting at die Akademie der Bildenden Künste in Vienna before apprenticing directly with Prof. Ernst Fuchs.
After living in a number of cities (Vienna, Munich, Malta, Monaco), he settled in Paris, where he has authored several books on Spirituality and Art.
As the present director of The Vienna Academy of Visionary Art, he frequently travels abroad to give lectures, hold workshops and exhibit his works.
“Detailed, precise, with a fine line and accomplished hand, Laurence Caruana brings a classical approach to his painting, which abounds nevertheless with fantastic, dream-like and visionary imagery. As principle instructor at the Academy, he brings many of these same qualities to his teaching, urging the student to explore both the technical and imaginative aspects of creation.
Born in Toronto Canada of Maltese descent, he graduated from the University of Toronto with a degree in Philosophy. To learn classical techniques of painting, he moved to Europe, studying at die Akademie der Bildenden Künste in Vienna.
In Europe, Caruana led mostly an itinerant existence, living variously in Malta, Vienna, Munich, Monaco and Paris, while travelling extensively through Asia, Europe and Central America to enrich his passion for different sacred traditions and cultural iconographies. This passion is reflected, not only in his painting, but also in a series of books and articles, such as his erudite study into the ‘image language’ of myth, art and dreams called Enter Through the Image. Caruana also wrote and edited The Visionary Revue, an on-line journal where his highly-influential Manifesto of Visionary Art first appeared.
His art is highly mythological, exploring the interplay of different cultural symbols and styles. Classical in approach, hieratic in structure, his images vibrate with strong saturated colours.
In the year 2000 he received the invitation to work with Ernst Fuchs at the Apocalypse Chapel in Klagenfurt. It was here that he met Amanda Sage and A. Andrew Gonzalez, who were instrumental in bringing him into the Chapel project. More than a decade later, they realized that the seeds had been planted then for their joint Seminars and the Visionary Academy.
After Klagenfurt, Caruana apprenticed under Ernst Fuchs for a year, learning the Mischtechnik while working as his assistant in Monaco and Castillon. At the same time, his wife Florence Ménard worked as Fuchs’ personal assistant in arts administration.
In 2008, Caruana created The Visions in the Mischtechnik Seminar, a popular painting class held in the Italian eco-village of Torri Superiore, just across the mountain from Ernst Fuchs’ studio in France. After teaching solo for two years, he invited a series of other artists to attend or co-teach, thus forming the foundations for the Academy. During the 2012 seminar, this idea was firmly set in motion, due to the inspiration of Amanda Sage and the confirmed collaboration of severak artists who had either taught or attended the seminar.
With the blessings of Ernst Fuchs, the couple of Caruana and Ménard co-founded The Vienna Academy of Visionary Art in the autumn of 2012. As Academy Director, Laurence Caruana brings his strong organizational skills but also his profound love of Visionary art to the programme. In collaboration with his colleagues, he develops the curriculum and co-teaches a number of the courses. In this way, he is able to share his Old Masters expertise while exploring new facets of painterly creation.
L Caruana has also authored several books:
Sacred Codes: The Forgotten Principles of Painting Revived by Visionary Art
Enter Through the Image: The Ancient Image-Language of Myth, Art and Dreams
The Hidden Passion: A Novel of the Gnostic Christ, Based on the Nag Hammadi Texts
A Manifesto of Visionary Art (available in English, French & Portuguese)
(All those books are listed in the Books section of the present page.)
High Culture Was Strikingly Fluent in Mythology Analogies for Initiation — Routinized Use of Mushroom Mixed-Wine to Flip the Mind’s Personal Control System from Possibilism to Eternalism — Impressive Evidence of Routinized Mushroom Initiation, Highly Articulated in Mythic Analogies, Observable through Mythemese Fluency
A week-long Art High: This week, I got confirmation of my hypotheses of around a year ago, about branching vs. non-branching, tree vs. snake, branching antlers of a stag, in ancient Greek & in Christian mythic art. Confirmed: artists understood that mystic revelation about moral agency is a matter of moving from freewill thinking to no-free-will thinking, moving from autonomous monolithic personal control to puppet/slave/ rail-driven personal control with 2 levels or layers of control involved: the transpersonal driving layer (hidden thought source you must trust your life to) and the personal local locus of control-power (a reactive driven-gear, your forceful control-power that you exert is forcefully steered by the rail: you are forced to push in the direction that the hidden controller has pre-set you to push).
Another daring hypothsis from me has been confirmed: Pre-moderns in loosecog had equivalent of multistate or altered state-based Cognitive Science, about 4-D spacetime (the Rock Universe), illusory control power (kingship, vs. puppet/slave), mental construct sequences positioned in spacetime (ivy strand with leaves; pine cone that opens its scales when dry and closes its scales when wet).
The art evidence emphatically and pointedly confirms my theorizing of a year ago that the man riding the donkey or horse toward the broken-branch tree trunk with snake, on sargophagii, means awareness passively being carried forward in time along your frozen rigid worldline, while the donkey or horse — a separate control-agency component of the psyche — steers your thinking, following the invisible rail(way). The donkey is the personal steering among virtual possibilitiyy branches through time. The one possibility branching path that is destined and pre-set and pre-existing is the path the steersman donkey is forced to follow, forced to choose.
The artworks convey “is personal moral control agency power a matter of possbiility branching, as you originally think and feel in the OSC, or is it non-branching, like snake/ivy/monocoursal/dragon/serpent/worm/ Eve’s long hair? ” The artworks say “You thought possibility branching, with you having that particular key kind of power: steering-control power of a kind that can manifest either branch A or B into the future. But per Peart, No One at the Bridge, in the mystic state you see you have no arms to steer, no power in the present to steer to one vs. a different future branching-path.
This system of art confirmation is maximally profound, exactly as powerful and reputation-boosting as the confirmation of bending of light near the sun in a complete solar eclipse some time after Einstein predicated light bending near the sun’s gravitational spacetime-curving field. Artworks directly and pointedly confirmed during the past few days, that the ego-transcendent understanding and knowledge about moral agency is a matter of repudiating Possibilism and affirming Eternalism, and trusting in your near-future worldline & hidden source of control-intentions, not battling against that.
Art clearly and definitely confirms my Cybernetics/Heimarmene/Entheogens/Metaphor (CHEM) explanatory model of myth & religion. The kylix (saucer-shaped shallow cup) painted by Douris completely fits with and affirms the Eden tree of knowledge. This art confirmation, though “merely confirmation” of my breakthroughs of a year ago, I report that this mere confirmation actually caused substantial link-tightening and compaction of my Theory of ego transcendence and metaphor — the *real*, relevant, central, driving force in the mystic altered state, the *real* nature of ego transcendence (as discovered in my initial, main, January 11 1988 “Crystalline Ground of Being & concomitant non-control” breakthrough). Journal of Transpersonal Psychology in 1985-1988 asserted that ego transcnedenence is spatial unity. I said no, ego transcendence is illusory control together with Eternalism (one’s future stream of control-intentions is pre-set, pre-arranged into a rigid snake shaped future-worldline).
The pearl of great price: The unenlightened illegitimate king sends Jason to retrieve the golden fleece. The fruit of the tree in the Garden (of Hesperides/Eden) is Transcendent Knowledge about personal control power being illusory; the fruit of the tree is understanding Cybernetics/Heimarmene/Entheogens (CHE) (including understanding how Metaphor describes Cyberneics, Heimarmene, and Entheogens/Loosecog; M->EHC). Metaphor describes entheogens causing loose cognitive binding revealing fatedness and non-control.
In religious myth, Metaphor describes entheogens experiencing Heimarmene & Cybernetics.
M->EHC
CHEM:
C – Cybernetics, personal control power; loss of control; self-control seizure, control vortex, non-control, autonomous personal control, switch from autonomous kingship to puppet/slave following hidden rail into future, unable to control which control-intentions come up in the fountain/spring/wellspring behind awareness.
E – Entheogens; loose cognitive binding state, mental model transformation.
M – Metaphor, myth, religious myth, esoteric symbol usage about C/H/E above.
Joseph Campbell says there’s no (single) Myth for our time. I say the equivalent of the myth-system of our future, quintessentially late-Modern or transitional to post-Modern, is my layout: an explicit non-metaphorical Core Theory plus mapping that to reliigious/mythic/esoteric metaphor, and, as far as *specific* brand-styling, we must consider STEM-style themes like:
o In the Matrix series, the Animatrix movie’s tripping android segment
o Rush songs — not Pop Sike (girl-relationship as metaphor for acid experiencing) but Tech Psych (STEM as metaphor for loosecog experiential insights)
(STEM means Science, Technology, Engineering, & Mathematics. A standard acronym.)
In the present, late-modern or post-modern era, we won’t have a myth (in Campbell’s sense), per Campbell. My response is that we will have correct non-mythic explicit explanation of ego-transcendent knowledge & no-free-will, and, we will have correct mapping to all past mythemes/tropes and the ability to created unlimited number of themes/tropes. Metaphor-only expressions of one’s correct understanding of TK proved (historically) to have problems, so it is urgent that everyone knows the non-metaphorical Core Theory, my Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence per my 1988 first drafts and 1997 summary at Principia Cybernetica (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/egodeath/message/5870).
Transcendent Knowledge (Cybernetics/Heimarmene/Entheogens/Metaphor) is the forbidden fruit forbidden to the egoic mind. The fatedness snake-dragon guards the fruit of the tree of knowledge of the illusory nature of moral control culpability in light of no-free-will and the pre-givenness of all your control-thoughts. Your snake made you choose as you did; you had no meta-choice; you have pseudo-freedom, the illusion of having the kind of steering-power that can select some other possibility branching path. The heimarmene snake dragon serpent monster (this is *the* monster, forcing you to intend against your self-protection programming in such a way that your steering-power with respect to your future possibility branching is shown to be illusory impotent cybernetic control power. You are only allowed to steer how you are forced to steer.
The serpent guards ego-transcendent knoweldge in at least 2 ways:
o If you are among the Elect, the serpent makes you wrestle with and submit to & put full intimate trust in your threatening thought-source, then the serpent as gate-controller lets you pass, to get the golden fleece or eat the apple of knowledge of the illusory nature of moral agency — to get ego-transcendent knowledge. The pearl of great price held in the claw of the challenging/threatening/enlightenment-bringing dragon/monster/serpent: you must sacrifice your childish free-will thinking *and* (stabbing your heart) sacrifice your claim to have the kind of control that could prevent a fatal control-intention from arising; to stop the sea-storm shipwreck control-instability, you must pay the price, repudiate your childish animal naive initial implicit essential claim that you have possibility-branch steering control power.
o If you are not among the predestined, pre-existing Elect, it is impossible for you to get to the fruit, impossible for you to steer down the possibility-branching path in which you gain the elegant pearl of ego-transcendent knowledge; you are pre-destined so that you in the future are destined to not ever come to (this elegant compact explosive system of) ego-transcendent knowledge.
Take my hand, I’ll take you to the other side, to see the truth: the path for you is decided
— Iron Maiden, album Somewhere in Time
Destiny planned out … speculation of the wise
— Bob Daisley, album Diary of a Madman
In these artworks, also I spotted clearly the theme, across systems/brands of ego-transcendent knowledge (= no-free-will, interlinked with personal non-control (non-sovereignty)).
o Jonah being spit out by the sea serpent
o Human torso w/ serpent legs in the Gigantomachy
o Snake in Eden tree: Eve’s torso with arms, or just her face, and a serpent lower body.
o Jason in the kylix (saucer-cup for drinking mixed wine/mushroom wine) painted by Douris, ego-dead, torso coming from the guardian heimarmene-dragon/serpent.
Sometimes the serpent’s head is shown in addition to the human head. Usually the human has arms but I especially resonate with the Eden serpent that just has Eve’s face; she has no arms to steer into her future possibility-tree branches, and the serpent has no arms.
Invisible railways crackle with life
— Rush/Peart, Spirit of Radio
Printed as “airwaves”, sung as “railways” the first time, “airwaves ” the 2nd time.
Theology is too policitized, it is misleading, and you have Augustine’s winking asymmetry: God is the author of good, humans are the author of evil. God is all-powerful, all-good, and isn’t the author of evil (directly or indirectly). But the entire Theology industry knows this is self-contradiction. Gnostic-like thinking (in whatever metaphor-systems of ego-transcendence) solves that by splitting the creator god (who is responsible for layout out our evil actions in spacetime) saying the evil creator (Demiurge) *is* the author of evil, and the high God is purely good and isn’t the creator. Theology advocates confusion and waffling, leading Reformed theologians to falsely say “man’s mind can’t understand this apparent contradiction: God is all-powerful and all-good” when the truth is, it’s blatantly self-contradictory and impossible to “solve” other than by subtle or covert or dishonest meaning-shifting.
Art tells a simple, valuable story: no-free-will, your snake-rail controls & pre-sets your steering, your awareness can only helplessly look on as the future destined thoughts & steering-direction are revealed, and thus God is the author of evil – ‘evil’ as unethical acts and as the delusion of freewill moral culpability. The essence of the story is beautifully straightforward as communicated in art, rather than in Theology: ingest entheogen, see and experience the self-contradictions of freewill thinking & its control-thinking, and switch to no-free-will thinking including the puppet/slave relationship of personal control to time. Alex Grey has not represented the discovery of the no-free-will, consistent, beautiful, attractive, threatening model of personal control in relation to time. This is the frozen-puppet-universe perspective.
I was surprised that “mere” confirmation of my theory by the layered and clustered branching antler and serpent and tree and “tree’s guarded treasure”, caused some jackpot updating of my cross-linking: adding new insights and giving an *enlightening* confirmation as opposed to mere simple confirmation. Art inspired me to see things even more clearly, simply, starkly: *tree* of knowledge of good & evil; fruit of the tree; golden fleece like pearl of great costly sacrificed price — the snake is the fruit of the tree; the fruit is the product of mentally considering tree vs snake, posssibility branching vs. monocoursal linear nonbranching; Possibilism vs. Eternalism & concomitant personal control power implications.
Artworks’ confirmation of my snake vs tree theory, and man riding donkey/horse/panther (or snake-drawn cart), toward branchless tree with snake, caused massive adjustments to the cross-linking in my theory — not negating anything I wrote, but tightening and affirming it, such as confirming my assertion that pre-modern elites understood 4D block time, loosecog, and levels of control.
That’s one example of how daring I’ve been always in my Theory: I had to make an entire set of ideas that each totally conflict with strong dogmatic assumptions. Pre-moderns were stupid, we assume, and yet, we late-moderns were the clueless ones who were incapable until me of reading the simple message encoded by Douris and the pre-modern or early-modern artists: snake vs. tree, fruit reveals no-free-will & its concomitant ramificaitons for personal control morality steering power.
Art’s confirmation of my theorizing about branching, of a year ago, only showed me a few truly new insights this week, yet I’m getting a huge reading: my feelings report that the ability to more and more quickly read and decipher these metaphor artworks resolving them into no-free-will, or “Cyb/Heim/Enth” concerns, I detected or “heard the jackpot sound” of linking-updating the cross-linking throughout my Theory of myth & religion. It by today has become clear and feels simple: mystic revelation shows simply no-free-will; map the athiest no-free-will books’ phrases to *esoteric* religion.
Everything Sam Harris asserts in discussing no-free-will maps *directly*, consistently, to religious myth — to higher-order, esoteric religious understanding. It’s only exoteric, lower-order religion that clings to the childish sinful confused self-contradictory freewill idea which posits and includes the feeling of, being a control steering power agent, a kind of control that is precisely the impossible aspect: the power in the present of steering into more than one real possibility branching path — that is the key core central power we assume and that we iniitally take as real, forming our moral control agent identity and its supposeed moral culpability.
The adult must cast off both the freewill assumption and the control meta-steering power assumption, but through intense overwhelming experiencing in loosecog, not speculation based only in the tight cognitive binding state — not the model of linear time & linear domino-chain causality. With my main article in hand, and my snake vs. tree revelation of switching from Possibilism moral thinking to Eternalism thinking, It is possible now, without entering the loosecog state, to have a correct and clear 2nd-hand understanding of control seizure and revelation of this specific kind of non-control, and changelessness of your near-future sequence of control-thoughts or control-intentions.
Joseph Campbell and Ken Wilber are not wrong so much as grossly massively incomplete. When the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence a la my first mid-1988 article drafts is inserted into Wilber’s system or Campbell’s, their systems are overwhelmed and totally dominated by my system, which is CTET/TK/Egodeath theory / the CHEM (M->E->H&C) model of ego transcendence & religious myth & esotericism-based tropes such as narrow escape in ancient novels.
My Egodeath (CHEM or M->EHC) theory:
M->E->H&C
Metaphor describes Enthoegens for experiencing Heimarmene & Cybernetics limits/vulnerability (“noncontrol”).
Cybernetics is the biggest most soul-shattering topic, Metaphor is the least, so imagine each letter font size from small to big: meHC, or CHem.
When I say “Entheogens” as 1 of 4 key topics, ‘Entheogens’ is a condensed term meaning & emphasizing loosecog — that is, loose cognitive association binding of (as worded per my crucial April 1987 thinking-style change) DMCRMs: dynamic mental-construct relationship matrixes — MCs (mental constructs), for short. This is an example of how I have deciphered metaphors describing what’s revealed in loosecog, and have engineered a language that is optimized for discussing efficiently ego-transcendent knowledge.
I feel guilty for only really speaking 1 language (English), but to redeem myself, I have fully cracked the mystery encryption code to fully explain what is actually essential in religious myth, and I have formed and shared a highly efficient language to discuss ego-transcendent knowledge. Each brick component of my theory I have customized, modified, and optimized; I have contributed “bricks” in many fields but the value of those bricks is superior because my bricks fit together successfully across fields. identifying analogies others that other investigators didn’t recognize. 20th Century research in myth & religion uses English, French, German, Greek, & Latin, but those are equivalently clueless and really only amount to 1 language. I provide the other language, that of the CHEM model I have created and discovered, rediscovering the essence but putting forth the first efficient systematic useful practical omni-powerful model that explicitly gives the solution to all the mysteries that matter.
I deciphered Moses’ seeing the burning bush = the subjectively moving present, seeing illusory unreal virtual possibility branching, like a hanging rope/fuse, with a smalll, localized flame climing up. A possibility branching bush with only the pre-existing branching-path being real; the other possibilities are virtual-only possibilities; they are impossible because not fated; those other, illusory branches are the branches which do not match what is happening in your worldline in your future.
Professors who lack my Egodeath theory are clueless and need to know that my theory will accellerate their work ideally and provide the ideal perfect solutions.
Researchers of Western ancient religion are doing a reset now, revisiting more carefully their assumptions, shaking off the horrible and confused Christian apologist historians — the equivalent of my desecrating and p*ss*ng on the pathetic worthless books around 1994. Previous books are as much misleading as informative. The field is saying “quit believing the biased presupmtions, the shared wrong assumptions. We must mind our assumptions! We couldn’t understand puzzles in religion, because our assumptions were wrong and careless. We must be careful this time in our foundational assumptions and be ready to change our assumptions.
In 2006 when I wrote the main article defining the CHEM model, the Jesus Myth hypothesis was beyond the pale, taboo, and no one heard of it. Now no-Jesus has become mainstream *on the internet* but not in the “real world” (the Establishment media & print-based press), and thank God for the Web, where real people can challenge the confusion of the Establishment position and its slave-scholars it employs and deploys such as the malarkey assumption-laden phrase “entheogens vs. traditional mystic methods”.
Back in the print days, the Establishment had a monopololy and effective censorship (of professors and of real people); they could get away with ignoring and dismissing challenges. Now, thank God, real people (critically thinking individuals) are calling the Establishment-collaborationist academics on their nonsense. It’s a war over defining reality: print vs. online, falsity vs truth, Establishement professors with mental shackles (they want you to wear shackles too) vs. actual free thinkers, who follow the evidence and reason, not politiicized status quo dogma and policed boundaries of what views are permited to be considered. If you are an academic, to write truth, you must post online in an area not controlled by the Establishment paradigm-police.
In 2006, my theory was far beyond the pale, far outside where academics are permitted to comment and write and think:
o No Jesus/Paul/apostles. That was way taboo but now has become a hot topic online, with real thinkers, un-cowed, shamelessly and brazenly challenging the clueless and self-contradicting Establishment academics.
o No free will. That was way taboo but now has become a hot topic online.
o Reformed theology: was shocking to Evangelicals, was way taboo but now has become a hot topic among thinking Christian young guys who move from perfectly clueless high school Christian groups to college and — a few years after me — discovered Reformed Theology.
o Entheogens: officially this is beyond the pale and unthinkable. But recently this has become a hot topic.
o God is the ultimate author of evil.
o You have no power to steer your future or make your future be anything other than the 1 path that always already exists in your future. You merely implement and discover your steering-direction; you cannot choose which path you will steer into.
No-free-will was a serious liability for the Egodeath theory in 2001 (my mythic metaphor deciphering breakthrough year), but suddenly has flipped to be a benefit, a genius insight and commendment for the Theory.
Ahistoricity of Jesus/Paul was a serious liability for the Egodeath theory in 2001, but suddenly has flipped to be a benefit, a genius insight and commendment for the Theory.
Same w/ entheogens.
o Professors who don’t have my perfect omni-successful key theory are clueless.
o Professors who have my perfect omni-successful key theory agree with it, but are censored — but they still need to use my Theory fully in their thinking, and (in the ways that these slaves are permitted by their masters) in their writing.
o Students who don’t have my Theory are cluesss.
o Students who have my Theory agree with it, but are censored by their Establishment-complicit professors and advisors — they need to use my Theory fully in their thinking, and write as they can get away with.
There is no problem of “people who disagree with the Theory”. It’s not possible to understand the Theory and disagree with it, because the Theory works, perfectly and extremely well and no other Theory works at all. The problem is either people don’t have the Theory, or, they have it and therefore agree with it (to understand it is to agree with it) but they are aggressively censored by the Establishment commitments: commitment to historical Jesus/Paul, commitment to generally literalist reading of pre-modern evidence, commitment to underestimating the intelligence (per the Evolutionism ideology) of pre-moderns, commitment to assuming pre-moderns were in the OSC only, commitment to non-entheogenic methods of mysticism throughout *our* culture’s history — white Western European history. Bunk unexamined assumptions a la Schultes’ Golden Book on Psychedelics: if a culture has writing, it doesn’t have entheogens; only if a culture lacks writing, it might have entheogens.
My Theory is perfectly cohernet & simple & successful (massive explanatory power & scope), there’s no other theory. The fields need my theory; it is painful to watch authors fail without the Theory. At this point, writers in the fields of myth, religion, psychology, cognitive science, time, entheogens, and agency, just need to discover that my Theory exists and perfectly explains every essential aspect and puzzle in the field. If only they *knew* my theory, they would hasten to leverage it; it is the solution they are in need of. It’s not a matter of some agree and some disagree; it’s a matter of some have this Theory, some lack this Theory. To know the Theory is to agree with it and recognize the genius of it: so butt-simple, so earth-shattering of all we thought we knew, so totally broad and deep in explantory power. Will the lecture audience agree with it?
That’s off-base: the lecture audience will be shattered, stunned, I have destroyed the world. Don’t bother thinking about the Establishment, because my Theory changes everything: Armageddon, the end of the world as Academia mis-knew it. Now we will need to instruct young adults in high school & college in sacrificing their childish freewill thinking. Not for the educating State to advocate a particular religion; more like, the State needs to teach (in place of “drug education”) what mental control dynamics result from loose cognition, and how these dynamics have been connected with no-free-will. The State can’t push a particular religion, nor illegalize a particular religion. What is religion? Original, source, higher, esoteric religion is the use of visionary plants to induce loose cognitive binding, to explore personal control power and no-free-will. Religion is the use of loosecog to change from freewill thinking to no-free-will thinking.
Should the State, in Education, teach the use of loosecog to change from freewill thinking to no-free-will thinking? That’s not laws pushing one religion or forbidding one religion; it would be educating people in religious cognitive structure transformation. The State should make available to people, in Education, the option of understanding religion in terms of CHEM (Cybernetics, Heimarmene, Entheogens, Metaphor), as a theory/hypothesis, as an alternative to literalist interpretation that’s done only because of ignorance of the CHEM option.
— Michael Hoffman, December 1, 2013
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, Egodeath.com. All Rights Reserved. Based on original research & idea development since 1985.
/ end of 2013 announcement posting
Essay: “Cognitive Phenomenology of Mind Manifestation”, in 2013 book: “Breaking Convention: Essays on Psychedelic Consciousness”
The forthcoming book ‘Breaking convention: essays on psychedelic consciousness’ (currently available for preorder on amazon)
[probably the following book, probably an essay by an expert on the Egodeath theory -mh]
Breaking Convention: Essays on Psychedelic Consciousness July 5, 2013 Essay: Cognitive phenomenology of mind manifestation David Luke (Editor), Dave King (Editor) http://amzn.com/1907222227
contains an essay which is based on Michael Hoffman’s theory of mental construct processing (loosening of associations in the psychedelic altered state), and which includes several citations to the egodeath theory website.
The title of the essay is ‘Cognitive phenomenology of mind manifestation’, it covers the following topics:
Relation of psychedelic tripping to the mind’s association and pattern forming capacities.
Using analogies to describe altered state experiences.
Plato’s allegory of the philosopher in the cave, and how it maps onto the psychedelic state.
Frank Jackson’s philosophical thought-experiments about radically novel kinds of experience, and how they map onto the psychedelic state.
Andrew Marr’s theory of visual perception, and Jerry Fodor’s theory of mental modularity, and how both these theories imply a broadly representationalist metaphysical view (perception mediated by mental symbols, as opposed to direct perception of external reality).
Michael Hoffman’s concepts of explicit representationalism and metaperception in the psychedelic state.
Undulating qualia – the specific way in which ordinary perception of physical objects is altered in the psychedelic state, and how this alteration indicates a representationalist theory of perception.
Edmund Husserl’s concept of phenomenological epoche (= deliberate ‘bracketing-off’ of natural, habitual assumptions for the purpose of carrying out phenomenological analysis), and how it describes both psychedelic tripping and schizophrenic/psychotic mental fragmentation.
Freud’s analogy of the mind as a crystal vase which shatters during episodes of psychosis, making the underlying crystalline structure become visible.
Humphrey Osmond’s concept of tripping as ‘psychotomimesis’.
Louis Sass’ concept of schizophrenic cognition as ‘hyperreflexivity’ and how this concept also applies to the psychedelic cognitive modality.
The phenomenological inaccuracy of the term ‘hallucinogen’.
Benny Shanon’s analysis of the ayahuasca experience, in particular his description of the way in which ayahuasca can reorientate a person’s ontological understanding.
How the psychedelic state reveals the mind’s basic function of fusing together mental representations with their external referents.
How Michael Hoffman’s analysis of the psychedelic trip effect explains the proper way in which tripping is related to hallucinating.
Michael Hoffman’s concept of the mental worldmodel, and how psychedelic tripping can lead to a radical overhaul/restructuring of the mental worldmodel.
Using the process of waking up from a dream as an analogy for the psychedelic mental reconfiguration.
Paul Thagard’s writing on paradigm conversion and how it maps onto the psychedelic mental reconfiguration.
/ end of Joe’s 2013 posting
Email Outtakes
A large part of the “reasoning” will be a collection of images that commands/demands attention.
No more facile arm-waving like “they are all just Parasols of Victory”, or like Brinckmann/Panofsky ludicrously generalizes, “They are all Italian Pines”.
Yeah buddy let’s hear you say that too-easy “explaining away”, when the Explanandum is this Official Point-of-Reference Database of Christian Mushroom Images, accompanied by specimen-photos of several types/families (Cubensis, Liberty Cap, Amanita).
How scholars who are committed to a certain research programme and a New Explanatory Framework, can productively move ahead, when there are prominent, vocal naysayers and overrated books spreading their old, superseded, misguided thinking.
I wrote a critical review of the book which Hatsis will have written two years from now, explaining why it completely misses the mark and just piles-on the existing confusion, making it worse.
I threw together a gallery of all known images. People ought to open their eyes and upload many more — such images are not hard to find, as people negatively assume. Such images are common, for good reason.
Many more images must be online but are not tagged to be findable with the desired keywords. When quickly throwing together this page, I contributed several more cropped extracted images to the collection now on the web and (soon) tagged to appear in image-searches.
Yesterday I was particularly pleased at finding my important archive of images from my discussion group (defunct starting today) — my best photo perfectly confirms my identification of an Amanita in a Greek mosaic.
___
What it would mean to have a divorce, a split in the field, equivalent to starting a journal that is committed to the explanatory framework, of the maximal mushroom theory of Western religion.
Split the field this way: Break out a distinct research topic, specifically and explicitly:
the maximal mushroom theory of Western religion
to provide a much-needed alternative to the manifestly predominant monstrosity “the Allegro theory”[sic] with its universe of vague confusions & conflations & presuppositions.
Hatsis might do fine research on various topics, but I don’t care about those topics. I only care about the actual leading edge of this one research topic/framework.
By definition, the field/topic/specialty of the maximal mushroom theory of Western religion would explicitly set the guiding principles and explicitly, definitionally state that:
Allegro is not an entheogen scholar.
his book is not an entheogen scholarship book.
Allegro isn’t interested in or knowledgeable about entheogens.
ALLEGRO IS IRRELEVANT AND OUT OF SCOPE for this topic; he is purely DEAD WEIGHT; an obstacle to be cleared out of the way like my Plaincourault article states, dismissing the abortive non-debate around Allegro; my article instead calls for addressing the real question (just forget about Allegro!!):
To what extent mushrooms in Greek & Christian religion & culture?
To what extent mushrooms in Christianity?
To what extent was the Eucharist recognized as mushrooms?
Explicitly point out Pope Wasson’s extreme conflict of interest.
Explicit foundational principle & value:
Robert Graves in 1958 is the best, main starting point for scholarship on the maximal mushroom theory of Western religion.
ie, for productive scholarship on the maximal mushroom theory of Western religion:
TAKE DOWN YOUR JOHN ALLEGRO PORTRAIT;
TAKE DOWN YOUR GORDON WASSON PORTRAIT;
PUT UP A ROBERT GRAVES PORTRAIT.
TO HELL WITH THE WHOLE TOPIC OF “THE ALLEGRO THEORY”
THE REAL TOPIC IS “THE GRAVES THEORY”
a nice match for “the ego death theory”!
People who fail to meet basic credentials here, need to be disavowed and exposed as rank amateurs (in the bad sense), regarding this topic — they haven’t done the Required Reading; only lopsided engagement with a single author (Irvin), and their “contributions” actually harm and retard the field.
Hatsis doesn’t know the difference between a cista mystica snake basket and a wine-mixing krater.
He is functionally unaware (in his argumentation on this topic) that there are other types of mushrooms than just Amanita.
He’s completely unqualified for this speciality, this specialized, specialists’ topic.
You gotta meet the Prereq’s! or else you are not worth “taking seriously” on this topic.
The problem now is, people don’t have a good theory to debate around; instead, they have this vague fog, this blurry & shifting guiding-star that’s popular to kick around, that they call “the Allegro theory”. Which every person free-associates & projects onto. Which every person defines differently. Which, if they actually understood his mentality, they’d acknowledge his total irrelevance to the topic of Western mushroom scholarship, or entheogen scholarship broadly at all.
Robert Graves is an entheogen scholar. (Albeit cut short to 83 pages total, by my count, due to market-censorship ~1957-1973 — plus his unacknowledged communications with Pope Wasson.) John Allegro is not an entheogen scholar.
Hatsis lost debate partners. Irvin left the field (around 2018) and flipped his own values almost entirely against the field.
Stop depicting the field (of mushroom scholarship in Greek & Christian art & culture) like an ignorant Pop outsider.
Debunking Pop theories for a Pop audience is one thing;
Debunking serious Western mushroom scholarship for a scholarly audience is something else.
Stop conflating the distinct candidate fungi varieties; separately discuss the various types of evidence and various different hypotheses:
Italian Pine? The top art historian credentialed expert & the Pope say so — learned, learned!
Parasol of Victory? Letcher-Hatsis says so in his video, having the audacity to contradict the top art historian (& the Pope, too)!
Amanita?
Cubensis?
Liberty Cap?
I’m amenable to countenancing a split in the field.
I’m prepared to write-off the naysayers and ignore them and continue getting on with productive, unconfused research within the committed, “New Research Framework”, eg the maximal mushroom theory of Greek & Christian culture/religion/art.
I may propose that Divorce, an agreement to mutually ignore the other camp.
Are people on board with the Minimalists — Brinckmann, Panofsky, Pope Wasson, Letcher, & Hatsis;
or are they onboard, committed, with the Maximalists eg Michael Hoffman/Brown/Brown?
PICK A SIDE! Invest & commit carefully; one side is going to be a laughingstock.
The in-side, the out-side;
those on the outside, or those on the inside — which side are you on?
Not to mention the wishy-washy fence-sitting, wobbly, self-contradictory Moderates: maybe Mark Hoffman, & Carl “Everywhere a Secret” Ruck.
I am done paying any attention to naysayers — don’t need ’em; I have no need to give them the time of day — but, they plan to mis-lead the field further down into their rut of confusion — I dispatched Robert Price with an overkill article about Plaincourault; but then there was Andy Letcher, then Hatsis; and who’s next, after that?
I was glad to see constructive disagreement in Hatsis’ video meeting with Brian Muraresku & Chris Bennett.
Jerry Brown must have been incensed about Hatsis constructing a strawman garbage-can (“followers of Allegro”) and then sloppily throwing him & everyone in the field, into that garbage-can of Hatsis’ own fabrication based on Hatsis’ over-engagement with Irvin & thus Hatsis’ gross, newcomers’/ outsiders’ misreading of the field.
I watched a few minutes of the debate video (Brown vs. Hatsis) before, and I couldn’t bear to watch Hatsis’ presentation — I don’t care what his misguided arguments are; I’m not interested, my research is doing terrific without him, and I don’t want to drag my IQ down — but I might have to force myself to watch it.
I have better things to do than hear yet more confusion.
I want to set up the field to finally be headed in the right direction.
The field needs capable researchers. The field lost some contributors (eg James Arthur, Jan Irvin).
Thomas is horrifically ignorant about Greek mythemes; every word he wrote about a snake-basket illustration in his published book was mistaken. He is simply unqualified by any rudimentary measure, and wholly lacks credibility, on this particular topic.
Yet he is planning to write another book pushing the same Pop-level confusion and conflations, spreading & perpetuating the same Pop confusions in the name of debunking them, while I’m still saying his publisher owes me reimbursement for his recent farcical disaster of a book, regarding the only topic that matters — mushrooms in Greek & Christian religion.
He has high standards for scholarship, which I press him to live up to on this topic, of mushrooms in Greek & Christian art — put the car all the way into reverse, all the way back to 1957, then properly move forward:
ROBERT GRAVES’ 1957 DECODING OF THE KYKEON RECIPE AS MUKES; ‘MUSHROOM’
Letcher-Hatsis is lazy, sloppy, accustomed to merely refuting Pop error on a Pop level, instead of rising above that level; thinking he can get by with cheap shots and doesn’t need to aim high when discussing anything that supposedly has to do with “the Allegro theory“[sic].
Thomas thinks that everyone in the field is identical with Irvin of 2010 (Allegro’s advocate).
How “Letcher-Hatsis” got himself confused:
By paying too much attention to Carl Ruck’s “secrecy” fixation/ presupposition-framework.
By paying too much attention to Pop articles about “the Allegro theory”[sic]
By paying too much attention to former Allegro advocate Irvin.
To advance the field, it is necessary for me to engage with Thomas.
The reason I am engaging with Thomas is his influence:
His pretty-good video with popular author Brian Muraresku & Chris Bennett.
His plan to write a book that’s likely to head the field further in the wrong direction & get himself even more confused: “The Sacred Mushroom Conspiracy”.
Andy Letcher’s equally bad (on this topic), predecessor book Shroom has been well-received.
Allegro’s book, re-released by Irvin, with Ruck, also has been doing well.
Those books are overrated — Muraresku’s book has limitations too — but also, this popularity of these books shows that:
Everyone is watching & wants this field to be covered — we must get the ship turned in the right direction (like the book The Psychedelic Gospels, which didn’t disappoint).
Thomas is planning on digging the field deeper into the same rut of sloppy Popular thinking that mis-steered the book Shroom by Andy Letcher.
I’m seeing the same bad pattern repeat, over the years, blocking progress, re-entrenching the same mis-thinking.
Hatsis plans a book titled “The Sacred Mushroom Conspiracy”.
Such a planned book is likely to perpetuate misguided thinking.
It is necessary to correct Popular errors, but that has to be done in a twofold way — selectively, not wholesale dismissal and ridicule.
Negative: Explain how Pop thinking is wrong; e.g. ignore Allegro.
Positive: Explain the historical facts of the matter, so as to correctly include the sacrament in question. Do not throw out the baby (sound Western mushroom scholarship) with the bathwater (Pop Sike Cult “Allegro’s theory” followers).
I’m putting together articles and galleries. I did this in the past, and I can tell that people aren’t trying very hard at all, to gather images from print and upload them to the web. Given how easy it is to find “new” examples in print, there should be many more hits in image searches. It’s only taken me about a day to gather all examples on the web, and contribute a bunch more cropped images, and gather my 2002-2006 examples. A significant percentage of online examples are the ones I scanned & uploaded.
People have been dissuaded from even trying to look for examples. They’ve been told the opposite of the truth, eg by McKenna. “Don’t look, it’s not there, Big Bad Church eliminated.” Nonsense. Allegro pushed that nonsense too, despite pop culture thinking he asserted the opposite. Allegro was self-contradictory on this point, of whether mushrooms were present or absent in later Christianity.
Images of Mushrooms in Christian Art https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/13/images-of-mushrooms-in-christian-art/ New gallery of all pics I can find – I’m sick of “spot the mushroom”; my Maximal Entheogen theory has more than enough supporting evidence; but still, there should be way more images. I haven’t gone through all your online images yet. I made some clearer cropped image captures than some in your collection.
Brinckmann, Mushroom Trees, & Asymmetrical Branching https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/11/brinckmann-mushroom-trees-asymmetrical-branching/ Panofsky recommended this 1906 book to Wasson — it proves that all mushrooms in religious art are Italian Pines. (Strange, the other expert, Hatsis, proved that they are all Parasols of Victory — which expert is right??) Wasson censored this book citation from his book SOMA; replaced it by ellipses. A maximum, worst-case conflict of interest makes Wasson have zero credibility re: mushrooms in Christianity. __________________
Influence of early anthropological theorizing on ‘entheogen’ scholarship: John Allegro, The Sacred Mushroom Cyberdisciple, December 14, 2020 https://cyberdisciple.wordpress.com/2020/12/14/influence-of-early-anthropological-theorizing-on-entheogen-scholarship-john-allegro-the-sacred-mushroom/ With Cyberdisciple’s new critique yesterday, actual mushroom scholars need to disavow Allegro and break the false association of “Allegro = mushrooms in Christianity”. Allegro is not an entheogen scholar; his book is not an entheogen scholarship book; and he doesn’t know anything about entheogens. People could hardly pick a worse writer to represent the theory of “Mushrooms in Christianity”.
DUH DUH what I had mis-called a ‘tiger’ is a leopard (that was stupid, but that’s not my point here) so I corrected that yesterday.
But now with my recovered 2010 photos of Amanita, it ONLY NOW struck me that the artist has the SPOTTED (not striped) leopard (not tiger) drinking from the (what we know is, like in my photo) SPOTTED Amanita cap.
Thus as additional evidence for my positive identification of the image as Amanita, we have the Leopard’s SPOTS representing the veil remnants of the Amanita-as-fountain.
The fountain/cap in the mosaic doesn’t show spots, but the leopard drinking from it has the spots – for the Amanita identification, IN CONTRAST TO the striped tigers in the image.
DUH
I added a bullet-point to my list of arguments supporting the Amanita identification. 5 supporting points now.
Photo by Michael Hoffman, the theorist of ego death, 10:10 a.m. 10/10/2010
On November 14, 2020, I positively identified the leopard’s bowl in the Dionysus triumph fresco as Amanita mushroom — not as a fleeting possible hypothesis to consider, like in 2006 with a sense of high uncertainty and skepticism (that was a preliminary, hypothesis-formation phase of the discovery process) — but this time as a conclusion that I commit to and stand behind.
I defensibly concluded that this image represents an Amanita, based on:
My own first-hand, close-up inspection and photographing of numerous Amanita specimens. My specimen-photo confirms that a rim can be formed, matching the leopard-fountain image, when the Amanita is upturned but not extremely upturned.
The wide stem; the proportions of stem and bowl.
The distinctive gills exposed on the outside.
The established mushrooms and mythology context of the mosaic.
In contrast to the striped tigers, this is a spotted feline, a leopard. The veil-remnant spots are not shown on top of the fountain, but the associated leopard has spots, like an Amanita cap, making the leopard a better choice of feline, to visually match the Amanita fountain, than a tiger would be.
Emoji Message to Me
Thank you for showing us the authenticity of all throughout the , and the true meaning of the ✝ Thank you for all the many hours, months and years of you’ve put in toward finding the to the mysteries of life. And through the many, many sessions of research about where stops, and future thoughts are frozen ♒ and fixed and how gives us strength and enriches our life. Thank you, Michael, for all that you do. Wishing you a glorious filled with many wonderful of life. I also give thanks to Yahoo Groups where I found the Egodeath Theory.
Reading-Copy/Annotation-Copy of Article About Allegro’s Undue Influence
In order to characterize entheogen scholarship since the 1950s, we should recognize the role in that scholarship of theories about religion, myth, and culture developed by European anthropologists from the 19th and early 20th centuries.
Such theories have shaped many scholars’ investigations of psychedelic drugs in religious history. The background assumptions of many scholars has been founded in such theorizing about pre-modern religion and myth. I have written before about how Robert Graves’ and Wasson’s reliance on the concept of “taboo” led them to underestimate the extent of evidence for psychedelics in religious history.
[In Ruck, the ‘taboo’ assumption/explanatory paradigm manifests as his bizarre overuse of the concept ‘secret’ (conceptualized incorrectly).
In Hatsis, the ‘taboo’ theory comes through in his planned book title, “… forthcoming books … “The Sacred Mushroom Conspiracy” (spring, 2022).” -mh]
The concept of “taboo” led them to speculate that mushrooms were used in religious origins, but were then suppressed and made taboo. They were subsequently half-remembered in mythology. See my posts on Robert Graves: https://cyberdisciple.wordpress.com/?s=robert+gravestodo (recheck)
This post discusses anthropological theorizing as a major component of Allegro’s book
This post discusses a strain of anthropological theorizing as a major component of the intellectual background to John Allegro’s The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross.
_____
It would be misleading to think of Allegro as a “mycologist” or a scholar of “entheogens” (i.e. drugs in religious history).
It has become clearer over the past 20 years that Allegro’s contributions to scholarship on psychedelics in religious history are rather minor.
Although he has priority in the act of combining the topics of drugs in Christian history and the ahistoricity of Jesus and the Apostles (as well as drugs in Jewish history and the ahistoricity of Old Testament accounts), his book is not really of much use now to scholars.
Allegro was a pioneer for the field of ‘entheogens,’ such as it is, but a very imperfect one.
_____
Similarly, it does not help much to describe his work in The Sacred Mushroom as that of a linguist.
His argumentation may be primarily linguistic, but that argumentation relies on anthropological theorizing of the 19th and early 20th century.
See my Evaluating Theories of Mythology page for summaries of anthropological theorizing about mythology. Relevant extracts for this post:
[Instead of just “natural world”, I’d specify absolutely clearly, a key real distinction: practically all of the bad theories of Mythology commit the Great OSC Category-Error; the Great Wrong-State Category Error: the bad theories of Myth assume that the referent of myth is things in the ordinary state of consciousness.
In fact, Myth is explanation or description for things that are observed and experienced in the altered state (such as Psilocybe) — regardless of whether you choose to categorize that as “the natural world”. –mh]
Myth as science: Myth is an explanation for the natural world. Read myth literally. Myth is premodern/’primitive’ form of modern scientific explanation. Variants within this framework. Creationism; Rationalizing; Tylor; Horton. Literal, ordinary-state, alien social psychology.
E. B. Tylor (1832-1917): myth is ‘primitive’ version of scientific theory. Myth explains natural world, but poorly. Decisions and actions of gods cause physical events. myth and science incompatible. ‘primitives’ had ‘myth’, moderns have ‘science’. We moderns should reject myth. Myth must be understood literally because myth explains the workings of the physical world. ‘Primitives’ think like moderns, but less rigorously. ‘Primitives’ see same world as moderns, but conceive of it differently.
R. Horton (1932-2019): Modifies E. B. Tylor’s theory. Myth and pre-modern religion are coherent conceptual systems with internal logic and rules, just as science is for moderns. Take pre-modern myth at face value, not symbolically. Rejects Tylor’s use of word ‘primitive’. Modern western thinking should not monopolize interpretation of other non-modern, non-western thinking.
Myth-ritual theory: Myth intertwined with communal religious ritual. Myth explains ritual, ritual enacts myth and seeks to affect world. Variety within this framework. Frazer; Smith; Harrison; Hooke; Girard; Burkert; Frye; Raglan. Literal, ordinary-state, alien social psychology.
J. G. Frazer (1854-1941): Myth-ritualist theory. Early: myth is pre-modern version of modern applied science/technology. myth tied to ritual, ritual enacts myth. combination of ritual and myth affect physical world. Focused on ensuring yearly vegetable growth, main myth worldwide is of dying and rising vegetation god. Later addition: Focus on king in worldwide myth. God resides in king, king is ritually killed before becomes too infirm, soul of god passes to next king, ensures continued success of community (including vegetable growth). Ignores story-telling elements.
Allegro’s The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross is founded on his construction of the “fertility philosophy” as the origin and essence of Near Eastern and Greek religion
Allegro’s The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross is founded on his construction of the “fertility philosophy” as the origin and essence of Near Eastern and Greek religion.
The book fits in with anthropological theorizing about the origins of cultural practices and with the mindset of “primitives,” imagined in general as a mindset now foreign, alien, and lost to modern, rational, industrialized people, and needing to be reconstructed via the scholarly heroics of the investigator.
Allegro interprets religion and myth as resulting from early peoples’ attempt to control the cycles of generation in plants and animals, including people.
_____
This is not so different from James Frazer’s widely-read The Golden Bough (first published 1890; expanded in 1900; expanded again 1906-1915).
Frazer interprets the many examples of a dying-and-rising godman in world religion and myth as representing the planting and harvest cycle.
For Frazer, religious ritual was meant to ensure the next year’s harvest.
He interpreted Christ as a variant on this central myth.
Frazer’s book was read widely by scholars, intellectuals, and the general reading public alike, and was influential on thinking about ancient religion.
_____
When I finally read Allegro’s book recently, I was surprised to see how much space was devoted to this “fertility philosophy.”
If someone asked me what Allegro’s book is about, I would say the book is primarily about his variant of the theory of an ancient “fertility philosophy” asthe origin and essence of Near Eastern and Greek religion; I would not say that it is primarily about mushrooms in Christianity.
Allegro’s contribution of combining psychedelics in Christianity and ahistoricity of religious founders seems almost accidental.
Allegro’s theory is grounded in etymology, to interpret mushrooms as “fertility philosophy”
Allegro’s particular twists on the “fertility philosophy” theory were:
to ground it [fertility theory] in etymologies and
to interpret the mushroom as the primarysymbol of “fertility philosophy.”
The first [the first what? ie ‘etymologies’…??] is a linguistic argument, [that what? what is the first argument asserting? that etymologies evidence fertility philosophy]
the second [ie asserting that the mushroom was the primary symbol for fertility] more of an argument by analogy and symbol.
[i wish the above abbreviated condensed sentence were broken into two explicit statements. I *hate* the word ‘it’, and indirection/pointers. I like every sentence to stand on its own, specifying the subjects/objects explicitly. the below will clarify. -mh]
_____
His linguistic argument is:
That words in Aramaic, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, etc. are all traceable to Sumerian.
That these roots in Sumerian reveal the true meanings of the later words.
That authors were aware of these true meanings and wrote in a special code that alluded to them.
Allegro claims that: key words in religious contexts can be traced back to Sumerian words that have to do with fertility.
This material is so technical and (by Allegro’s own admission) hypothetical that evaluating it is impossible for the common reader.
In passing, we can point out that it is only Allegro’s conjecture (as he admits) that the languages noted above are descended from Sumerian.
Scholars of Sumerian language, from what I can tell, regularly treat it as a linguistic isolate, meaning it did not descend to later languages in the way that, for example, Latin descended into Italian, French, Spanish, etc.
_____
His argument by analogy and symbol is that the life cycle of the mushroom, its various stages, and its appearance are all representative of the longer seasonal cycle of plants and the procreation of animals.
His method here too is primarily linguistic, with little reference to depictions of mushrooms in art.
This material relies on accepting the details of the “fertility philosophy” construction. [explanatory framework -mh]
It
[agghh I HATE THE WORD ‘IT’, even more than I hate the word ‘secret’. WTF IS “IT”??? My rule I follow is, state the “it” thing directly/explicitly every time, w/ rare exception. -mh]
It [Allegro’s material about mushrooms??] is not evidence to prove the “fertility philosophy,” but rather
the “fertility philosophy” is evidence that proves the hypothesis that the mushroom was symbolic of the “fertility philosophy.”
The Amanita mushroom’s psychedelic effects play a minor part in Allegro’s interpretation.
He is not too interested in the phenomenology of the state induced by mushrooms.
_____
Allegro does not have anything to say about possibility-branching [aka tech-term ‘Possibilism’] or pre-existence [aka tech-term ‘Eternalism’ -mh].
It may be true to say that “Allegro talks about psychedelics and about metaphor”, but it [such a general assertion] wouldn’t be very helpful or tell us much about his book.
“Psychedelics and metaphor with reference to what?” one could justly ask.
Answer: with reference to his “fertility philosophy” construct.
[
Allegro’s proposed decoding to identify the ultimate referent of religious mythology: Religious mythology refers to fertility increase.
Hoffman’s proposed decoding to identify the ultimate referent of religious mythology:
Religious mythology refers to repeatedly taking psychedelics, producing transformation of the experiential mental worldmodel from literalist ordinary-state possibility-branching to analogical psychedelic pre-existence. I’m not happy with either phrase, inadequate for standalone use: literalist ordinary-state possibility-branching analogical psychedelic pre-existence I wish to contrast two models of “controller-in-world”. The mind switches from one “controller-in-world” model to another; from possibilism to eternalism; (two “controller-in-world” models) from {king steering in tree} to {snake frozen in rock}. From: the “freewill power in branching-possibilities”-premised, egoic personal control system to: no-free-will/monopossibility; to: empty, projected, no-free-will, personal control agency, steering along a pre-existing worldline rail {snake} frozen into the block-universe {rock}
Hoffman’s proposed decoding to identify the ultimate referent of religious mythology:
Religious mythology refers to repeatedly taking psychedelics, producing transformation of the experiential mental worldmodel from
the “freewill-power in branching-possibilities“-premised, egoic personal control system — {king steering} in {tree} to
empty, projected, no-free-will, personal control agency, made to steer along a pre-existing worldline rail {snake} frozen into the block-universe {rock}
-mh]
To make better sense of his work, we have to do the additional work of taking Allegro’s “fertility philosophy” and mapping it on to transcendent knowledge.
Allegro ‘decodes’ religion into… another code.
[
the actual correct non-code, non-analogy referent, is: myth describes —
psychedelics transforming the mental worldmodel of agent-in-world from the “freewill power in branching-possibilities”-premised, egoic personal control system to empty, projected, no-free-will, personal control agency, steering along a pre-existing worldline rail {snake} frozen into the block-universe {rock}
-mh]
_____
Allegro writes as a modern rationalist.
This is typical of the perspective of the 19th century anthropological theorist.
Allegro’s interest in
explaining Judaism and Christianity as exemplars of the “fertility philosophy”
is to discredit them:
once we see that they derive from the “fertility philosophy” we should
abandon the religions and their moral teachings as irrational.
[the virgin-maiden Ariadne, daughter of maze-architect Daedalus, was abandoned by Theseus, then Dionysus abducted/married her -mh] FACT-CHECK: Theseus abandon Ariadne Dionysus married https://www.bing.com/search?q=Theseus+abandon+Ariadne+Dionysus+married The Soap Authorities, Wiki: “Dionysus claimed Ariadne as wife, causing Theseus to abandon her. Homer does not elaborate on the nature of Dionysus’ accusation. Oxford Classical Dictionary explained: Ariadne was already married to Dionysus when she eloped with Theseus.”
the mystic womanly soul, always prostituting herself to the false ruler, not her true, given Partner, the mind’s actual, veiled male component. -mh]
The drug aspect of the book seems present to discredit the religions, to associate them [religions] with a topic [psychedelics] controversial at that time (late 60s, early 70s).
_____
Allegro’s decoding leads him to reject the historicity of the Old and New Testaments.
The authors wrote in punning code to allude to the fertility philosophy and its main symbol, the mushroom. His emphasis on secret punning leads him to read the history of conflict within Judaism and Christianity and between the Romans and Christians as the conflict between mushroom users and mushroom suppressors.
He does not have any direct evidence of such suppression.
On this topic he projects modern Prohibitionism onto antiquity.
It is not clear why there would be suppression of a fertility mushroom cult in later antiquity during the Roman Empire, if Allegro’s other argument is true, that the fertility-mushroom cult is the origin of Near Eastern and Greek religion.
Were not Roman and Italic religious practices of near equal antiquity as Greek religious practices and derived from similar sources?
Allegro’s investigation & framing of religion & mushrooms is shaped by his “fertility philosophy” idea from anthropological theorizing
Allegro’s investigation and framing of the topic of religion and mushrooms is shaped by his basis in the “fertility philosophy” idea drawn from anthropological theorizing.
_____
Allegro’s future reputaton will be as an imperfect pioneer.
[Allegro was right about ahistoricity of religious founder figures. Allegro was right about mushrooms being source of Christianity. Allegro was merely accidentally correct on these points. He got the right answer, for the wrong reasons, and those “right answers” were couched/framed wrong. Allegro had a wrong mental framing of these points. -mh]
It is possible to imagine a different book published in 1970 opening up the topic of psychedelics in Christianity and combining that with ahistoricity of religious founders, but entirely lacking in any reference to a “fertility philosophy” and without attempting to tie Greek, Christian, and Jewish religion to Sumerian religion via tenuous linguistic arguments, and without projecting modern Prohibition onto ancient society.
_____
Ah, well. We [scholars] deal with [always have to sort the wheat/grain/fruit from the chaff/husk/straw, like Persephone’s threshing & winnowing sieve -mh] what we have.
More important than studying Allegro in much detail is to understand and characterize the components of his theory and the role his book has played in discourse about psychedelics in Christianity.
_____
There’s no need to spend much time refuting or defending Allegro.
Even to say, broadly, that “Allegro was right about psychedelics in Christianity and the ahistoricity of religious founders” requires us to have gone far beyond Allegro’s model.
[Allegro’s conception of both “psychedelics in Christianity” and “the ahistoricity of religious founder figures” was so totally malformed, that Allegro harmed MORE THAN helped the field.
Now, we’re having to un-do and un-ravel everything people think they know about “Allegro’s mushroom theory of Christianity”;
we have to fully waste time and put the car in reverse like my time-wasting 2006 exhaustive and exhausting article, travel back to 1970, and move again forward, onto the right, correct onramp,
BACK TO SQUARE 1, NEUTRALLY, WITHOUT the shared Allegro-and-Ruck, DAMNED “SECRET TABOO CONSPIRACY” PRESUMPTIONS, AND without muddle-headed “MUSHROOMS = AMANITA” vague conflations and PRESUMPTIONS, to neutrally and without presuppositions, ask the simple question:
To what extent mushrooms in Greek & Christian religion & culture?
To what extent mushrooms in Christianity?
To what extent was the Eucharist recognized as mushrooms?
-mh]
_____
Allegro was right, broadly speaking, about psychedelics in Christianity, but what would the phrase ‘psychedelics in Christianity’ mean for Allegro?
It would mean Amanita, Amanita as symbolic of plant growth and animal reproduction, and secretive linguistic punning on the mushroom and on fertility.
It would not mean a variety of psychedelics used in an initiatory sequence to cause the transformation of mental worldmodel from possibility-branching to pre-existence of the future, in service of a counter-imperial society.
_____
Allegro was right, broadly speaking, about the ahistoricity of religious founders, but what would the phrase ‘ahistoricity of religious founders’ mean for Allegro?
It would mean secretive linguistic punning to refer to Amanita and fertility, in order to hide a mushroom fertility cult from the Roman authority.
It would not mean an analogical understanding of figures in mythology as representing aspects of the psyche during altered state initiation, etc.
_____
The above characterizations are not possible if we are stuck in the simplistic framing of “defending or refuting Allegro.”
They [the above analysis & summary-characterizations of Allegro’s positions/ proposals] require standing outside of Allegro’s work , with independent understanding of the many topics Allegro touched on.
Saying positively that Allegro was right about psychedelics in Christianity and ahistoricity requires pointing out how constrained and narrow his positions were.
He deserves credit for combining psychedelics and ahistoricity, a key idea combination though the way he deployed it was largely limited.
_____
“Refuting Allegro” has become its own cottage industry, one that needs to be put to rest.
[ The other half of that coin is, the many, shallow, outsider, gee-whiz Pop sites, looking for Content, that have the “good idea” of again re-re-re-presenting “the Allegro idea, that Christianity was started with mushrooms“.
What a terrible situation!, that Pop Sike Cult today thinks:
“The Allegro idea = Christianity had mushrooms.” “That Christianity-had-mushrooms, is Allegro’s idea and discovery and thesis.”
Since when does Allegro own the realization that Christianity is based on mushrooms? He doesn’t even understand the idea!
Even Clark Heinrich’s book Strange Fruit in 1995 horrifically botched & misrepresented Allegro’s thesis, stating that “allegro held that Jesus used mushrooms.” No, Allegro held that Jesus was mushrooms, not that Jesus used mushrooms!
REST IN PEACE John Allegro;
Don’t let some evil necromancer force your ghost to forever guard and prevent scholars from entering the topic of:
To what extent mushrooms in Greek & Christian religion & culture?
To what extent mushrooms in Christianity?
To what extent was the Eucharist recognized as mushrooms?
-mh]
Why the obsession with ‘refuting Allegro’?
What does an author gain by portraying himself as a ‘debunker’ of Allegro?
What’s the point?
The field would be better served by ignoring the details of Allegro’s work.
It’s not necessary to take Allegro as the starting point [and guiding star, and definer of the debate positions, and definer of the outermost boundaries of our thought -mh] for discussing psychedelics in Christianity {or for the ahistoricity of religious founders}.
Allegro is interesting for the discourse provoked
Allegro is more interesting for the discourse that he provoked.
The dynamics of argumentation can be observed in that discourse:
I wouldn’t bother studying Allegro in much detail.
It’s enough to know about Allegro and to conceive properly of his achievements and limitations.
At least The Sacred Mushroom has convenient summaries of each chapter at the chapter’s end.
[The Tragedy of Irvin the former Gnostic-Entheogen Scholar
I wonder what Irvin — the now-lost, former Irvin of 2009, now dwelling in the land of shades with Kore the illusory maiden-ego-agent — says in his Preface, pp v-viii.
It’s a tragedy, Irvin invested so much in Gnostic Entheogen scholarship & Amanita and Allegro & McKenna and interviewing ALL of the hyped promoted Names in the Pop Sike Scholarship Industry.
Then his Grand Finale article series The Secret History of Magic Mushrooms, followed by video interviews with careless slob never-ready-for-prime-time Joseph Atwill; now he’s become some Irvin-type-of- Christian, Logos advocate and goes around yelling insults and accusations at anyone who is favorable about the entheogen theory of religion, and now damns entheogens with the faintest of praise, last I heard.
The Sacred Mushroom and The Cross: A study of the nature and origins of Christianity within the fertility cults of the ancient Near East 4.6 stars out of 5 — 424 ratings <– This is a problem. This book is way overrated and over-influential — or rather, pseudo-influential, by means of misrepresenting this book and letting the ghost of this way-off-base book PREVENT and KEEP CLOSED rather than ASSIST the field of Western mushroom scholarship. Anniversary Edition, 2009 Gnostic Media/Irvin http://amzn.com/0982556276 by John M. Allegro (Author), Judith Anne Brown (Foreword), Allegro’s daughter Jan Irvin (Introduction), Carl “Mr. Secret” Ruck (Addendum)
-mh]
Summarizing entheogen scholars’ relation to anthropological theorizing
Summarizing major entheogen scholars and their relation to anthropological theorizing:
Graves, Wasson: Taboo: mushrooms were present at religious origins, but later suppressed and rendered taboo. [McKenna’s books (McFakea), same! -mh] This taboo is reflected in mythology. [?? not sure what’s being asserted here -mh]
_____
Allegro: Fertility Philosophy: mushrooms are symbols of the life cycle of plants and reproductive cycle of animals. Religious rituals were focused on renewing these [mundane-state, OSC-focused] cycles, ensuring future life [in a purely mundane sense]. Mushrooms were referred to via secretive coding in language, knowledge of which was later lost. [and yet – inconsistently – was not lost, as Allegro evidenced by citing the Plaincourault Amanita-tree. -mh]
In a subsequent post, I will discuss Ruck’s 2009 Afterword to Allegro’s book, titled “Fungus Redivivus” (whose meaning, “Fungus Reborn,” seems to pun on Allegro’s focus on the mushroom as symbol of the life cycle of plants).
[Irvin[2009]’s Introduction. Irvin[2017] feels “had” by the whole field; that we’ve all been taken for a ride; he accuses most everyone (the Big Names) of deceitful intentions. -mh]
Expect more posts on Ruck’s scholarship.
With Brian Muraresku setting out to vindicate Ruck, it is time to characterize his [Ruck’s body of] work.
[need to identify contributions & limitations/shortcomings of Ruck’s work.
Around 1998-2003, I read all of the entheogen scholarship, including Ruck. Ruck’s work was one building-block that I repaired and incorporated into my 1998-2006 work on the Mytheme theory, that:
Religious mythology is description-by-analogy of repeatedly taking psychedelics, producing transformation of the experiential mental worldmodel from “literalist ordinary-state possibility-branching” to “analogical psychedelic pre-existence”; from literalist ordinary-state possibilism to analogical psychedelic eternalism, as a sequence of two conflicting mental worldmodels of time, self, possibility, and control.
-mh]
Related email outtakes
I’m not sure if I have all of Irvin’s books – I got them very late, if at all, so I haven’t seen his published coverage that Hatsis rebutted.
I’m very glad Cyberdisciple today wrote this much-needed critical assessment of Allegro‘s book in relation to the field of Western mushroom scholarship.
Allegro’s book has little relevance to the field of Western mushroom scholarship.
Everyone in the popular audience seems to equate Allegro with the idea of mushrooms in Christianity — his book is far from deserving that equation, and that equation is harming and blocking the field. I wish everyone would just forget Allegro — he is irrelevant.
Allegro is not an entheogen scholar; his book is not a book of entheogen scholarship; and he doesn’t know anything about entheogens.
People could hardly pick a worse figure than Allegro, to represent the “mushrooms in Christianity” theory.
Allegro even contradicts himself, saying that the secret coded meaning was forgotten — and then showing a much later mushroom tree depiction in support of primitive Christians’ coded message.
Any alleged “contribution” of Allegro to the field of Western mushroom scholarship, is accidental and misunderstood by Allegro himself.
___________
I’m glad that Cyberdisciple plans to critically assess Ruck‘s body of work and do a critical scholarly write-up.
I’m not sure Hatsis’ views on John Rush & especially on Carl Ruck.
I’m quoted in Ruck, asserting that “mixed-wine” throughout Late Antiquity should simply be considered mushroom-wine (I most certainly don’t mean the red-and-white kind).
That argument is 90% based on effects described in mythology & Mystery Religions; my argument is only 10% based on images.
Ruck wrote a couple chapters in one of Rush’s books, which I haven’t seen.
What Letcher-Hatsis, Ruck, Irvin, and Pop Onlookers Must Change, for Constructive/ Productive Mushroom Scholarship
What the individuals must to do rectify the situation for the field:
Ruck must stop employing his malformed concept “secret”. Stop using the word ‘secret’, FFS!PLEASE STOP, for the love of God, and to save the field of mushroom scholarship!
Irvin must stop uncritically affirming Allegro monolithically. Do like I do: list the pros and cons of any writer; what aspects they get right, and what they get wrong.
Outside the field, everyone must stop treating “Allegro” as synonymous with mushroom scholarship, or the theory that Christianity involves mushrooms.
Letcher-Hatsis must stop thinking that the Pop-spreading of “Allegro says”; and Irvin’s uncritical wholesale affirmation of Allegro; and Ruck’s obsession/fixation on “secret”, define the productive potential field of mushroom scholarship.
Letcher-Hatsis must stop conflating a particular hypothesis with the entire field; stop covertly flipping back and forth between the extremely narrow, particularly premise/hypothesis of “spreading via secret Amanita cult” vs. the completely broad, general question, “the extent of use of various psychoactive mushrooms in Western culture”.
Letcher-Hatsis must dis-entangle their discussion of what are actually distinct questions; some 5-7 distinct debate-issues.
Letcher-Hatsis must stop writing unthinking phrases like “I find the idea totally ridiculous” – that’s the problem with Letcher-Hatsis’ approach to writing about the field’s questions, right there: *WHAT* idea; *WHICH* IDEA? You HAVE to be specific and articulate!Or else you are failing as a scholar, and even failing as a thinker.
It is *not* “the”, single, one, idea, which Letcher-Hatsis flips between identifying as “spread of secret Amanita cult”, and “use of mushrooms in Western culture”.
Like good scholars in the field of mushroom scholarship, I reject the hypothesis “spread of secret Amanita cult”, and I assert “significant use of mushrooms in Western culture.”
According to Letcher-Hatsis, no such compound position is possible, because they are one and the same question; in their Pop-shaped, overly Pop-guided thinking, “spread secret Amanita cult” is the same identical position as “mushrooms in Western culture”.
That’s why Letcher-Hatsis consistently — and PROVABLY — demonstrates ZERO SELF-AWARENESS about his continual flipping back-and-forth, silently conflating the (incorrect) “spread secret Amanita cult” position with the (correct) “mushrooms in Western culture” position.
In his sloppy, undifferentiated, Pop-guided, Pop-level thinking, — Letcher-Hatsis argues this way consistently — he assumes and takes it as granted, that if you reject the “spread secret Amanita cult” hypothesis, that’s the same thing as rejecting “mushrooms in Western culture”.
They think and reason that, because the idea of “spread secret Amanita cult” is totally ridiculous, that’s the same thing as the idea of “mushrooms in Western culture” being totally ridiculous.
According to the malformed assumption that’s latched onto (and promoted) by Letcher-Hatsis, if you assert mushrooms in Western culture, that necessarily means that you assert “spread of secret Amanita cult” — in his inchoate thinking, these two positions are the same identical position — that’s why Letcher-Hatsis never discusses or acknowledges the distinction between the two question-scopes (“spread secret Amanita cult”, vs. “mushrooms in Western Culture”).
Thus (as proof and evidence supporting my seemingly unbelievable assertions about his total lack of self-awareness of conflating the two extreme opposite-scoped questions) you have Hatsis within his video disproving Amanita, and then titling the video “I disproved mushrooms.”
The clear implication in this video is that he is unaware of Liberty Cap mushrooms, and he is only aware of Amanita!
Who the f*ck ever asserted, that the question of “Amanita” is the same question as “Mushrooms” — other than bad, sloppy, Pop thinkers? — including Letcher-Hatsis.
Letcher-Hatisis is letting sloppy Pop thinking guide his would-be scholarly analysis.
Those are two opposite extreme scopes of “the” idea, but Letcher-Hatsis conflates the two totally differently scoped questions into this single monstrous construct of his own creation, “the” idea.
This way, Letcher-Hatisis can strawman misrepresent the entire field of “Western mushroom scholarship”, and struttingly self-promote as if he has proved something significant and contributed something significant, when in fact, the only thing Letcher-Hatsis has contributed to the field of Western mushroom scholarship, is his own confused conflation of the narrow, incorrect hypothesis “spread secret Amanita cult”, and the broad, correct hypothesis, “significant mushrooms in Western culture”.
Identifying Exactly Why Letcher-Hatsis Has a Pop-level Mis-conception of the Field of Mushroom Scholarship, as Allegro-centric and “Secret”-Obsessed
Letcher-Hatsis’ inability to specify what he means by “the idea is totally ridiculous”, shows that he’s attuned only to the very worst he can find, in pop spreading of “Allegro says” (outside the field of mushroom scholarship), and Irvin 2010’s uncritical following of Allegro within the field of mushroom scholarship, and Ruck’s extreme overuse of the mis-conceived idea of “secret” (within the field of mushroom scholarship).
By only focusing on these 3 things:
Pop “Allegro says” articles by non-scholars, very much ignorant outsiders to the field of mushroom scholarship.
Irvin 2010’s uncritical wholesale affirmation of Allegro’s work.
Rucks’ mis-use and extreme overuse of the concept “secret”.
Letcher-Hatsis has become lazy and unable to sort out the valid from the invalid.
Letcher Hatsis is LAZY. He doens’t wnt to do the intellectual hard work otha that scholars always have to do, of sorting out the wheat from chaff. He latches onto the most silly and ridiculous aspects or layer of Pop Entertainment Outsiders’ Gee Whiz articles, that just parrot the other Gee Whiz outsideres articles, repeatinng “Did you hear the Allegro theory?” Because the pop world can limit itself to “Allegro says”, these lazy sub-scholars, Letcher Hatsis, (NAD AND ROBERT PRICE!! EDITOR OF JOURNAL OF HITGH HIGHER CRITICISM) wrongly THINK THEY CAN use similarly sloppy, careless writing, to debunk the pop, sloppy, careless writing of the countless Web articles that spread and repeat … they are thowing the baby out with the bathwater. Just because the most rubbgish recounting of “the mushroom theory — which Allegro created” — is dominant, these failed scholars mistakenly think that they can paint THE ENTIRE FIELD OF MUSHROM ESOTERICISM SCHOLARSHIP with the SAME POP ALLEGRO-SAYS” BRUSH. That’s where — unfortunately — L.H. is coming from. LH, STOP SAILING BY THE STARS OF POP “ALLEGRO SAYS” SCHOLARSHIP. THAT’S NOT HOW THE REAL SCHOLARS IN THEIR FIELD STEER THEIR THINKING AND RESEARCH. (Though Ruck is infested by the “secret” concept, he really needs to drop it! And Irvin pretty much really was the #1 fan/follower of Allegro, 10 years ago.) Yes, there are real problems IWHT WITHIN the field, na and popularly AROUND/OUTSIDE their field:
Garbage-thinking around/outside of the field: pop articles parrotting “Allegro Says”.
Garbage-thinking inside the field:
Ruck’s awful “secret” this, “secret” that. STOP IT! Stop your PR propaganda hype of “secret! secret! buy my book about “secret” mushrooms!
Irvin 2010’s uncritical wholesale affirmation of Allegro.
(to the extent that he’s even genuinelinly inside the field of mushroom scholarship, which is highly debatable: )
Letcher Hatsis’ reaction to both the gee-whiz parrotting-outsiders, and to the bad “steer by the star of Allegro” fallacy within the field, and Ruck’s “let’s see how confused I can make myself” obsession/fixation on “secret”, which he doesn’t even understand.
THAT is where Hatsis comes from when he says writes to me, VERY REVEALINGLY, his 100% vague, inchoate: “I find the idea totally ridiculous.”
He finds some idea “totally ridiculous” — YET HE NEVER SPECIFIES WHAT HE HAS IN MIND BY “THE IDEA”.
He gives 0 specification of what “the idea” is, while… He finds “the idea”() “TOTALLY RIDICULOUS”.
Those two go hand-in-hand:
Letcher-Hatsis’ complete lack of clear specifying of the idea; his notorious slip-and-slide shifting of what “the idea” is; and:
His finding of “the idea”(??) to be “totally ridiculous”; which is to say: His RIDICULING OF “THE IDEA”.
Letcher-Hatsis’ driving motivation for his non-scholarly non-research on the non-specified topic: He is out to ridicule some “received idea” that he in no way consistently specifies/identifies.
The ENTIRE PROBLEM with his thinking, is, his use of the term “the idea”, WITHOUT IT OCCURRING TO HIM TO SPECIFY WHAT HE HOLDS IN MIND BY “THE IDEA”.
A New, Clarifying Approach: Arrange the Tauroctony Elements into a Hierarchy of Control-Power: What Is the Revealed Chain of Control?
God the ultimate creator/controller of the block-universe world
the block-universe world; the worldline of control-thoughts frozen into the block universe
the control-thought inserter/injector
the control-thought receiver/receptacle
WHAT IS THE PERCEIVED/REVEALED CHAIN OF CONTROL?
The perceived/revealed levels of control; chain of control
(debatable/unclear – FIGURE IT OUT! — DONE.)
In terms of Core theory / the Cybernetic theory:
creator of the fate-controlled, pre-existing world
fate-controlled, pre-existing block-universe {rock} world
control-thought inserter/injector
control-thought receiver/receptacle
It turns out that the bull (the seemingly autonomous personal control system) is actually, under the hood/cover, a control-thought receiver/receptacle that is controlled by the control-thought inserter/injector {sol} which is controlled by the pre-existing worldline of personal control-thoughts which is controled by god/ Zeus/God/ the Creator/ the Lion outside the fate-controlled cosmos
_____
The mind changes:
From: a simple-single locus-of-control: the bull (the seemingly autonomous personal control system)
To: this control-hierarchy: God/ Zeus/ the Creator/ the Lion the pre-existing worldline of personal control-thoughts the control-thought inserter/injector {sol} a control-thought receiver/receptacle
____
In terms of Mystery Religion mythemes:
The trans-cosmic lion born outside of the rock
The block universe/ snake (or m/f snake-pair)-in-rock/ pre-existence/ Fatedness
Mithras
Sol/charioteer
Luna/ bull/ local virtual egoic locus of control, in the ordinary state of consciousness
[11:37 a.m. December 14, 2020] – chariot drawn by 2 Drakones = the mind’s personal control system is controlled by 2 snakes = controlled by 2 worldlines = controlled by 1 Male worldline + 1 Female worldline = the control-thought inserter/injector + the control-thought receiver/receptacle This perception of control-reality occurs in the fate-ruled sphere-and-gateway of the fixed stars (Heimarmene);
Tauroctony elements for Creator-> block universe-> control-thought inserter> control-thought receiver:
snake in rock = the fate-controlled worldline frozen into the pre-existing block universe [fwfb] the worldline frozen into the block universe [wfbu] the worldline of control-thoughts frozen into the block universe [wctfbu]
Lion outside fixed stars/heimarmene
snake in rock – the fate-controlled worldline frozen into the pre-existing block universe
Sol – the control-thought inserter/injector
Luna – the control-thought receiver/receptacle
self-sacrificing, self-threatening, ending the dominance/claim of lower thinking, sacrificing the centrality/origin-claim of the egoic locus-of-control power claim/assumption. by demonstrating the threatening of it, acknowledges the actual control-chain:
God the ultimate creator/controller of the block-universe world
IF YOU ARE GOOD, THE NATIVE CHRISTMAS SHAMANS WILL INITIATE YOU IN THE SACRED MEAL THAT WAS USED IN ALL THE HELLENISTIC MYSTERY RELIGIONS (SECRET AMANITA CULTS)
“But they did have these loaves of bread inscribed with a cross. They also drank wine at these Mithraeum communion banquets, and the wine was laced with Amanita muscaria mushrooms, which were intended to produce a kind of out-of-body experience.” 2:20 Video: Mithraism with Jason Reza Jorjani YT ch: New Thinking Allowed with Jeffrey Mishlove https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIQ0i_1eoJ8&t=135s
OF COURSE for the thumbnail image, HE CHOOSES THE MALFORMED STATUE WHERE MITHRAS FAILS TO REMEMBER TO TURN, CONVERT, AND LOOK BACK BEHIND HIM TO THE RIGHT, TO PERCEIVE SOL, THE MIND’S UNCONTROLLABLE SOURCE OF CONTROL-THOUGHTS.
Sacrificial Climax – Higher Thinking Doesn’t Do Physical Harm, But Commits a Control-System Violation to Sabotage and Disprove the Personal Egoic Control System — Turning the Will Against Itself
The higher mind, in God-mode thinking (not to say ominpotent; this is not saying that the mind gains control over its thought-source), the mind finds a sacrifice-potential, a vulnerability-exploit.
The mind finds a way to self-blade itself, a real kind of violation, willing against willing, a cybernetic self-cancellation that amounts to a control-system violation.
Not that this involves harm; but the mind discovers that it can be made to will anything, in God-mode thinking, and that spells the terminal death of child-mode thinking, with no more reincarnation, forgetting, falling back into egoic possibilism-thinking.
It is a real kind of self-penetrating, self-blading, a cybernetic intentional sabotage, to finally disprove personal egoic control agency, in the center of the bull-man’s labyrinth where child-thinking enters, and is sacrificed, and does not re-entrench, but the mind finally remembers and holds onto eternalism-thinking.
The mind is made to hunt for a way to disrupt, thwart, break, disprove, wreck in some sense, to catch-out the fatal vulnerability, powerlessness, and contradiction of the virtual egoic control system.
Higher thinking & observation discovers a vulnerability, a sacrifice opportunity, a way to fully and finally thwart lower thinking.
The higher mind hunts for a way to overthrow the old possibilism-thinking, childhood logic, and the mind finds that way, and “does” that violation.
What exactly does that act of sabotage/ disproof entail? Being made to will against one’s will — at that point, the old way of thinking dies, violated, self-cancelled, purified, pollution burned away.
Heading
Praying to the spirit of Chris Bennett to be of the mind to comment on well familiar tauroctony.
Mithraism — Think with the Female-Male Mind of Mithras, Look at Sol not Just Luna, Blade Ego-Bull and Its World in Its Vulnerable Control-thought Receptacle
Shine torch light on the snake in the covered basket underneath the projected-image, “virtual egoic control agent” mask layer. Remember the worldline of the control-thought injector
All Mithraism material from my 2006 Main Article
~~
Astral ascent mysticism centers around the dangerous gateway or “fatal” boundary crossing – the sphere of the fixed stars – representing the apprehension of Heimarmene and its control of one’s thoughts. The stars wind around the world in a spiral pattern over time; this pattern is depicted by the Heimarmene-snake wrapped around the cosmos, cosmic egg, or Mithraic lion-headed gatekeeper figure.
The Potential for Control Breakdown and Transformation
Julius Caesar was authorized for power by his seizures, and the bull in his military’s Mithraic mystery-cult was wounded in the side, so the figure of Jesus was shown as similarly authorized by the spear-wound in his side, and the figure of the apostle Paul was portrayed as suffering from seizures. The ability to make self-control seize or cancel itself dramatically is an afflicting thorn (2 Cor. 12:7-10), hole, or wound in our side, the innate cybernetic governance-failure through which the new, transformed life is born. The new transcendence-aware self is given birth through the pride-killing disproof-wound in the side.
Jupiter Optimus Maximus means ‘all-good’ and ‘all-powerful’, as is hoped for from a protective deity when one is vulnerable to awareness of Heimarmene in the intense mystic altered state.
Mithras demonstrates that his arm wields control over the power of the bull’s shoulder. Sol is reconciled with Mithras in a pact, and given transcendent power. Sol becomes an authorized charioteer, steering the quadriga with Mithras, guided by Mercury (or Hermes), who is holding a Fatedness-snake on a time-pole. [ouch another “time-pole” half-on-target decoding]
‘Sacrifice’ is a mental attitude of cooperative dependence on that which gives thoughts, your will having been overcome and made to will its own demise as an empty delusion, turned against itself by now-revealed transcendent power. Sacrifice offers up and hands over your claim to effective independent power, as opposed to battling against your near-future self and the inherently overpowering source of all thoughts and movements of will.
Sacrificing your autonomy-claim, acknowledging your dependency on that which ultimately gives you your thoughts, brings mental peace and harmony and calms turmoil, because you are relieved from increasing your attempt to grasp and secure power over your own power; relieved from testing the power of your autonomy and the limits of your self-control thoughts.
Roman sacrificial altars are typically shown with a libation of concentrated, psychoactive unmixed wine being poured on the altar, which opens up a channel to the gods, along with the sacrificial animal such as the unresisting, cooperative bull. The sacrificer pouring the libation has a cloth behind the head, representing the spiritual ecstatic state, where awareness is positioned outside of the usual mind, perceiving its functioning.
Mithras overpowering and sacrificing the bull represents the delusion of self-originated control-power being given over to the transcendent level, with Mithras’ arm wielding the bull’s shoulder and his knife piercing and fatally wounding it. The wound in the bull’s side indicates Mithras demonstrating his power over the bull’s control-power. Mithras wrestles and overpowers the initiate’s control of their will, reconfiguring their understanding of control-power to account for the transcendent givenness of one’s thoughts.
Sol represents the mind’s awareness, which in the dissociative state is positioned ecstatically outside the mind’s functioning. The mind is possessed and overtaken by Mithras. Pure awareness passively watches the sacrificial disproof of the mind’s claim to wield independent personal control-power.
A tauroctony fresco in a Mithraeum shows the self-command bull being sacrificed near the shoulder. A Heimarmene-snake is inevitably drawn toward ingesting the entheogenic blood; often the snake approaches a wine-mixing bowl below the bull instead. A blue-stemmed Psilocybe mushroom appears in Mithras’ leg and garment, with the stem proceeding through 7 steps, up to the stars. The billowing cape behind Mithras indicates the ecstatic state. The sphere of the fixed stars is shown on Mithra’s cape, inside the underworld cave. The god forcefully pins the bull, who is paralyzed and unable to stand. Mithras’ feminine features indicate the soul abducted and married by divine power. Mithras turns to knowingly look back behind the conventional self-concept to see the source of thoughts and movements of the will.
/ end of Mithraism material from my 2006 Main Article
The shine-light-on-hidden-sht-going-on-in-your-control-power-center that snake underneath the empty mask as if the puppet/reflection local locus of control were autonomous when contrrol-thoughts are coming in unstoppably and uncontrollably, light makes visible through elevated – female/male Mithras turns to look back behind the mask of personal e personal egoic control agent at Sol the real source of control , local control is at its mercy at the mercy ofwhathever pre-existing control thoughotus are in the near-future in the worldline of the control-thought inserter, at that time, the mind is eternally laid out with those control-thoughts inserted at each time along the worldline of the control-thought-inserter the snake we’re at th emercy of. Mithras turns to remember and hang on to e-t eternalism-thinking , and not turn to look left toward Luna and forget, and fall back into soul freewill possibilism-thinking and fordet DON’T FORGET ETERNALISM-THINKING … the mind seeks clear thinking regarding the personal control system, leads to purify/purge/ disprove-away.
If the goal is to get rid of or break free from possibilism-thinking, because it’s powerless and unstable and leads to cybernetic death/cancellation/complete overcoming of control / loss of ballast of control.
This is actually can be similar to why McFakea stopped using the flesh of christ, he described meaningless of life but in some ways that’s similar to becoming able to, made able to think anything, to will anything, having no values, transcending usual thinking, values, , ballast; shipwreck storm while possibilism-thinking remains.
possibilism-thinking + altered state = giving birth to a lion-faced serpent monster.
ffemale/male god Mithras instead of looking at Luna, he now looks at the hidden behind his projected mask of Luna, who was virgin, turns to the right in the eternalism-thinking direction, turning to look back to the right at Cybernetic theory, looks at the true locus of control, the hand hiden inside the puppet, now illuminated made visible by the mushroom sacred self-sacrificing meal, the poison meal poisoning traces of egoic possibilism-thinking,
The mental conversion from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking
possibilism mental worldmodel of time, self, possibility, and control
eternalism mental worldmodel of time, self, possibility, and control
TRANSFORMED FROM BRANCHING-POSSIBILITIES-THINKING TO PRE-EXISTENCE-THINKING
is verbose common words common parlance to say with pro jargon, efficiency, conciseness, of uncommon words used by the mind jammers. uncommon yet there are other meanings of these tech terms.
transformed from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking
transformation of the mental worldmodel from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking
caduceus = message, about two worldlines intertwined, male and female serpent king & queen co-rulers, rebis one body has Mithras but a female nature sacrificed the luna crescent bull. look away from luna as locus of control, look toward the true ruler – the control-thought inserter along its worldline, Sol. The bull’s shoulder is its egoic locus of control power. It is vulnerable to the control-thought inserter spear, become visible now in the snake in a bascket –
blade = control-thought inserter,
serpent = the worldline of personal control-thoughts, of the blade, of the control-thought inserter, of the female+ now consciously is arrived the male part, the true ruler, the real locus of control & power. Not the projected and pwoerless female, control-thought receiver.
Email to Brian Muraresku
Hi Brian,
In November, I wrote these articles, in response to Jerry Brown’s question to me, about whether I or my cohorts have defined “criteria of proof” & what counts as “evidence”, for mushrooms in Christian art.
Brown is co-author of the book The Psychedelic Gospels and the article Entheogens in Christian art: Wasson, Allegro, and the Psychedelic Gospels.
Starts with Sullivan reading ‘s quoting of Cicero uncharacteristically enthusing about the Mysteries of Eleusis, with its “mixed potion”.
Robert Graves in 1957 decoded the recipe for the kykeon “mixed potion” as MUKE; mushrooms. 12:00 – Sullivan has done mushrooms many times. Muraresku has no entheogen experience.
14:40 Mur asserts women did the mixing. 16:00 “Brewing was the women’s art.”
53:00 “Ego death” — It’s almost as good as decades of meditation. AS IF we know for a sure fact, that meditation works.
What flimsy ground! — Let’s justify psychedelics by comparing them to “meditation”, while treating the Nondrug Meditation Industry as the given, factual, established, measure-of-credibility; the authority, the reference-point of Truth.
Topical Notes on Digest 145 of Egodeath Yahoo Group – Decoding the Bestiary Salamander Image with Y-branching Mushroom Tree
Motivation for choosing to upload this particular Digest: Contains my late-2015 analysis of images that are treated in Hatsis’ articles 5 years ago.
This archive shows how far I got decoding the bestiary salamander image. I got far, in 2015.
I didn’t get so far as, contrast “snake vs. branching-into-2 mushroom tree”; nor, “right hand pressed firmly and stably against head, while left hand floats, giving no stability”. That left-hand analysis has a weak foundation, from this isolated image; the theme of “left hand floats, giving no stability” is foregrounded in the Canterbury “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image.
Similarly, the mushroom in the “dancing” man’s garment, with the “erect garment” theme per Rush (= the ecstatic self-violation state; the altered state; the intense mystic altered state), is not as strong in this isolated image as in the Dionysus’ Triumph mosaic.
My mytheme-decoding really took off when I worked across multiple images, cross-decoding them as a set.
In November 2020, I came closer to completely decoding the bestiary salamander image with Y-branching mushroom tree.
Decoding the bestiary salamander image, which Hatsis’ article brought to my attention in 2015, was a good warm-up exercise to tackle the hugely important and advanced image, the Canterbury “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image with the trained, self-threatening Psalter viewer.
The remaining fine-tuning of my decoding of the bestiary salamander image with Y-branching mushroom tree, is how best to map, using analogies, the rod-splitting-into-two form, which is seen in the caduceus and in mushroom trees.
There is also a “snake branching into 3” form, to debate about the best, most correct decoding.
This isn’t primarily a matter of “what did people think”; this is primarily theory-driven: given the Egodeath theory, including Cybernetic theory & Mytheme theory:
How is the form of “non-branching rod or snake, split into a pair of branched rods or snakes”, or into “a trio of branched rods or snakes”, most like Egodeath theory/ Transcendent Knowledge; how is it most analogous to “things that are observed and experienced in the altered state”?
What is the strongest similarity between the form of “rod branching into 2 rods”, and “things that are observed and experienced in the altered state”?
Topical Notes on Digest 144 of Egodeath Yahoo Group – Analyzed Bestiary Salamander Image in Dec. 2015
This is evidence that I critiqued Hatsis’ articles & ‘salamander’ years ago, and I completely disagree with his arguments, thus disproving his assertion in the book Psychedelic Mystery Traditions that the reason people disagree with his “no mushrooms in Christianity” position is that they are ignorant of his rock-solid, instantly compelling arguments.
I first posted about ‘Hatsis’ starting on December 24, 2015 (evidence below [ie at the Digest page linked above]). I also posted a Comment on Cyberdisciple’s weblog on the same day.
In his book, he falsely claims that he has compelling arguments in his articles. His book Psychedelic Mystery Traditions omits to even summarize his allegedly compelling arguments against mushrooms in Christian art.
I’ve provably been aware of his articles’ argument since he first uploaded his articles, and they are bad arguments.
His statement in his book is false, that the reason people don’t agree with his position is that they haven’t read his arguments in his articles.
Another Image with Salamander-Serpent, Left-Foot Floating, Odd branching
Note to Self: Remember not to sign up for Esoteric Poetry 101 with mystically tone-deaf Prof. Hatsis. Poseur witch writes: “The salamander signifies a salamander unequivocally“. Additional Digest archives of my early 2016 posts, have me labelling Hatsis as “even more of an outsider than Ruck”. “It’s the 80% blind, criticizing the 50% blind.”
Such articles as Hatsis Roasting Hatsis are merely an argument among rank outsiders, who are struggling just to arrive at the outermost gate: recognizing mushrooms in art.
“MS. Bodl. 602 simply depicts long-held traditions about salamanders. And it isn’t alone. Other manuscripts, like the c. 1300 Brussels Manuscript, and the c. Douai Manuscript (c. late 13th century), also show this widely held belief: each document depicts a man eating a fruit (usually an apple) that a salamander has corrupted with poison. The theme is common28. There is also this curious depiction (Figure 2) of the same image from the Bestiary of Ann Walsh, produced in the 15th century. This man isneither dancing nor experiencing divine revelations. He is dead from eating the poisoned fruit of the fire-resistant salamander, just as the legends of yore foretold.”
A legless salamander, that looks like a serpent? QUICK, PASS OVER THIS WITHOUT REMARK; MAYBE NO ONE WILL NOTICE!
Why do I waste my time; my conversation is with the wise. Nice easter-egg find though; at least the pictures are instructive and say something wise, not foolishness:
The altered state, loose cognitive binding, reveals the pre-existing worldline of control-thoughts, including the worldline of the control-thought inserter hidden within the personal control system; and reveals non-branching; the illusory nature of the apparent possibilities-branching world, populated with king Ego, power-steering through the branching tree to create the future.
The {fire} of the altered state reveals monopossibility, rendering the virtual egoic control system naught but a powerless reflection; a dead, empty, impotent image.
Email via Contact Form, to Tom Hatsis
Establishing my Priority of Discovery; my requisite inclusion & recognition in entheogen scholarship coverage.
Hi Tom,
Thanks for your entheogen scholarship, including books, videos, articles, presentations, and activism.
You’re hearing from me, the case for 3 types of mushrooms in Christian art: Liberty Caps, Cubensis, and Amanita.
I wrote a couple articles in November. These articles bring-in decades of my own original research.
Cheers — Michael Hoffman, the theorist of Egodeath
His reply
I recently lost my debate partner on these matters and would be more than happy to discuss this issue with you..
Full disclosure – I find the idea totally ridiculous. Just wanted to be honest about that up front.
If that doesn’t bother you or scare you away, let’s talk. 🙂
shrooms and riding brooms, Tom
____
Hi Tom,
It’s important for the field of Western mushroom scholarship, or the field of Western entheogen scholarship more broadly, that we have this constructive discussion.
After much writing and fulminating, I feel I finally managed to write a constructive critical write-up.
I haven’t yet communicated this request to Ruck, to stop using the word ‘secret’, which is just confusing himself, confusing everyone, and confusing the issues.
— Mike
_____
Hi Mike,
I look forward to reading what you have here. We’ll be in touch 🙂
shrooms and brooms, Tom
_____
this just in, added to See Also in that new article:
The giant paste of huge html <table> worked. The Egodeath Yahoo Group posts 2001-2004 are at Egodeath site, threaded by topic. This table of the first 50 posts from 2001 really is a new perspective. Star nav – TOC at top shows thread title, who posted, date of post, jumps down to the post, inline in temporal, post# order regardless of topic — it’s a Digest, that way. Whatever the latest sequence of posts covered topics/threads, it’s here all sequentially by post#.
The reader of this Psalter is thinking about cybernetic self-threatening.
The personal control system is made to blade itself.
It is given instructional messages of wrath and of mercy.
{snake} worldline + {phallus} control-thought inserter = the worldline of the control-thought inserter, intertwined ..
I remember this idea 2012, a similar idea remembered.
When I worked on local control agency = femmale, helpless thought reeciver.
Now trace those [10:47 p.m. December 10, 2020] — pair of intertwined snakes, male & female.
The worldline of the helpless, powerless control-thought receiver, in relation to the worldline of the worldline of the control-thought inserter.
The two partners, woven together — two snake-shaped distinct worldlines, caduceus, Andro Gyne I def’ly did decoding work on that, together with my first figuring decoding {female} = local control helpless puppet agency thought-receiver, = the female queen in the pair, one body
alchemy andro-gyne, herme-aphrodite, 1 body, two heads, crowned, bearded male, king; female, queen — queen is the reflective moon virtual image of control center (evil king usurper of the throne from the rightful king}, king is the true control-source. Partners — two control centers’ worldlines = 2 snakes intertwined.
The worldline of the control-thought inserter; wrath vs. mercy:
“I’m being made to experiment and demonstrate willing against myself by Dionysus teaching, training, educating, making the case, demonstrating the utter lack of local egoic control power, scourging the personal control system like in Villa of the Mysteries.”
What’s In the Covered Container, that’s Revealed in Mystery Religion
I predict the following items in the covered container in Mystery Religion: doll, snake, phallus.
{doll} = local control agency virtual egoic control agent, powerless; its seeming apparent power, is a reflected image, like moon reflects sun’s light.
{snake} = the worldline of the normally hidden, control-thought inserter.
{phallus} = the normally hidden control-thought inserter.
1997 theory-spec wording combining {worldline + control-thought inserter}: “the pre-set stream of injected thoughts”:
The Pre-set Stream of Injected Thoughts, Puppethood, and the Inability to Control Future Actions
Branching Patterns in Brinckmann’s Book’s Plates
Brinckmann’s book [5:08 p.m. December 10, 2020] shows an intriguing image like the Pink Key Tree in the Canterbury “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image with the trained, self-threatening Psalter reader:
OMG it’s a REPEATING PATTERN! LEFT BRANCH OF MUSRHOM TREE IS BRANCHING, THE RIGHT BRANCH IS CUT OFF!
GOT TO START A BRINKMANN PLATES PAGE. – done.
To confirm a theme that Egodeath theory / Mytheme theory predicts (branching on left, non-branching on right), I’d need the original art that Brinkmann used to draw his shape-diagrams, and the English translation of Brinckmann’s book, including captions for the numbered shape-illustrations in each plate.
Amanita Strawman Strategy: Conflate All Mushrooms with Amanita, Dismiss Amanita, then Declare That You Disproved “Mushrooms” – Unbelievable Lack of Awareness of Images of Liberty Cap & Cubensis in Christian Art, Zero Consideration, Blinded by Amanita-Obsession/ Fixation/ Reductionism
The vid w/ the 3 of them was fine — Hatsis, Bennette, & Muraresku.
Video title: Psanctum Oddcast Ep 3 Chris Bennett and Brian Muraresku YouTube channel: Psychedelic Historian [= Tom Hatsis] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5G7yiTwLr6o – Notes say: “… forthcoming books … “The Sacred Mushroom Conspiracy” (spring, 2022).”
They have differences of opinion.
Having two esteemed authors, keeps his tone in check.
The vid with just Hatsis was awful, a massive failure of argumentation, failure to discuss Liberty Cap Form and Cubensis Form AT ALL.
Here’s his argument:
The image looks like a parasol, not an Amanita. Therefore the image represents a parasol, not an Amanita. Therefore the image doesn’t represent a mushroom.
THAT’S LITERALLY HIS ARGUMENT! UN-FCKING BELIEVABLE. Fallacies he commits: o Changing the claim/objective/scope. slip-n-slide o Conflating one case with all possible cases. o Conflating 7 distinct questions. Hamfisted af. Mushroom Trees Debunked YouTube channel: Psychedelic Historian https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrfeNp1FSUY
He has gotten himself so confused, it’s not worth anyone’s time to straighten him out.
He strains to argue: these are not amanita, they are umbrellas/parasols.
He’s evidently never heard of Liberty Caps.
He’s confused and unclear, that there are 3 families of shapes (if not more).
Cubensis, Amanita, & Liberty Caps have very different morphologies.
The permissible/expected range of shapes, for “mushrooms” is wider than he realizes.
It is remarkable how he keeps using the word ‘Amanita’ where you’d expect him to say “mushrooms, either Amanita or Cubensis or Liberty Cap”.
He acts unaware of these 3 distinct shape-families.
He says all mushroom trees represent an umbrella, a Parasol of Victory.
He doesn’t discuss that parasols were respected because they are shaped like an umbrella.
It is evident in a couple ways, he’s not familiar with the images, and he acts like he’s not familiar with photos or specimens of actual mushrooms – the various shapes of Amanita, Cubensis, and Liberty Cap.
Any actual entheogen mushroom scholar would be surprised, even shocked, at his unexpected word-choice of “Amanita” when you’d expect him to say “mushroom” or “Liberty Cap”. He is too confused to debate, because his position requires him to be fixated on Amanita, and conflate Amanita with all mushrooms.
Exactly the same strategy of self-confusion through conflation & fixation (on a “secret Amanita cult” theory practically of his own invention), as Letcher.
This video is a misfire that fails to make its case – WHY DIDN’T HE NAME THE VIDEO “MUSHROOM TREES AS AMANITA IS DEBUNKED”? THAT’S THE ONLY THING HE ATTEMPTS IN THE VIDEO.
Not a parasol of victory, and not an amanita, and no one is claiming that this is Amanita, and yet that’s the theory that he obsesses on tearing down, while claiming he’s disproved “mushroom trees” — he strategically conflates Amanita with mushrooms of all types.
He acts like he’s never seen a Liberty Cap.
This Isn’t a Cubensis with Liberty Caps; It’s an Impressionistically Rendered Italian Pine with Umbrella Pines
He explains that all mushroom trees are NOT Amanitas, like everyone says (not true but that’s his strawman-story), but are umbrellas, Parasols of Victory. He shows this illustration:
Compare some of Brinckmann’s plates, censored by Pope-buddy Wasson:
Evidence That He’s Never Seen Liberty Caps: They Have Tassles, Which Flips His Argument* Against Him – His Argument* Backfires; Tassels Are Evidence for Liberty Cap
He argues in that “Mushroom Trees Debunked” video that the tassels, together with nub on top, prove it’s a Parasol of Victory, not a mushroom. The as-loud-as-wrong entheogen scholar literally acts like he’s never heard of Liberty Caps — he actually acts like the only psychoactive mushroom under discussion is Amanita. But of course, he’s inconsistent on that. He’s inconsistent.
Letcher’s book, same — the main character of the book: it’s inconsistent about what the distinct issues are, and what’s his position regarding each distinct issue.
Titanomachy — Battle of Levels of Old vs. New Gods, Modelled After Battle Between the Old/ Lower Level’s Possibilism-Thinking vs. the New/ Higher Level’s Eternalism-Thinking
Titanomachy — Battle of Levels of Old vs. New Gods, Modelled After Battle Between Old, Egoic Projected-Image Virtual Agents on Lower Level/ Possibilism-Thinking Level vs. New, Transcendent Truth-Aware Agents of Higher Level/ Eternalism-Thinking Level
The {abduction/sacrifice} that Was Made to Occur, to Fish Us Out Up from Lower, Mortal Level to the Level of the Gods/Immortals
Yet another reason to practice Gnosticism: McKenna disparaged it.
McFakea
You know the guy who asserts than there’s no mushrooms in Christianity (big bad church, turn off brain now, conversation over, stop looking, give up, don’t look at all those mushroom indicators, just ignore those and like dumb-as-an-ox, or dumber probably, doesn’t know his left foot from his right, I saw a photo of him with only his left foot touching the ground.
My own oxen are smarter than that; right is the way to heaven. Left cannot pass through the door on the way up to the god-mode level of personal control system. Have you sacrificed your childhood-thinking, to transform to the eternalism of the gods,the immortals, who have been made to sacrifice their child thinking to return back home to origi block pre-existent Heimarmene snake in rock inject thoughts around a temporary volatile mental structure that is designed to know the will and see tehe will of god inside her the female thought-receiver and her revealed higher PARTNER IN THE 80S POPULAR ALLCAPS VERY COMMONPLACE IN MANY CONTEXTS
THE AGE OF THE ROCK GODS
THE SNAKE-WORSHIPPING ROCK GODS FAMILY OF THREE CARVED AS GOD-HEADED SERPENTS CARVED FROZEN INTO THE ROCK ALTAR OF SACRIFICED THE THE CHILD WHEN WAS ON THE WA UP TO THIS LEVEL ABOVE HEIMARNE MENE NOW MOVING THE POLE PRECESSION EXINOX TRANSCENDING THE SPHERE OF — TOO MUCH FOCUS ON HEIMARMENE FIXED STARS IT IS WRONG, TO JUST IGNORE: SATURN WHO SCYTHES AWAY, THE COST TO REACH THIS GOD LEVEL THAT WAE HAD TO PAY WAS: OUR ONLY CHILDHOOD-SELF HAD TO BE SACRIFICED TO MAKE IT UP TO THIS TRANSCENDENT LEVEL, THE COST OF ENTRY: YOUR EGOIC ILLUSION PROJECTED IMAGE PASSSIVE COLLAPSE VIRGINITY LOST BUT MYTHIC {VIRGIN MAIDEN MARY MOON REFLECTION OF LIGHT OF GOD THE TRUE AUTHOR OF CONTROL-THOUGHTS, THE TRUE KING/ CREATOR/ CONTROLLER} ANALYSIS: SHE IS PENETRATED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT [HS] Holy Spirit [hs] SHE IS ONLY A ‘VIRGIN’ MYSTICALLY IN A MYSTIC MYTHEME SENSE – STANDARD MYTHEME-SEQUENCE klkjd holy spirit HOLY SPIRIT
interesting! keyboard shortcuts are case-sensitive unique!! the expansions are case-differentiated!
THE COST OF ENTRY TO GET PAST WINNOW-THRESH-SCYTHE FUNCTION THE PERSEPHONE-SATURN FUNCTION:
THE EGO
THE WORLD IN WHICH EGO
GETTING UP TO THIS HIGH LEVEL OF THE IMMORTALS THAT WE DWELL IN WITH GOD-THE-TRUE-RULER AWARENESS DEMANDS *TWO* , A *PAIR* OF SACRIFICES:
1. SACRIFICE THE EGO AGENT
2. SACRIFICE THE POSSIBILITY-BRANCHING WORLD — WORLD CONFLAGRATION ALL THE BRANCHES ARE BURNED AWAY
PRODUCING A BRANCH WITH FRUIT.
BREAK OFF THE BRANCHING, TO GET THE FRUIT OF THE TREE (mytheme {removed-branch with fruiting}
PPL ARE WRONG TO IGNORE SATURN GATEKEEPER WHO SCYTHES-AWAY *NOT ONLY* EGO, BUT *ALSO*, ITS WORLD IS BURNED AWAY — YOU HAVE TO BE BROUGHT TO SACRIFICE CHILDTHINKING; POSSIBILISM-THINKING TO MAKE IT UP TO THIS LEVEL OF HEIMARMENE AND HEAVEN EMPERIUM — DWELLING PLACE OF GOD AND OF ALL THE ELECT
MY SOLUTION I CREATED IS TO PAIR / COMBINE / IDENTIFY THE SPHERE OF SATURN & THE SPHERE OF THE FIXED STARS –>
SATURN IS THE GATEKEEPER FILTER TRANSFORMATION FUNCTION *OF* THE HEIMARMENE FIXED-STARS LEVEL.
SATURN IS THE GATEKEEPER OF THE SPHERE OF THE FIXED STARS HEIMARMENE <-my solution to give Saturn his due. When the spirit grain is pulled by force by the gods up to the eternalism-level, the Saturn-Persephone function strips away the hull, thresh-winnow-scythe,
GOD LIFTS YOU UP {lifted up/pushed down} WHILE HE STRIPS AWAY EGO PUSHING IT DOWN TO THE VIRTUAL ILLUSION UNDERWORLD LOWER LEVEL.
TO BECOME A STAR IN THE HEIMARMENE SPHERE, YOU ARE FORCIBLY MADE TO SACRIFICE YOUR CHILDHOOD-THINKING
I HOLD THAT VIRGIN MARY IDEA IS STANDARD NOTHIN SPECIAL, MYTH OF MYSTIC MEANING IS STANDARD.
DIME A DOZEN VIRGINS RAPD BY GODS/SPIRIT, GET ZAPPED SENT TO THE UNDERWOLD SHADOW-LAND OF THE OLD LOCUS OF CONTROL BACK WHEN THE MIND WAS A VIRGIN NOT YET IMPREG’D BY THE UNCONTROLLABLE SOURCE OF CONTROL-THOUGHTS
THE GENERO-VIRGIN MYTHEME, ALL MAIDENS GET SENT TO THE UNDERWORLD ON THEIR WAY UP TO THIS LEVEL ABOVE THE POSSIBILISM IMAGE PROJECTION SCREEN.
TO GET UP TO THIS TO BE GODS LIKE US THE MORTAL SELF IS TOAST; SENT DOWN TO THE UNDERWORLD SHADES OF PROJECTED AGENCY IMAGE.
Kore, Persephone, Demeter — Three Combinations of “Agency-in-World” Models
FIRST {SELF+WORLD} MODEL: FIRST {SELF-IN-WORLD} MODEL: KORE VIRGIN MAIDEN (VIRGIN PRINCESS MAIDEN WHO RULES/CONTROLS IN POSSIBILISM-LAND!) NOT BEEN FLIPPED TO ETERNALISM-THINKING YET, THEN
SECOND {SELF+WORLD} MODEL: SECOND {SELF-IN-WORLD} MODEL: QUEEEN OF THE UNDERWORLD (ADULT WHO RULES/CONTROLS IN POSSIBILISM-LAND UNDERWORLD) PERSEPHONE + THE QUEEN OF THE ABOVEGROUND (ADULT WHO RULES/CONTROLS IN ETERNALISM-LAND) DEMETER THE MOTHER AN ADULT,
MAPPING TO {mystic family of 3}: roughly speaking,
1. child thinking in child world = Kore Maiden = possibilism-agent in possibilism-world; naive possibilism-thinking Kore does NOT understand that she is an illusory virtual egoic control agent [iveca]. illusory virtual egoic control agent virtual egoic control agent Kore simply does not exist; the mind in Kore mode is simply deluded, centered around a false, illusory center.
2. adult thinking in child world = Persephone = eternalism-agent in possibilism-world qualified possibilism-thinking Persephone understands that she is an illusory virtual egoic control agent. This is the debatable interesting case, hard to simply describe the nature of Persephone’s existence as Queen of the Underworld; she does and does not exist. Persephone does exist, but as a shade shadow reflection empty image in the underworld, an illusory *known to be illusory*
3. adult thinking in adult world = Demeter = eternalism-agent in eternalism-world eternalism-thinking Demeter understands that Persephone is an illusory virtual egoic control agent.
KORE VIRGIN MAIDEN FLIPS TO QUEEEN RULER OF THE UNDERWORLD BRIDE OF HADES ABDUCTED MARRIED IMPREG’D AND FLIPPED TO ETERNALISM BY HER HIGHER REAL KING RULER
PARTNER
HIGHER CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER
THEY HVAE BEEN FLIPPED, INITIATION — INITIATED-AWAY CHILDHOOD POSSIBILISM-THINKING TO COME UP TO THIS LEVEL ABOVE SATURN THE GATEKEEPER NO POSSIBILISM THINKING IS TAKEN SERIOUSLY UP AT THIS Heimarmene LEVEL
TO VOYAGE HIGH IS TO HAVE THE YOUTH FALL FROM THE FLYING TOO HIGH RAM SACRIFICED ON ROCK HOW THE F DOES THAT ONE GO THE 1ST HIT AUTOTEXT ANY GOOD??:
The Golden Fleece – 50 Pages of Interrupted Stories within Stories for a 5-line Search Hit Paragraph
TO VOYAGE HIGH IS TO HAVE THE YOUTH FALL FROM THE FLYING TOO HIGH RAM SACRIFICED ON ROCK HOW THE F DOES THAT ONE GO THE 1ST HIT AUTOTEXT ANY GOOD??:
“In Greek Mythology,
STORY BEGINS
THE GOLDEN FLEECE
was the fleece of a wingedgoldenram from Colchis. It was
a holy ram of ZEUS
The Origin of the Golden Fleece.
“Athamas, the {KING} of Thessaly {MARRIED} …
RANDOM PROBABLY WRONG AND IRRELEVENT COMMENTARY SKIP:
MYTHIC BORING STORYTIME NOTE: ATHAMAS = KING. SO STOP FORGETTING THE SOAP DETAILS KING ATHAMAS.
WHICH MORTAL VIRGIN MAIDEN HUSK DID THE IMMORTAL GRAIN GOD PARTNER FORCIBLY ABDUCT AND MARRY THIS TIME?
{MARRIED
(ABDUCTED, NO DOUBT, THAT’S KINDA A GIVEN AMONG GODS & MORTALS,, THE GOD ABDUCTS AND MARRIES MORTAL VIRGIN SACRIFICING THE MAIDEN CONVERTING HER A CHANGED NOW HAS A CONSCIOUS PARTNER THE MOON REFLECTING THE LIGHT IMAGE PROJTECED BY THE ONE) IF MCFAKEA (“NO MSH IN Christianity “) REJECTS GNOSTICISM FOR ITS ANTI-COSMIC VALUES HE HAS SHIT JUDGMENT ON – HE SAID IN HIS GNOST VID I WOULDNA TRUSTEM TO FEED MY DAM DOG
IF MCFAEKA HATES GNOSTICISM I’M ALL IV IT
… CONTINUING THE MYTHIC TALE OF POSSIBILISM VS ETERNALISM AS ALWAYS NEVERENDING TALE CARVED IN ROCK IMAGES OF SERPENTS CARVED INTO ROCK ALTAR OF SACRIFICE OF THE CHILDTHINKING THAT’S THE PRICE OF ENTRY TO THIS LEVEL OF THE IMMORTALS HAVEING BEEN MADE TO FLIP AWAY THE HUSK PERSEPHONE KORE IS THE HUSK MAIDEN VIRTIN NOT-YET-FLIPPED KKORE VIRGIN NOW SHE IS PERSEOPONE WHO WHACKS EARNS OF CORN THWAKE THWAKKING THE GRAIN FROM THE HUSK AND WINNOWING AWAY YOUR CHILDHOOD LOSS OF CONTROL PROJECTED IMAGE WITH NO POWER FKE-AUATONOMOUS EGOIC CONTROL AGENT AS IF STEERING IN A TREE BUT FLIPPED AWAY IN WINNOWING BASKET AS CHILDHOOD HUSK NOW BEARD WISDOM GNOSIS HAVE BEEN ETERNALISMIZED
I’VE BEEN
ETERNALISMIZED
GIVE SATURN HIS DUE PAYMENT BEEN PULLED UP TO THE HEAVEN LEAVEL OF THE GODS DIR RULED BY AWARENESS OF THE GODS REVEALED TO THE ELCECT TO THE LIGHT THOSE ELECT OF LIFH LIGHT ELECTION LIGHT TORCH FIRE LIGHT ILLUSMINATINO TORCH SHOWEING THE HIDDEN WORKINGS OF THE AECA AUTONOMOUS EGOIC CONTROL AGENT [AECA]
LIEFT THE HOOD LID SEE THE SNAKE THE ___ SNAKE
THE CHILD THINKING WAS SACRIFICED SLIVED AWAY BY SATURN SCHTYH DAMMIT GIVE HIM DUE … CREDIT, DON’T JUST FIXATE OF THOSE BIG BAD FIXED STARS SATURN IS THE BADAZZ GATEKEEPER NO CHILDREN ALLOWED YET YOU VIRGIN ARE FORCED BY BLOCK UNIVERSE KING RULER SNAKE GOD CARVED IN ROCK THE VIRGIN IS MADE TO ROCK AWAY HER HUSK AND WINNOW SHAKE IN AIR WINNOER PERSEPHONE THE QUEEN OF THE UNDERWORLD WINNOWER OF SPIRITS VS MERE SOULS LOSE CHILD SOUL ON WAY UP TO THIS LEVEL OF SPIIRIT. ITS MATH MYTHEMEES
MY SOLUTION: COMBINE BUT DISTINGUISH BETWEEN SATURN IS EFFECTIVELY THE GATEKEEPER COMPONENT OF THE HEIMARMENE FIXED STARS – THEY ARE FUNCTIONALLY LINKED, SATURN HARVESTER OF RIPE CHILDTHINKING NOT YET FLIPPED TO ITS ADULT, ETERNALISM, SPIRIT PNEUMATICS
BEEN PULLLEDD OUT FROM POSSIBILISMLAND THE UNDERWORLD, BY THE GOD’S INITIATIVE,
FISHED OUT FROM THE LOWER LEVEL OF PROJECTED IMAGES, CHILDHOOOD EGOIC CONTROL THINKIG IN POSSIBILISM-BRANCHING WORLD
CHILDHOOD HUCKE HUSKED AWAY BY PERSEPHONE THE WINNOWING BASKET ON THE WAY UP HER TO THIS HEIMARMENE (AND BEYHOND TO THE EMPERIUM DWELLING PLACE OF GOD AND OF ALL THE ELECT). SCYTHE OF SATURN NEEDS ATTENTION GETS NO RESPECT F THOSE ROMAN GODS ANYWAY, I SAY, CHRONUS I SAY THE GOD CHRONOS TAKES THE CHILD THINKING WAY AT THE GREAT GATE WAY DOOR WAY COST OF FORCED ENTRY YOU ARE MADE TO SACRIFICED THE CHILDMODE THINKING OF — MATCH THIS PAIR:
} a {cloud goddess} called Nephele. They had {two children}, a {boy} named Phrixus and < SURVIVES FLIGHT a {girl} named Helle.” < DIES FALLS TO THE LOWER POSSIBILISM LEVEL OF SHADES PROJECTED IMAGES NTO TH E NOT THE TRUE KING RULER PUPPETMASTER THOUGHT INJECTOR ALL ALONG THE
ANOTHER INTERRUPTION: IGNORE:
THE THOUGHT-INJECTOR WORLDLINE RAIL – COMBINES THE TWO DISTINCT OVERPOWERINGS THAT COLLAPSE POSSIBILISM-THINKING INTO ETERNALISM-THINKING ON THE WAY UP THE HUSK WINNOWED AWAY BY SATURN SCHTHE SEPARATE BOYTS FROM POSSIBILISM YOUTHS FROM ETERNALISM GOD-CONFORMANT THEIR VIRGINITY OF FLIPPING TRANSFORMATION FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM WAS TAKEN BY THE GOD REAVELING THE COVERED SNAKE INSIDE THE MIND — THE
THE THOUGHT-INJECTOR WORLDLINE RAIL
I DECLARE THAT OBV SATURN WE ALWAYS IGNORE HIM I AGREE F HIM GO W/ MY VER
THE GOD CHRONOS LIFTS UP SPIRITS FROM THE ELECT WHO ARE FISHED OUT FROM THE UNDERWATER LEVEL OF POSSIBILISM-THINKING TO [THE ABOVE LEVEL NTO THE NOT THE BELOW LEVEL} U C, THERE
THERE’S 2 LVLS:
THERE’S THE UPPER LEVEL. ETERNALISM.
THERE’S THE LOWER LEVEL. POSSIBILISM.
WHEN A MIND OF THE PNEUMATIC ELECT
ELECT-PNEUMATICS RESCUED RANSOMED REDEEMED.(?) TECHNICAL DIFFERENCE THO…. ONE TERM = POSSIBILISM-THINKING ONE IS LOWER ONE IS HIGHER. SOME TECH OVERHEAD TO CONTRAST DIFFERENT TECH TERMS USE D… AFTER ALL, ‘ETERNALISM’ AND ‘POSSIBILISM’ are already too tech terms. possibility possibility-branching possibility-branching possibility-branching possibility-branching possibility-branching transcendent thinking Transcendent Knowledge uncontrollable source of control-thoughts eternalism-thinking possibilism-thinking Transcendent Knowledge Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence Mytheme theory Cybernetic theory Egodeath Concepts Collection Egodeath Concepts Collection
THE THOUGHT-INJECTOR WORLDLINE SACRIFICES THE MAIDEN VIRGIN WHO HAD ENVER YET BEEN DIED BEEN TRANSFORMED FROM TEMP MORTAL HUSK CHILD FORM, PSMT-THINI POSSIBILISM-THINKING , TO
WINNOW WINNOWING BASKET GRAIN FROM CHAFF STRAW PERISHABLE CONTENGIENT LIKE STAY VIRGIN ONE’S WHOLE LIFE NEVER BEEN FLIPPED FROM [FREEWILL POSSIBILISM-BASED SOUL THINKING TO NO-FREE-WILL ETERNALISM-BASED SPIRIT THINKING
FINALLY THE STORY CONTINUES
“… Athamas to sacrifice Phrixus in order [SOAPY DETS: KING ATHAMAS SACRIFICE CHILD YOUTH,
ZEUS RAM TO RESCUE YOUTH BUT DITCH MAIDEN
10:49PM IF I DIDN’T POST A TON ON THIS KINDA OBV DECOING:
BOY = DEMETER = ADULTHOOD GODDESS-AWARE/ GODDESS HONORING
AN ENTIRE HIGH CULTURE CARVED IN ROCK IMAGES OF SERPENTS MUSHROOM ROCK IN CHRONOS-GUARDD GATEKEEPER WINNOWER PERSEPHONE IS SATURN WITH SCYTH SATURN IS THE THRESHER AND WINNOWER ON YOUR BEING PULLED UP TO THIS LEVEL BY THE GODS, THE MIND’S CHILD-MODE WAS SACRIFICED CHRISTS HOLY SPIRIT INITIATE CHOSE TO RAPT THE VIRGIN MAIDEN FOLLLOWER OF THE WY INTO HEAVEN WHICH WAY THE SACRIFICE SLICE APRERT SEPARATE THE HULL FROM THE GRAIN THRESHER AND WINNOWER OF SOULS, THE GOD CHRONOS WHILE THE GODS PULL UP MORTALS TO TIHIS LEVEL THUS KILLING THEIR MORTALITY, THEY / IN UNDERWORLD CHRONUS IS THE WINNOWER AND THRESHER SEPARATING GRAIN FROM HUSK AND WHEAT FROM CHAFF
ETERNALISM-THINKING GIRL = MAIDEN = POSSIBILISM to bring an end to the drought.
Before the sacrifice occurred,
Nephele [SOME MYTHIC SOAP STAR STORYTIME NARRATIVE WHATS POINT? ZZZ {cloud goddess}] appeared to Phrixus, bringing
a golden-fleeced ram to rescue him and his sister.
Phrixus and Helle managed to escape on the ram and flew over the sea, but when Helle looked down, she lost her balance and fell off the ram. She drowned near the strait separating Europe from Asia, which became known as Hellespont (sea of Helle). Luckily, Phrixus made it all the way to Colchis on the Black Sea and was welcomed into the house of Aeetes on his arrival. Phrixus sacrificed the ram and its Golden Fleece was hung in the grove of Ares, where it was guarded by a sleepless dragon.
Athamas, the King of Thessaly married a cloud goddess called Nephele. (cloud goddess) They had two children, a boy named Phrixus and a girl named Helle. Athamas later fell in love with another woman, Ino, and took her as his second wife. Nephele cloud goddess was angered by her husband’s actions and left him, bringing drought to the land.
The King’s new wife, Ino, became jealous of Nephele’s (cloud goddess) children and wanted them dead. She (NEW WIFE INO) convinced Athamas to sacrificePhrixus in order to bring an end to the drought.
Before the sacrifice occurred, Nephele (cloud goddess) appeared to Phrixus (BOY/YOUTH… NO… THE GOD PORTION; SIS = MAIDEN POSSIBILISM-THINKING , BRO = GODBOY ( ETERNALISM-THINKING ), (CLOUD GODDESS RESCUE FROM SACRIFICE BY THE KING TO END DROUT) bringing a golden-fleeced ram ({FLYING RAM}wtf) to rescue him and his sister.
IS THIS ISAACS RAM COUSIN
Phrixus (IMMORTAL GODBOY ETERNALISM ) and Helle (MORTAL MAIDEN VIRGIN POSSIBILISM THINKING OF CHILDREN BUT NOT GODBOYS)
managed to escape on the ram and flew over the sea,[OF IMAGE PROJECTION SEPARATION OF LAYERS – THE “HIGHER VS LOWER” THEME, “LEVELS” — THE MORTAL LEEL, LEVEL , LIVING UP ON ETERNALISM LEVEL ARE YOU EXPERIENCED, OR A VIRGIN PHOSE WHOSE NEVER BEEN PSY BEEN PSYCHEDELICIZED ETER MUSHROOM ETERNALISM SPIRIT DOORWAY THE FLESH CUP BLOOD OF HOLY SPIRIT RAM CARRIES – the male control-thought inserter abducts teh maiden away. LIFTS YOU UP (ROLL SACRIFICE MUSIC) LIFT UP = SACRIFICE GIRL POSSIBILISM-THINKING OF THE RESISTING MAIDEN WHO HAS NOT KNOWN GOD CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER HIDDEN COVERD IN HER MIND
but when Helle looked down, she lost her balance [MSH-CYBERNETIC SEIZURE TRANSFORMATION-AWAY OF EGOIC ILLUSION AUTONOMOUS EGOIC CONTROL AGENT OPERATING IN — FUSE THESE TWO — OPERATING IN A BRANCHING WORLD; AUTONOMOUS EGOIC CONTROL AGENT WITH STEERING WITH POWER AMONG BRANCHING POSSIBILIITY OPERATING WITHIN A BRANCHING- POSSIBILITIES tree AUTONOMOUS EGOIC CONTROL AGENT
autonomous egoic control agent operating in a branching-possibility tree AUTONOMOUS EGOIC CONTROL AGENT operating (controlling) in a branching-possibility tree
{king} {steering} {tree}
OPERATING
, EGOIC CONTROL AGENT ]
and fell off the ram.
She drowned near the strait separating Europe from Asia, which became known as Hellespont (sea of Helle). Luckily,
Phrixus made it all the way to Colchis on the Black Sea and was welcomed into the house of Aeetes on his arrival.
Phrixus sacrificed the ram (from cloud goddess Nephele a ram “of Zeus” but wife cloud godess dispatched it, how does this work) and its Golden Fleece was hung in the grove of Ares, (garden of the Hesperides?) where it was guarded by a sleepless dragon.
“Its Hera’s personal domain. Its her orchard.” —Homer. The Garden of the Hesperides, also known as Domain of the Hesperides and Hera’s Orchard is a world featured in Greek Mythology. It first appears in around 700 BCE and ends around 9th Century. The Garden of the Hesperides is based on the location of the same name from Greek Mythology.
Hera’s Orchad; [sic; Hera’s fury = typos] (:”also” known as the “Garden of the Hesperides”:) is Hera’s orchard in the west, where either a single apple tree or a grove grows, producing golden apples that grant immortality when eaten.
The trees were planted from the fruitedbranches
mytheme decoded [7:54 a.m. December 9, 2020]: a removed branch that has fruit: debranch = gnosis; harvest to get the better. John must decline so Jesus can rise.
John the Baptist the child must be sacrificed (possibilism-thinking), so that Jesus Christ the adult may rise (eternalism-thinking).
to go up, you must bow down
To rise to ETERNALISM, you must put down POSSIBILISM.
To gain eternalism, you must sacrifice possibilism.
To get to Eternalismland, you must leave Possibilismland.
to eternalism, leave psm
to 👍 eternalism, 👎 possibilism — Persephone-Saturn, the winnow/thresh/scythe function. to pull-out the grain, you must remove the husk
diversion: husk: = outer casing, shell, container of the fruit, of the payload. dlivery shell of the payload. the dry outer covering of some fruits or seeds. shell · hull · case · casing · covering · rind · chaff
to eat the orange flesh, you must get rid of the rind. Saturn-Persephone is the Great Orange Peeler, the Winnow-Thresh-Scythe function, the egoic-thinking Filter, you must BURN OFF, PEEL AWAY, FLAIL THRESH WHACK STRIP CUT OFF THE EGOIC THINKING TO THE FIRST PART CUT OFF THE FORE PART TO GET THE REMAINDER RIGHT WITH GOD-MODE THINKING, SACRIFICE TO HONOR THE GODS, SACRIFICE YOUR INITIAL-THINKING. TO BE STABLY IN GOD-MODE THINKING, MUST REJECT PREMISE OF EGOIC-MODE THINKING: A E [ACRO]/KEYBOARD SHORTCUTS A E SPELL IT OUT BGY BY HAND
AUTONOMOUS EGOIC CONTROL AGENT [AECA] + OPERATING IN A BRANCHING-POSSIBILITIES TREE [OBPT] = SHORTENED ACRO FOR AUTONOMOUS / EGOIC / BRANCHING /TREE [AE-BT] <– NEW NOTATION FOR SOOPERLONG EXPANSION ABBR COMPOOUND ACRO/ COMPOUND [ACRO]/KEYBOARD SHORTCUT: AE-BT TEST: AE….- BT… WILL EXPAND TO AECA + OBPT AUTONOMOUS EGOIC CONTROL AGENT + OPERATING IN A BRANCHING-POSSIBILITY TREE = AE-BT –> AUTONOMOUS EGOIC CONTROL AGENT OPERATING IN A BRANCHING-POSSIBILITY TREE AUTONOMOUS EGOIC CONTROL AGENT OPERATING IN A BRANCHING-POSSIBILITY TREE AEBT AUTONOMOUS EGOIC CONTROL AGENT OPERATING IN A BRANCHING-POSSIBILITY TREE HAVE TO *COMBINE* — YOU NOT ONLY SACRIFICE EGO AGENT; YOU *ALSO* SACRIFICE THE WORLD! THE POSSIBILITY-BRANCHING WORLD MODEL. IT IS AN ENTIRE WORLDMODEL CONSISTING…. YOU SWITCH FROM AGENT A IN WORLD A TO AGENT B IN WOLRD B LOWER/FIRST AGENT IN LOWER/FIRST WORLD –> HIGHER/SECOND AGENT IN HIGHER/SECOND WORLD THROUGH THE FLESH OF CHRIST HOLY FOOD
Flesh of Christ, Holy Food, Living Bread, Native Christmas Shamans, Secret Amanita Cult, Hellenistic Mystery Religions
the new podcast … your comments about Christian ‘contemplation.’
“words from John of the Cross on ‘contemplation’ as follows and they ooze with mushroom wine:
“Contemplation is nothing else but a secret, peaceful, and loving infusion of God, which if admitted, will set the soul on fire, with the Spirit of love.”
“The eternal tide flows hid in Living Bread.”< ?? wtf is “LIVING BREAD” ??? 🤔
“That with its Heavenly Life to be fed.”
“Faith is a dark night for man, but in this very way it gives him light.”
???? wtf is “LIVING BREAD” ??? 🤔
the “secret Amanita cult” theory explains “Living Bread”🍞def Wonder Bread for sure, its those Native Christmas Shamans at it again, in every last one of the Hellenistic Secret Mystery Cults 🎄🍄🦌🦌🦌🦌🛷🎅🎁
At the climax of the Greater Mysteries of Eleusis, the Hierophant with a grand flourish lifts the lid on the basket to reveal by torch light the greatest mystery of the mind in The Upper Level of the High Culture Mythological state of experiencing:
“ITS A AMANITA!!!! OMFG!!” 😱😱😱–>🍄🐍!!!<– 🤯🤯🤯
AND EVERYONE GASPS TREMBLING IN ASTONISHMENT AS THE ULTIMATE SECRET OF THE HIGH HUMAN MENTAL MIND IS REVEALED:
THE SECRET HIDDEN SECRET OF HIGH SECRET GNOSIS IS:
😱🤯 GNOSIS = ITS A 🍄!!! 😱🤯
SEE RUCK FOR DETAIL
______
“that Gaia gave to Hera as a wedding gift when Hera accepted Zeus. The Hesperides were given the task of tending to the grove, but occasionally picked apples from it themselves. Not trusting them, Hera also placed in the garden a never-sleeping, hundred-headed dragon named Ladon as an additional safeguard. In the myth of the Judgement of Paris, it was from the Garden that Eris, Goddess of Discord, obtained the Apple of Discord, which led to the Trojan War.
ARES was the Olympian god of war, battlelust and manliness.
This page describes the god’s divine attributes, estate and sacred animals. His standard attributes were a crested helm and war-spear. He was sometimes depicted holding a snake [right?] or with a serpent emblazoned on his shield.
(1) ESTATE & ATTRIBUTES
CHARIOT Ares drove a golden-reined chariot drawn by four fire-breathing horses.
SPEAR Ares brandished a bronze-(tipped spear) in battle.
ARMOUR Ares wore golden armour (helm, cuirass, war-belt, shield and greaves) which shone with a burning light.
PALACE The palace of Ares stood either upon Mount Olympos (along with the other mansions of the gods) or upon Mount Haimos in Thrake. His Thrakian palace was an iron fortress adorned with war-booty and guarded by various divine sentries.
SHRINE-GUARDIANS Several of the mythical shrines of Ares were endowed with monstrous guardians: – the Sacred Groves of Ares at Thebes and Kholkis each had a guardianDrakon; and the Sacred Amazon Island of Ares had arrow-shooting birds.
SPARTI EARTH-BORN WARRIORS The Spartoi were armed warriors which sprang fully-grown from the earth, when the teeth of Ares’ Guardian Drakones (flying serpents) were sown in a field sacred to the god.
diversion:
THE DRAKONES OF MEDEA were a pair of serpents which drew the flying chariot of the witchMedea.
She summoned them to carry her away from Korinthos (Corinth) following the murder of King Kreon (Creon), his daughter Glauke (Glauce) and her children by Iason (Jason).
high up carrying-serpents, flying drakones carry witch chariot
autonomous egoic control agent operating in a branching-possibility tree [aebt]
(2) SACRED PLANTS & ANIMALS
EAGLE-OWL & BARN OWL Two species of owl, were regarded as sacred to the god Ares. They were birds of ill-omen, presaging war and sedition.
SNAKE POISONOUS The poisonous serpent was sacred to the god Ares. Several of his groves are described in myth guarded by these beasts, and in sculpture and art he often bears a serpent or serpent device.
grove of trees has fruit, guarded by serpent dragons monsters.
gnosis fruit brought by the worldline spirit gnosis is guarded by scythe worldline spear divider between mortal virgin maidens vs.
VULTURE The vulture was a bird of ill omen. Because it haunted the battlefield feeding upon the bodies of the dead, it was closely associated with the war-god Ares.
WOODPECKER The woodpecker was a bird of good fortune believed to be sacred to the god Ares.
Notation for Defining a Compound Keyboard Shortcut: [abcd], [efgh], [ac-eg]
Notation for Defining a Compound Keyboard Shortcut, Because Not Just Sacrifice {Ego}; Sacrifice {Ego in Tree-World}, so Need Compound Pair of Kept-Distinct Phrases, Using Dash: [aa], [bb], [aa-bb]
The resulting set of standardized fairly easily typeable shortcuts:
Notation for defining the set [acro]/keyboard shortcuts including an abbr’d compound shortcut indicated by a dash: autonomous personal control agency [apca] operating in a branching-possibilities world [obpw] autonomous personal control agency, operating in a branching-possibility world [aa-bw]
Notation for result/demo: apca->autonomous personal control agency obpw->operating in a branching-possibilities world aa-bw->autonomous personal control agency, operating in a branching-possibility world
Demo:
autonomous personal control agency
operating in a branching-possibilities world
autonomous personal control agency, operating in a branching-possibility world
More Verbose Summary of the Above Outcome
1. Define the first phrase: autonomous personal control agency [apca] [aa]<-rejected addl shortcut, bc it messed up typing the abbr’d compound shortcut “aa-bw”, else would be nice shortened abbr.
2. Define the second phrase: operating in a branching-possibilities world [obpw] [bw]<-rejected 2nd ver.
3. Define the compound phrase: autonomous personal control agency, operating in a branching-possibilities world [aa-bw] a possible conceptual notation: [[aa]-[bw]]<-rejected
4. Test: apca-> autonomous personal control agency obpw-> operating in a branching-possibilities world aa-bw-> autonomous personal control agency, operating in a branching-possibility world Success; now have a set of fairly easily typeable shortcuts.
Keyboard Shortcuts Tests/ R&D
define compound keyboard shortcut expansion: kse keyboard shortcut expansion [kse] test: keyboard shortcuts keyboard shortcut expansion keyboard shortcut expansion test: [acro]/keyboard shortcuts [acro]/keyboard shortcuts teesst: keyboard shortcuts keyboard shortcuts test: keyboard shortcut expansion keyboard shortcut expansion autonomous personal control agency, operating in a branching-possibility world [aa-bw]
[acro]/keyboard shortcut test: of a compound keyboard shortcut: autonomous personal control agency, operating in a branching-possibility world a compund of i have not yet defined the component expansion-phrasaes of the coumpound expansion: apca i defined ‘veca’ virtual egoic control agent need: autonomous personal control agency [apca] operating in a branching-possibilities world [obpw] test: autonomous personal control agency operating in a branching-possibilities world autonomous personal control agency, operating in a branching-possibility world
{{personal egoic control agent} {operating in a branching-possibilities world}} pa-bw elevated awareness- fail
High Culture Was Strikingly Fluent in Mythology Analogies for Initiation
Routinized Use of Mushroom Mixed-Wine to Flip the Mind’s Personal Control System from Possibilism to Eternalism — Impressive Evidence of Routinized Mushroom Initiation, Highly Articulated in Mythic Analogies, Observable through Mythemese Fluency
Midnight at the start of December 7, 2020, I received a vision from the heavens, which puts me on more solid ground than these mundane, uninspired, ineffective researchers.
The fervency of mythology, the highly fluent analogies fairly consistently throughout history before the Late Modern era, evidences an impressive degree of widespread familiarity with transformation from possibilism to eternalism.
Flipping the mind’s personal control system was completely routinized, as routine as adolescents’ initiation, condensed to most-efficient formulas, a system of mathematics, an optimized widespread Technology of Analogy for mixed-wine Mystery Initiation.
If you had a beard, you were expected to be conversant and fluent in Mythemese discussion of entheogens transforming from possibilism to eternalism.
To rise up to the spheres of Saturn and the fixed stars, it was commonly, routinely, widely understood that you’d have to sacrifice childhood-thinking, upon reaching that level; it just happened automatically, in that culture.
Everyone just knew — that’s the report I received, given how very standardized it was understood, that the mind responds like a female, like a virgin maiden.
Everything about this situation, evidences a thoroughly mixed-wine based culture as the norm — as the very standard of reference for what it means to be adult and cultured.
Flipping the mind’s personal control system from possibilism to eternalism was utterly routined and well-understood, experientially and as described through analogy, in the language I deciphered, that everyone used to know — not Greek, not Latin, but Mythemese.
The only way this could be the case is per the maximal entheogen theory of religion & culture.
I’m impressed with how highly fitting the analogies are, why the tradition is so strong and consistent and universal, that the mind acts like a female.
This is strong evidence, it struck me, that indeed all of the banqueting and mixed wine throughout Antiquity is entheogenic, across all of the Mystery Religions and related drinking parties.
The Ancients talked about entheogens constantly, with great enthusiasm for descriptive analogies, speaking the language of Mythemese.
For those on the inside, who have the technical equipment that’s required to tune into the evidence, there is a buzzing, popular, loud chorus of discussion of all kinds of rich analogies.
“The mind on entheogens is like a woman in these 10 ways, is like a sacrifice, is like a river in these 3 ways, is like a resisting virgin overtaken and then submitting, is like a death of the first child of two — or, of your only son, is like an evil king who sends the hero to bring back a prize,”
The right kind of evidence, found in Mythemeland and its imagistic literature, opens up into an astonishing wonderland — for those who know how to operate the telescope, how to speak the language.
I was awestruck by the profundity of the received High Culture, the lofty mastery of the high culture of Great Mythology.
Our forebears, Greek and Roman and Christian culture around mixed-wine, describe fluently the entheogenic transformation from possibilism to eternalism, with an ease that comes from intimate mastery.
I got the full impact of High Culture of routine, masterful analogies for transformation from possibilism to eternalism.
Awakened, not drunken and asleep like the bad academics, but sober in the Chris Bennett frame of mind, flights of ideation.
In my zeal for decoding {maiden}, I had overlooked the whole area of {virgin} — the mind which has not yet been transformed from possibilism to eternalism.
I immediately hastened to update my Key Mythemes list to reflect the Muses’ input on some 30 mythemes, including an embarrassing number of very basic fundamental mythemes that I had not decoded or listed.
So routine, the Ancients’ facility with description of mixed wine routinely flipping the mind from possibilism to eternalism!
The Ancients, into the Early Modern era, had such ease with advanced and sophisticated mastery of analogies describing the mental dynamics of the common, well-familiar flip from possibilism to eternalism.
Such intimate and widespread, standardized familiarity with the {female} mind; the personal control system’s reaction to discovering and perceiving the frozen worldline with control-thought inserter all along it.
So familiar the Ancients manifestly are, with frenzy mania resistance and then compliance and then harmony, and so-apt intimate analogies.
_____
I just had to fumble and struggle with 2 diverging copies of my idea development pages, I hit an idea-capturing productivity brick wall there, going from 100 to 0 mph instantly.
I will never again let the issue of where I happen to be currently typing, let me miss a beat — I will run with it, doing the idea development wherever I happen to be writing in; which WordPress page.
In any case, after the dust settled, my Key Mythemes list is so much more adequate, without some embarrassing most-major gaps that it had — and that’s helped to keep my Core Concepts outline in check:
I was pleased to work on a difficult hypothesis today, that:
Hypothesis: There are two distinct senses in which personal control is removed: 1) because of the frozen worldline of control-thoughts. 2) because of the uncontrollable control-thought inserter/injector.
— and then I was impressed (and relieved) by my dauntingly complete 1997 Core Concepts theory-spec writeup (non-mythic), in which I intelligently and elegantly paired those two distinct ideas:
My Hypothesis above, and the 2 reasons supporting it, exactly fit on all 3 points/phrases, matching my section heading from the 1997 theory-spec:
“There are two distinct senses in which personal control is removed:” = “Puppethood, and the Inability to Control Future Actions”
“1) because of the frozen worldline of control-thoughts.” = “The Pre-set Stream“
“2) because of the uncontrollable control-thought inserter/injector. = “of Injected Thoughts“
That 1997 Core-theory spec, really can’t be beat. I wrote “Injected Thoughts” in 1997!
So my accusation that I failed to decode {virgin} until yesterday, December 7, 2020, can only go so far — my Core theory in 1997 summarized the needed elements, to map “virgin maiden” to the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.
So, I got the answer to my recent question:
Have my mytheme decodings made me go back and revise and improve the 1988-1997 Core theory, the Cybernetic theory?
Did my mytheme revelations expose room for improvement in my Core theory?
Answer: No, the 1997 outline/summary seems astute; that theory-spec did a good job of covering the bases and articulating, in summary, the key, peak, crucial ideas.
There is always room for more connections, within a new explanatory framework.
The New Theory is like an empty skeleton with only some parts fleshed-in, but a good New Theory is notable for the rapidity of filling-in the framework, putting {flesh} and {clothing} onto the {naked}, {exposed}, underlying {skeleton}, the new explanatory framework explaining how the field works and what to look for, AND HOW TO LOOK for supporting or disconfirming evidence.
To those with no radio receiver, there is no evidence for radio signals and messages carried by them.
To those who are mytheme-illiterate, the world is one giant category-error and there is no evidence for entheogens in high culture. For those who speak Mythemese, it is impressive, the messages and analogies that were dominant and universal, showing a firmly mushroom-transformed, lofty-as-highest-heaven, High Culture of Mythology.
— Cybermonk
Key Mythemes catalog & Core Concepts catalog Major Improvement
[dec 9 2020 – finished good Nav improvements on the 3 catalog pages (Key Mythemes, Core Concepts, Theory-Concepts.
In each entry in Key Mythemes, I added a link back up to its category, where all of the mytheme-links for that category are listed.]
In my Core Concepts page, I grouped my “optimized concept-labels” sections.
The Key Mythemes page/catalog has empty slots, but it contains all the explanations somewhere in the page.
Content-wise, the Key Mythemes catalog is done; completed, finished.
Did mytheme-decoding modify the 1988-based Core Concepts, of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence?
Ans: NO; In my 1997 theory-spec outline, one of the 9 principles-titles nailed it, word for word!: though I used the word ‘stream’ instead of ‘worldline’ — I used a borderline-mytheme, {stream}.
The water nymphs are nearby, attracting and seducing to take a stolen look at Diana’s bathing, invoking her fury.
1997 theory-spec heading:
The Pre-set Stream of Injected Thoughts
Does the Cybernetic theory differentiate or discuss distinctly, the two distinct aspects of “the uncontrollable source of control-thoughts”:
The Personal Control System Is Penetrated in Two Distinct Ways in Conjunction: By the veiled control-thought injector; By the worldline of control-thoughts
My Key Mythemes catalog now distinguishes between two distinct aspects of “the uncontrollable source of control-thoughts”:
The worldline of control-thoughts.
The control-thought inserter, spread out at each point along the worldline.
the uncontrollable source of control-thoughts = the pre-existing worldline of control-thoughts + the control-thought inserter
the uncontrollable source of control-thoughts is abiguous, overloaded, has 2 distinct senses technically:
the pre-existing worldline of control-thoughts the control-thought inserter
it is overloaded to say as if it has only 1 sense, “the uncontrollable source of control-thoughts” — which one am I supposed to picture?
the worldline of control-thoughts
the veiled control-thought injector
the worldline of control-thoughts
the veiled control-thought injector [vcti]
the worldline of control-thoughts = {??}
the veiled control-thought injector = {??}
Ans:
the worldline of control-thoughts = {stake, crossbeam, spear shaft, snake, serpent, worm, river, ivy, vine, serpent tail, spear shaft, river, snake, stake, crossbeam}
Done:
Make sure there’s a Core Concepts entry [cce] for the worldline of control-thoughts – done, already exists.
Add the above mythemes list to that Core Concepts entry. done
Make sure there’s a Key Mythemes entry for each of these mythemes: paste into it: The worldline of control-thoughts.
In the grouped links at top of the Key Mythemes catalog, create 2 distinct categories of Key Mythemes entries:
the worldline of control-thoughts (done; recently broke block universe vs worldline sections apart).
the veiled control-thought injector, {phallus} – created topmost link, link-section head.
the Core Concepts catalog [ccc]
the Key Mythemes catalog [kmc]
the veiled control-thought injector = {phallus, herme, wellspring, wellspring in rock cave, message from gods/angel, spear tip, phallus, wellspring, knife, short sword}
Done:
Make sure there’s a Core Concepts entry [cce] for the veiled control-thought injector Definition: The veiled control-thought injector. The veiled control-thought injector together with the worldline form the normally hidden, uncontrollable source of control-thoughts. — done, created Core Concepts entry “control-thought injector”, with synonyms in the entry.
Add the following mythemes list to it. done.
Make sure there’s a Key Mythemes entry [kme] for each mytheme listed here:
The Worldline of Control-Thoughts {spear shaft, river, snake, stake, crossbeam, long sword, ivy, vine}
The Veiled Control-Thought Injector {spear tip, phallus, wellspring, knife, short sword}
RESOLVED, IN KEY CONCEPTS PAGE.
I find I keep debating between the same two repeating candidates for referents for mythemes, such as penetrated by source of thoughts —
for one thing, worldline is the source of thoughts (serpent),
for another — a distinct angle:
At any point in time, the fountain wellspring phallus … like a worldline of the thought-source injector phallus, a {snake-shaped} timeline series of {phallus}es.
Picture the worldline of a wellspring: the worldline of the thought-injector, the source of thoughts, the worldline of control-thoughts … the worldline of the thought-injector.
the snake-shaped worldline of the veiled phallus-like thought-injector
[compare that phrase that combines/pairs/integrates the two distinct concepts, with my section-heading from the 1997 theory-spec:
The Pre-set Stream of Injected Thoughts, Puppethood, and the Inability to Control Future Actions
Feb 7, 1997: “pre-set stream of injected thoughts“
Dec 7, 2020: “snake-shaped worldline of the thought-injector”
Advantages of my recent lexicon: o ‘worldline’ is more technically standard and specific than ‘stream’. o “thought-injector” is more tangible and myth-mappable ({wellspring, phallus}) than “injected thoughts”.
These are quibbles and fine-tunings of phraseology choices, not technical substance that I changed in the Core theory (the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence).
In conclusion, I don’t expect to need change the substance or principles of the Core theory, the Cybernetic theory, except to re-skin it superficially, to “refactor the API layer”, to better enable mapping mythemes to the Core theory;
to better enable mapping my Key Mythemes catalog entries to my Core Concepts catalog entries.
the snake worldline of the {phallus} / {wellspring} thought-injeoctor, wellspring inside the rock cave.
The personal control system is doubly pierced/speared by the worldline {snake} of the thought-injector {phallus}.
There are control-thoughts laid out along the pre-existing worldline of control-thoughts. At any point in time, awareness can perceive, the mind can percieve… I don’t wnt to …
Mytheme Theory: State that Definitions Will Not Repeat What’s Alway True of Every Mytheme: This Mytheme Is a Description by Analogy, of Something that Is Observed and Experienced in the Altered State
done: make a note in the “Theory of mythemes” page, link from top of Key Mythemes list.
the note to add:
Whenever discussing mythemes, such as in the “Key Mythemes” catalog entries, it is to be understood that:
Mythemes are in context of the altered state; loose cognition.
Mythemes are description by analogy.
Thus together: Mythemes are description by analogy, of things that are observed and experienced in the altered state
Thus, how not to write a mytheme decoding:
The mytheme {snake} is a description by analogy, of the worldline of control-thoughts, experienced and perceived in the intense mystic altered state.
How to write a mytheme decoding:
{snake}
The worldline of control-thoughts.
Again, it is to be understood that this definition:
The worldline of control-thoughts.
Means:
The mytheme {snake} is a description by analogy, of the worldline of control-thoughts, experienced and perceived in the intense mystic altered state.
/ end of note to add
mytheme [m’m] loss of control [loc] levels of control [lvc] loose cognition [lcg] loosecog [lc]
That is, writing:
{snake} = the worldline of control-thoughts
Is an efficient way of communicating:
The mytheme {snake} is a description by analogy, of the worldline of control-thoughts, experienced and perceived in the intense mystic altered state.
Multiple Status Grades: From Candidate, to Initiate, to Completed Mature Initiate
Candidate Initiate Beginner Bride: Peak first-times Initiation(s) in the Bridal Chamber, fire every night GRADUALLY burning away mortality/ perishability / chaff More of a Bride; more conscious & adept at the {phallus} < – no entry?? Newly Completed Initiate Mature Perfected Completed Mushroom Initiate
The Initiate Is the Virgin Maiden
The Initiate Is Kore the Virgin Maiden
Not yet been abducted and overpowered by the uncontrollable source of control-thoughts, her higher half.
How do we know that the the personal egoic control system or the personal control system is female?
The personal egoic control system is female: in its action in its reaction in its functioning in what it produces
There is a huge natural match between the dynamics of the seqence of loosecog sessions…
The mind’s personal control system acts the female role classically.
I am now certain, it is obvious, that you are the maiden eating mushrooms in the upper right of the Canterbury “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image with the trained, self-threatening Psalter reader.
I NEED TO KEEP THIS PAGE OPEN FOR EDIT WHEN I’M RECEIVING IDEAS/DECODINGS DOWNLOADING DECODINGS FROM HEAVEN EMPYRIUM – DWELLING PLACE OF GOD AND OF ALL THE ELECT.
[8:15 P.M. DECEMBER 7, 2020] IN A CHRIS BENNETT MYTHOLOGY RESEARCH FLYING EYE FLIGHT OF IDEATION – BIG NEED BIGGER TYPEFACE FOR BIGGER IDEAS: BELOW IS SNAPSHOT OF BIG COMPLETION allcaps i can’t alternatBETWEEN EMPTHA so altereante. SNAPSHOT OF BIG JUMP-TOWARD-COMPLETION DECODING:
WHAT I GOT AT 8:15 15 MIN AGO:
BEGIN SNAPSHOT:
{salvation}
The personal control system is cancelled by the altered state.
Its system reset is consciously attributed to the now visible, the normally hidden, uncontrollable source of control-thoughts, and is reset by that ultimate control-source, just as all contro control-thoughts are now reveled (at the egodeath transformation climax).
The ego death and transformation climax is like a woman.
How is the ego death and transformation climax like a virgin maiden?
Very comparable to woman overpowered attracted seduced climax wrestle she’s completely overpowered SHE ACTS FEMALE.
The the personal egoic control system acts female.
The the mind’s personal control system behaves in a female way:
The mind’s personal control system resists being abducted, overpowered, seduced.
The mind’s personal control system is seduced.
Sequence of Female Aspects of the mind’s personal control system
virgin
abducted
attracted
seduced
wrestled
overpowered
climaxed
married
bridal chamber
impregnated
give birth
die in childbirth
child is god-aware
Heading
IT BEHAVES IN A FEMALE WAY DEFINED AS RESIST, SEDUCED, CLIMAX, GIVE BIRTH.
THE POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM TRANSFORMATION LIKE A VIRGIN WHO WAS ABDUCTED, SEDUCED, WRESTLED, OVERPOWERED, SUBMITTRED, THEN MARRIED?
THIS IS A TEST SENTENCE. TRANSFORMATION OF THE MENTAL WORLDMODEL FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM
TRANSFORMATION OF THE MENTAL WORLDMODEL FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM
create a million [acro]/keyboard shortcuts let the ood good ones survive by auto-complete helping reveal what’s been defined, fav phraseing but i keep improveing my phrasings
Maiden vs. Two Goddesses
{maiden vs. (underworld-queen + overworld-queen)} = naive-possibilism vs. (qualified-possibilism + eternalism)
{tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism
Innumerable Mythemes to Enter in Concepts Collection from a Single Idea-Development Session
{virgin} {bridal chamber} {spear} {avert eye} {bridal chamber, soul ascent} {bridal chamber} {soul ascent} {reaching level of fixed stars/ heimarmene} {soul ascent / astral ascent mysticism up to heimarmene fixed stars} {doorway} {passageway} {gateway} {heimarmene gate} {heaven gate} {password, key} {sacr child} {no egodeath virgins/ children/ youths/ maidens allowed through this door} {saturn scything the child during the ascent to reach heimarmene} {virgin} {phallus of god} {first birth vs second birth} {initial form, final form} {first form, second form} {first self, second self} {virgin} {mother} {child born} {son overthrows father} {firstborn replaced by secondborn} {stake through prometheus} {ascent} {crossing-through gate threshold cost} {male/female Mithras/Dionysus/Jesus} {athena’s tall spear} {spear dividing scene} {mortal, immortal} {spear through snake} {crossbeam} {Eve born from hole in Adam’s side} {worldline speared by the worldline, t / o shape} {control agent speared by worldline} {lion-headed snake monster created by solo maiden w/o consent of partner} {lion-headed serpent monster created by female acting without partner’s consent} {snake-headed family carved in rock} {snake through heart} {human head on snake} {spear through side/heart} {stake through prometheus} {spear in side of king on spacetime cross in heavens} {worldline sword running through God’s side} {2 goddesses} {maiden, underground queen, aboveground queen} {2 goddesses, maiden, underground queen, aboveground queen} {virgin maiden dies giving birth to god-boy} {epiphany ruler descending partway to meet rising soul} {puppet/ puppetmaster} {god-phallus revealed in maiden virgin takes virginity} {king descend heaven epiphany}
Mytheme {virgin} Mind Never Been Transformed from Possibilism to Eternalism
done: create Concept-entries in the Egodeath-Theory Concepts Database, for these more-decoded mythemes from this morning’s session:
(Conceptbase)
Mytheme {two goddesses} = from Naive Possibilism-Thinking to Eternalism-thinking + qualified possibilism-thinking
Mytheme {speared side} = Worldline Running Through the Personal Control System
Mytheme {speared} = Worldline Running Through the Personal Control System
Mytheme {king descend epiphany}
Mytheme {soul ascent, bridal chamber}
During the years-long course of decoding a given mytheme-network, a new connections-explosion builds on the partial mytheme-decoding to date, of the particular and overall mytheme-network. I expereicned this in Nov 2011 vs 13, now again with ~2012 decoding of helpless female thoughtreceiver vs. the true-powered, male, thought-injector, vs. Dec 7 2020 COMPLETION of that tight local mytheme cluster PLUS far-flung explostions of completion of unpredictable other ADDVANCED LEVEL MYTHEMSE that have been partly decoded incompletely ; missing some SPECIFIC KEY “ANGLES”, SEEING THE ANALOGY FROM THE RIGHT POINT OF VIEW.
HISTORY RECORD:
ON DEC 7 , I DECODED: X ASPECT OF {M}, THEN X ASPECT OF {M}, THEN X ASPECT OF {M}, THEN X ASPECT OF {M}, THEN X ASPECT OF {M}, THEN X ASPECT OF {M}, THEN X ASPECT OF {M}, THEN X ASPECT OF {M}, THEN X ASPECT OF {M}, THEN X ASPECT OF {M}, THEN
eg like, too many breakthroughs to even list.
I had such widespread and specific local decodings angles breakthrough, it is not possible to describe.
It cannot be listed, the large # completed-decodings 6 hours ago.
This connections-explosion builds on the 2012 b partial mytheme-decoding of the female thought-receiver and the veiled male forceful thought-injector.
The below is an “ok to edit” copy of the page:
First, at start of session, I was filling-in the list
Welcome to the Egodeath Theory, Joe Average
Welcome to the Egodeath Theory, Joe Average (and General Audience, and Professional Mystics, and Cognitive Scientists, and Ancient Hellenistic Initiates).
The basic ideas that anyone can understand, as I’ve presented them: Key topics that I assembled January 1988: o The block universe o No-free-will/monopossibility o Loose cognitive association binding o Cybernetic non-control <– do not think about or experience in the form of {snake} frozen in {rock}. This is the way through THE EGODEATH DOORWAY Semele light shines on her workings, dollpuppet immediately made visible as a illusion screen obscuring; it’s a virtual layer only, a projected image the personal egoic control system. The Maiden {virgin} means maiden; the maiden/virgin hasn’t been PENETRATED BY SNAKE WORLDLINE SPEARE OSIRIS DIED IN TREE TRUNK, GAVE WAY TO “THE SEONC FORM” {second form}{virgin} {maiden splits into two ruler-goddesses, one in the underworld}. to take a boy is to overpower and transformation shine the light on the underworkings of the the personal egoic control system causes necessarily a transformation to the adult from, transformation from possibilism to eternalism = {losing virginity}
this is not… my theory needs some theorizing, about “amont of reconnections” — at least I now know that deocind ga mytheme is more than {x} =x. 3 of 4 types of connection remain:
myth>myth synonyms antonyms generalization groups myth>concept concept>myth concept>concept
Look how many different angles you can draw analogies from.
I could prove that I thought of “much of these decodings already” — sort of.
What does “sort of” mean? I had half the angles/perspectives/analogies,
compare November 2011 tree/snake work, nice; versus November 2013 “TOTALLY GETTING IT!!! OMFG” — no comparison in magnitude.
think more literally. God’s control-member is inserted covertly into the heart inner place within the personal egoic control system. The maiden has been revealed = penetrated, for the thought-inserter to be revealed covertly operating inside the local locus of control, We see your will revealed the snake worleline running through our heart our mind’s adult form the virgin maiden mind hasn’t popped its one and only childhood-thinking mental models, the mind gets to have 2.5 mental models, called “first and second birth”, plus consolation prize your childhood self gets to be Ruler of the Underworld of the egoic control agents that never really existed in a sense, your initial fantasy-self, now still being used to control to now virtualy controrl the steering among the branches, Demeter is under there in the land of thihngs that seemed, The Land of Initially Seemed, local locus of control autonomous maiden gives birth to monster : lion (death-face) snake (worldlien) = lion snake = impaled by Death worldline
Cause of death: impalement by worldline through his cybernetic heart/side, and the woman eve born from Adam’s side. wound in side represents birth-opening where worldline puppetmaster is operating in your heart of your the personal egoic control system. the main image is, i didn’t arrange these ideas this way —
Mental Mode
the tem to eternalism to possibilism to eternalism cherry.
REALLY FEELIN A MYTH-GROK ABOUT MAIDEN DYING GIVING BIRTH TO EGOIC THINKING = NEW BIRTH OF AWARENESS OF THE MALE PUPPETMASTER INSERTED INTO FEMALE VIRTUAL ILLUSION LEVEL . ACTING ON ITS OWWN = POSSIBILISM-THINKING. SOPHIA INITIALLY GAVE BIRTTH TO A LION-FACED SERPENT MONSTER = CYBERNETIC DEATH. GOOD MODEL, CLEAR VIBES.. GEOCENTRIC Ptolemaic astral ascent mysticism . To get past a point of…. intelligence, light shining on how the mind works, how the feeling of time and control collapses upon light watery light the watery light shines on Semele realizing she is naked and vulnerable penetrated by the inner thought injector serpent running through the heart or lets just say running the branch Eve holds over her vulnerable spot covered by a branch; possibilism .
BEGIN LIFE AS A YOUTH / MAIDEN – NEITHER IS CONSIDERED MALE IN THE HIGHER SENSE OF PUPPETMASTER / THOUGHT INJECTOR SNAKE THAT IS YOUR LIFE ALL ALONG THAT RAIL IS PROJECTED REFLECTION …. GARMENT OF LIGHT PROTECTS.. GNOSTICISM – POSSIBILISM-THINKING ON ITS OWN W/O ETERNALISM GIVES BIRTH TO LION SERPENT YOUR HEAD ON TOP FROZEN IN ROCK, CARVED INTO ROCK, SNAKE THROUGH THE HEART AS YOU RISE UP AS PERSONAL EGOIC CONTROL AGENT AND ARE MADE SUPER LIGHT SHINED REVEALING THE WORKINGS OF THE MIND TO AWARENESS AND WHEN THIS HAPPENS CONTROL ILLUSION EGOIC CONTROL POWER ILLUSION COLLAPSES, THE MAIDEN PENETRATED BY THE MALE GOD DIES AND IS TRANSFORMED IDENTITY REPLACED BY ETERNALISM THE BOY DIONYSUS IS BORN, THE “ADULT” FORM BY ANALOGY … THIS IS HOW THE MIND WORKS IN THE ALTERED STATE. LOSE VIRGINITY, DIE MAIDEN, GIVE BIRTH TO AWARENESS OF YOUR MALE PARTNER WHOSE WILL YOU SEE IN YOU. I NOW SEE THE WILL OF GOD INSIDE ME AND MY ILLUSION COLLAPSED ABOUT BEING AN AUTONOMOUS SOURCE OF PERSONAL CONTROL POWER. YOUR MINID WAS FORCED TO CHANGE AND GIVE BIRTH TO THE *SECOND WAY OF THIINKING AFTER “IT” HAPPENS, THE SYSTEM CANCELLATION AND SUSPENSION AND REVELATION OF HOW TIME AND CONTROL UNDERNEATH THE PROJECTED IMAGE LAYERED ON TOP VANISHES AND NATURALLY THE MIND RECONFIGURES TO ITS HIGHER FORM. WE ALL HAVE A SNAKE SHAPED CROSS PROMETHUES RISE UP TO GOD-MODE THINKING AND DISCVERD A SPEAR THROUGH HIM. THE … RISE UP LIKE MOSES LIFTED UP SNAKE, THE WORLDLINE FROZEN CARVED IN ROCK IS YOUR LIFE STUCK WITH THE WORDLINE SPEAKER THE SPEAR IS THE WORLDLINE RUNING THROUGH THE KING, IS THE REAL KING REVEALED, 12:50 AM DEC 7 2020
FOUGHT THEMSELVES
done: add {throw rock}, one-eye throws {rock}, David and Golieth, Jason throws rock into army the {rock} makes them {fight}, ego fights the light of the real controller, the higher level king.
local control the personal egoic control system is a projected image with no real power, she is a penetrated, the god men are male female they have the spear-snake worldline running through their cybernetic heart impale Prometheus rose to god-mode access and died and transformed, that death is female-like: the puppet illusion we see God’s will in us. puppetmaster
the personal egoic control system is like an overpowered raptured female, helpless, no power, in light of God’s power, the maiden who WAS VIRGIN
“The word virgin comes via Old French virgine from the root form of Latin virgo, genitive virginis, meaning literally “maiden” or ” virgin ” —a sexually intact young woman or “sexually inexperienced woman“.
A GIRL WHO SLEPT AROUND BUT WAS NEVER CYBERNETICALLY OVERPOWERED BY LIGHT AND FORCED TRANSFORMATION FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM IS STILL A VIRGIN. YOU ARE NO — YOU THE FEMALE PUPPET SOUL ILLUSION-PROJECTION WITH NO POWER, THE THE PERSONAL EGOIC CONTROL SYSTEM ARE MADE TO GIVE WAY TO THE HIGHER UNDERLYING REALITY, THAT YOU HAVE NO POWER, ITS PROJECTED. TO LEARN THAT AND BE FORCED TO SWITCH TO UTTER HELPLESS DEPENDEDCY ON YOUR OWN REVEALED SEPARATE HIDDEN THE NORMALLY VEILED, UNCONTROLLABLE SOURCE OF CONTROL-THOUGHTS , TO UNVEIL THAT REALITY OF CONTROL-THOUGHT INJECTTION BY THE WORLDLINE SNAKE FROZNE SPEAR IN SIDE IN ROCK IN WHAT DIRECTION DOES THE SNAKE RUN THORUGH PROMETHEUS. THE MALE SPEAR SERPENT WORLDLINE RUNS THROUGH YOU YOUR PAST (TAAIL) IS VISIBLE FROEN IN ROCK AND FUTURE SAME FROZEN IN ROCK MAN’S HEAD FISH MOUTH HE’S DIVING INTO THE FROZEN SNAKE SHAPED FUTURE WORLDLINE. THE –
HOW DID I NOT SEE IT WHEN CLEAR HEAD AND SOBER? THE SPEAR DUMMY THE SPEAR DUMMY WORLDLINE SNAKE RUNNING THROUGH YOUR PRESENT TIME. CONTINUE [1:04 A.M. DEC 7 2020] I swear no one would agree that it failed failed to decode… the two go together: the spear in the side, and sword in god’s side suggests worldline snake is running through god and he is crucified not literally dead, if the personal egoic control system = king, has a spear through side not dumbly
“the symbol of the spear is corrolated/ associated with… (i hate that way of talking).
it magically is associated with seizures” misses the big main point:
The worldline snake runs through the heart of the king, formerly known as the {evil king}, he lives in one way but the godmen are rep’d as female-like Jesus with God’s will stuck in him and worldline spear wounded his side, effeminate Jesus Dionysus Mithras Osiris has God’s control-member inserted in hi he has the female trait of being overpowered by God’s light and forced to shed shine light on how mind really works, killing Semele the projected image illusion temporary powerless vulnerable illusion, not able to stand adult light truth the child is … my original point this writing session was {astral ascent mysticism}, before decoded {virgin} and {spear} decoding, [1:13 a.m. December 7, 2020] geocentric.
Caruana’s video and glossary and finished or “took” or “got” what i wrote already about possibilism transformation from possibilism to eternalism = transformation from Persephone to
HEAVEN EMPYRIUM – DWELLING PLACE OF GOD AND OF ALL THE ELECT
Christ descends down from Eternalism-land, we rise up from possibilism-land. Meet the ruler in the air, the epiphany, Mystery Religion. Mystery Religion. Mystery Religion Mystery Religion Mystery Religion Mystery Religion Mystery Religion Mystery Religion
Mytheme decoding sequence this session that’s ending 2:35 am dec 7 2020: 0. Passing through the astral doorway, the price is Egodeath. Egodeath theory = I, the Egodeath theory is the doorway from possibilism to eternalism. , ego death to get to heaven-empyriem through the layer of heimarmene to outside it where God and al the elect have risen to, out down from the sky means, vertical scale, lower = possibilism, higher = eternalism, Christ comes down from Eternalismland = Heaven = empyrium; above … astral ascent mysticism is useful. 1. astral ascent mysticism – {reaching heimarmene the sphere of the fixed stars} level (a got-it good idea, pass but first, 2. {Saturn sacrifice the childhood thinking, = possibilism-thinking. 3. {virgin}, mind hasn’t been made to flip mode to the mature real form underlying image projector, real power center the collapse of a false power-center. a mind that hasn’t been transformed to egoic thinking {virgin}. the Bridal Chamber – we know god inside us operating us, we are an image projection we were made to see and die, Persephone lost, – the one thing i don’t understand: didn’t i write all this? I HAVE NO ENTRY FOR VIRGIN. I HAVE NO ENTRRY FOR SPEAR. OMFG. LOW IQ. AND THE PRICE TO RISE UPWARD TO THE HEIMARMENE REALM FIXED … JUPITER SACRIFICES THE CHILDTHINKING (holy spirit high-flying eagle / harmless dove? = takes the mind’s virginity: eagle = power of the holy spirit to transform to THE SECOND FORM.
every myth is transformation from possibilism to eternalism
What’s Jesus as maiden? bc transformation from possibilism to eternalism.
Why is x y? b/c x & y is analogous w/ transformation from possibilism to eternalism is like losing a child, like losing virginity, like escaping prison HOH OH HOW WE LOVE THE WAYS TO COMPARE THE MAIDEN FORM, SHE HASN’T BEEN SHOWN GOD’S WILL HIDDEN OPERATING INSIDE HER YET. HER HIDDEN PARTNER, THE HIGHER, CONTROL-THOUGHT-INJECTOR.
THE FIRST WAY OF THINKING IS EGOIC/PSM POSSIBILISM . THE SECOND WAY OF THINKING IS THE TRANSCENDENT, ETERNALISM. adult form. ) SO YOU CAN REACH UP TO FULL LEVEL, HEIMARMENE AFTER TRANSFORMING TO ETERNALISM THUS DYING TO POSSIBILISM. 3. spear through, Prometheus stake worldline. CARVED HIGH-RELIEF SNAKE IN ROCK IS A {SPEAR} RUNNING THROUGH YUOR SIDE SIDEWAYS SPEAR WORLDLINE SNAKE FROZEN IN ROCK PROMETHEUS STAKE.
BILLOWING CLOTH = AN INVISIBLE FORCE THAT YOU CAN FEEL AND CAN INDIRECTLY SEE . REFLECTION. THE CLOTH IS BLOWING IN INNER MIND THE PERSONAL EGOIC CONTROL SYSTEM NO LONGER VIRGIN, GOT OVERPOWERED AND EXPOSED AND ILLUSION COLLAPSED, THE MALE HALF PARTNER REVEALED HIMSELF, THE HIGHER CONTROLLER. BTW KILLS FT FREEWILL THINKING. THE HIGHER CLOTHING, A NEW CLOTHING FOR THE SPIRIT, EXPOSED.
I already decoded “virgin”? not, surprisingly. very little. but so so much clearer it feels.
I totally get it, totally virgin, not yet transformed from possibilism to eternalism. did i not write that post that the Egodeath Yahoo Group 2012?
That is the conversation i spewed out to a friend – back when I figured out decoded “rapture/ra/e”. Wished I had recorded the burst of exactly-right analogies when I decoded “female” but mind has a first born self then when that collapsed no more; it was your mind’s only child-form.
Each mind gets one initial egoic possibilism-thinking, for a time, then that lower king dies, that maiden gets penetrated by Prometheus’ stake worldline running through her — the personal egoic control system is the virgin.
temporary, powerless, destined to follow Demeter, our collective i swear i wrote this in 2006. Every initiated man is Demeter-shaped, the adult-ruler.
Switch gears on the analogy — what happens when the maiden dies? she gives birth to Dionysus, and also, she is now an adult woman, thus Queen, Adult Queen of the Dead Child-thinking realm we all share, Demeter was a maiden but got penetrated by the snake-shaped worldline of god, God’s spear in your side, inside your the personal egoic control system injecting secretly thoughts, now revealed as a temporary beginner-form illusion — a cheap gimmick, a projected image that collapses upon light, got it. [1:31 am December 7, 2020]. the female the personal egoic control system soul splits upon death (transformation-away, replaced by eternalism-thinking splits into TOW NEW FORMS I GOT IT:!
NAIVE POSSIBILISM-THINKING = PERSEPHONE
ON THE REALITY SIDE, WE HAVE DEMETER (ETERNALISM-THINKING ) , ADULT FORM AFTER THE MAIDEN FORM. DEMETER IS AWARE OF SHADOW-EXISTENCE FORMER SELF, NOW SEEN AS “QUEEN” ADULT FORM IN THE SHADOWS-WORLD, PERSEPHONE QUEEN OF THE UNDERWORLD DEAD EGOS / TRANSFORMED-AWAY, ILLUSION-BASED SELF-CONCEPT. THE SELF-CENTER SWITCHES TO A DUO MODEL, TWO CENTERS OF CONTROL: PUPPETMASTER / PUPPPET. BRAND NEW IDEA FOR 1988? 2012 I CRACKED TONS OF THIS – NO VIRGIN Concept-entry THO???? UNBELIEVABLE. NO SPEAR ENTRY ???? JOKE, YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING.
ETERNALISM-THINKING + QUALIFIED-POSSIBILISM-THINKING = DEMETER MOURNING FOR HER LOST DAUGHTER
I ALREADY WROTE THIS/???? ON MY DEMETER PAGE? not really finding it, maybe idea development page? i spelled out the equations somewhere already.
MAIDEN PERSEPHONE SPLITS INTO ADULT QUEEN OF UNDERWORLD SHADES LAND OF DEAD EGOS, CANCELLED/REMOVED GARMENTS OF POSSIBILISM-THINKING, AND SPLITS INTO DEMETER, THE ADULT FORM OF THE MAIDEN, ETERNALISM.
To rise to a certain threshold level of awareness the Egodeath doorway, this transformation is the doorway to Cog Sci, Loose Cog Science. to get through the doorway, the price is your child [12:27 a.m. December 7 2020], to rise up high to fixed stars, you get trapped at the .. as you fly … as the child flies up higher and higher, there’s a level at which the child-mode thinking is revealed as an illusion and the inner snake puppet-hand in you is all visible; you experience and you see and the child-mode thinking dies; your demon-possessed ; the female dies, the male form is born. Semele Zeus Dionysus. the boy was born from the cybernetic death of the female when Zeus shined his light on the the personal egoic control system with branching — o Mental model transformation o Ego transcendence.
I’ve been working on clarifying and focusing ideas, including the peak climactic self-control-seizure vortex and control-system transformation, since I first put together the basic core ideas, on January 11, 1988 in the ivy-covered computer lab at university.
These basic ideas which you can readily understand, that I put together in 1988, are listed in my the Egodeath Concepts Database.
“Non-control” of a sort: personal control is no longer thought of as coming from a local locus of personal control power operating with steering power in a tree of possibilities into an open future.
Mytheme: {sow dragon teeth into ground}, {army starts to attack you}, {throw rock}, {army of soldiers fights against itself}; also: {slingshot throw rock kills giant}
Mytheme: {sow dragon teeth into ground} {army starts to attack you} {throw rock} {} — [10:50 p.m. December 6, 2020] side-note decoding a unit of decoding: SLINGSHOTTED {ROCK} {KILLS GIANT}. As I was saying before interrupted by fallout-connections tumbling along: {army of soldiers fights against itself}.
[10:17 p.m. December 6, 2020] i got something. dragons teeth. how does the tale-episode go? Army fighting against itself. This potential mytheme-decoding came to me when again reading:
Definition: A series of loose-cognitive sessions culminating in complete elimination of naive-possibilism-thinking, resulting in eternalism-thinking plus qualified-possibilism-thinking.
The initiation sequence: 1. Sensory entertainment. Discovery of meta-programing. 2. Nondual unity oneness awareness. Rainbows & unicorns, peace & light; the premature, unearned glimpse of the heaven-realms. 3. The gods’ guarding dragon smells your pollution, your impurity, and wakes up, releasing the Furies. 4. Some purification, try again. Get thrown out, fleeing in terror. 5. more purification, try again. 6. more purification, try again. 7. more purification, try again. 8. sacrifice, purification. 9. wedding banquet, bridal chamber. <– the proper return, now “earned“, of nondual unity oneness awareness. 10. singing praise to God with the angels.
The early initiation stage, and the final initiation stage after reaching Completion (of transformation from possibilism to eternalism), both include nondual unity oneness awareness.
The beginner has not yet discovered the cybernetic control-seizure vortex; has not become as acquainted with it as the bride has become well-acquainted with her husband’s body inside of her.
The situation is reminiscent of Ken Wilber’s concept “the pre/trans fallacy”: something from before a big change, can mistakenly look like after a change, but there are important differences.
In the early initiation stage, there is nondual unity oneness awareness, unearned, unstable.
Soon the mind catches sight of the attractor vortex.
The guarding {furies} awaken.
Desperately try to cover-up, flee in terror, from seeing the certainly threatening control-loss dragon serpent monster; Dionysus’ God-mode transcendent thinking takes over the egoic personal control system and straightaway crashes it into a tree; loss of control.
reading the following paragraph after the above, gave it another shot of thinking about tale of {army fighting against itself} THEY TURNED … HE THREW *DRAGON‘S TEETH* AND THEY TURNED TO FIGHT AGAINST EACH OTHER: [[10:48 p.m. December 6, 2020] note entered a few minutes later, after performing the theory-confirming-experiment: what made them fight against each other? a rock. Phase 1 was “Hypothesis Formation.” Phase 2 was Conduct Experiment to confirm or disconfirm the Theory. Phase 3 now: clean up/revise the theory or experiment: Jason didn’t throw dragon’s teeth; he sowed them into the ground, causing the army to appear and start to attack him, then he threw a {rock} and they fought themselves; “Some fought themselves, some fought each other”.]
The harder the personal control system tries to retain control, and watches the control-system vigilantly with perfect acuity and Reason, the more the personal control system is tricked into checking, testing, and challenging the mind’s control power, pitting personal self-control power against itself.
At cybernetic self-testing climax, the personal control system is made to prove and demonstrate willing the destruction and harm of oneself.
Purification and correction and coherence of the mental worldmodel occurs then; transformation, redemption, satisfaction, sacrifice, becoming right with God-mode thinking.
1) “First, Jason had to plow a field with fire-breathing oxen, the Khalkotauroi, that he had to yoke himself. [if only i were a salamander — or a furnace-proof (& lion-proof) prophet]
Medea provided an ointment that protected him from the oxen’s flames. [ointment for hero – check Ruck’s new book]
The Son Conceived in Drunkenness: Magical Plants in the World of the Greek Hero Carl Ruck, December 2017 http://amzn.com/1587904241
2) “Then, Jason sowed the teeth of a dragon into a field.
The teeth sprouted into an army of warriors.
Medea had previously warned Jason of this and told him how to defeat this foe.
Before they attackedhim, he threw a rock into the crowd. [I forgot the {rock} theme in the story — I’ll take that as YET ANOTHER VINDICATION/ THEORY-CONFIRMATORY EXPERIMENT]
Unable to discover where the rock had come from, the soldiers attacked and defeated one another. [the personal egoic control system in the altered state inherently collapses, becomes non-viable & self-cancelling upon revealing the veiled uncontrollable source of control-thoughts]
3) His last task was to overcome the sleepless dragon which guarded the Golden Fleece. [ram sacrificed on rock altar]
Jason sprayed the dragon with a potion, given by Medea, distilled from herbs.
The dragon fell asleep, and Jason was able to seize the Golden Fleece.
He then sailed away with Medea.
Medea distracted her father, who chased them as they fled, by killing her brotherApsyrtus and throwing pieces of his body into the sea; Aeetes stopped to gather them.
In another version, Medea lured Apsyrtus into a trap. [the self-control vulnerability attractor vortex]
Jason killed him, chopped off his fingers and toes, and buried the corpse.
In any case, Jason and Medea escaped.
Putting the Mind’s “Self-Control Climax-&-Transformation” Capability Front & Center of the Egodeath theory
The Egodeath Concepts page is an optimized collection of ego death & mental model transformation concepts, defining the field of Loose Cognitive Science.
This optimized set of concepts helps the mind directly see, access, and understand the mind’s innate, attractive vortex of testing the self-control-source vulnerability.
The mind is able to cancel-out personal control and cause transformation of the mental worldmodel from possibilism to eternalism.
This capability of transforming the mental model of time, possibility, and control and is innate, built-into the temporary, initial, egoic mental model of control and time.
The egoic mental model of time and control is suited only for the ordinary state of consciousness (tight mental functioning binding)
The egoic personal control system is only viable temporarily, until it is exposed to loosecog, then it burns off, revealing the skeleton of reality functioning snake hidden underneath.
The elevated god-level perspective on the personal control system reveals the underlying {snake}; that is, reveals the pre-existing worldline of personal control-thoughts.
Dis-embedded awareness makes visible the underlying mental functioning of the personal control system, making visible the foundation layer underneath the transient, childhood-only, temporary and passing and perishable, illusion-based, shadow-screen. The imperishable underlying structure is seen — the naked, vulnerable skeleton of the self-control system.
[11:07 p.m. December 5, 2020] {she saw that she was naked} = mind sees its vulnerability of the personal egoic control system, its illusion and the illusion of possibility-branching that the personal egoic control system operates within – both are a projected illusion, gained by covering up the way the mind really works.
I explain the loose-cognitive phenomenology of self-control climax/cancellation that causes mental model transformation.
The self-control climax causes mental model transformation. The illusion is revealed and so it collapses and the vulnerability that was blocked from mental access and mental view, is now revealed and triggered, causing climactic disproof the the initial model of self-control agency along with its model of possibility and time – the entire possibilism mental worldmodel.
Mytheme: {skeleton} per Brown; Eve “I’ve Been {skeletonized} *and*{disrobed}”, in Plaincourault Amanita Tree Fresco
What’s nakeder than naked? to be skeletonized like Eve, by the mushroom. See through the illusion of the personal egoic control system.
Eve is seeing through the illusion of the personal egoic control system, including the illusory egoic control agent, illusory possibility-branching, and the state-specific viability of those two, conjoined, stand-OR-FALL-together ways of thinking.
The egoic control system’s — the egoic control agent steering within time, with possibility-branching, that whole situation is an illusion/ mis-reading of the real situation — for control, time, & possibility — an illusion that is cast by the underlayment, the foundation level “exposed skeleton” {eve skeleton plaincourault} (per Brown’s mytheme-decoding, but better) of the reality of how the mind ACTUALLY works UNDERNEATH THE EGOIC/POSSIBILISM ILLUSION-LAYER, which is exposed in the loose cognitive state . the egoic the egoic personal control system
(THAT’S A good phrase, the cave-image-illusion-projection, analogy —
A. How the mind, self-control, and world APPEARS to work, when the mind is only exposed to what it can perceive with {non-flying-eyeball}, {eyes closed}, {unable to see}, {blind}, childhood chicken-vison
B. Upon the altered state, now perceiving the UNDERLYING REALITY, how the mind and the self-control system, time, & possibility REALLY work, UNDERNEATH THE OSC-ONLY, CHIDLHOOD-PROJECTED ILLUSION.
the reality of how the mind actually works underneath the ACTUALLY works UNDERNEATH THE EGOIC/POSSIBILISM ILLUSION-LAYER, which is exposed in the loose cognitive state
of and only viable during the THE ORDINARY STATE OF CONSCIOUSNESS; collapses by revealing its illusion of autonomy, when it is exposed in the altered state . ) and pitting control against itself, disproving the initial, possibilism-premised model of time, possibility, and self-control, and causing transformation to 2) the second, eternalism-premised model of
Core explanatory components of how the mind works in the loose cognitive state; what happens when the mind discovers cybernetic control climax scc its
What happens when the mind discovers its potential to undergo transcendent self-control climax and transform from possibilism to eternalism
perceives and is drawn toward catches sight of the attractor vortex of pitting control against itself, disproving the initial, possibilism-premised model of time, possibility, and self-control; and transforming/ converting to the “eternalism (pre-existence)” mental model of time, possibility, and control (the mind’s innate, higher experiencing, adult form).
Outtakes from Site Map Page
Possibilism vs. Eternalism: Two Models of Time and Control Two most-basic worldmodels, essential to the Egodeath theory; a good foundation for both the 1988/1997 core Cybernetic theory, and for the Mytheme equivalents, to understand religious mythology & Esotericism.
Religious mythology is description-by-analogy of repeatedly taking psychedelics, producing transformation of the experiential mental worldmodel from literalist ordinary-state possibility-branching to analogical psychedelic pre-existence.
Definitions of Common Terms that I Mean in a Specific Way, Throughout My Writings
The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence was formed on January 11, 1988, by combining a set of key ideas.
Key topics assembled January 1988: o The block universe o No-free-will/monopossibility o Loose cognitive association binding o Cybernetic non-control o Mental model transformation o Ego transcendence.
“Non-control” of a sort: personal control is no longer thought of as coming from a local locus of personal control power operating with steering power in a tree of possibilities into an open future.
The present page, Theory Concepts, contains concepts about Egodeath theory other than Core Concepts and Key Mythemes.
The Core Concepts page lists core explanatory components of how the mind works in the loose cognitive state — just the truly core principles of the Cybernetic theory (not the Mytheme theory; not meta-theory): how loosecog works.
The present, Theory Concepts page covers questions of mushroom-esotericism history; questions of how to construct a theory; and the history of the Egodeath theory and its two halves (the Cybernetic theory & the Mytheme theory).
The Core Concepts page: “Core concepts of how the altered state works” (use my 1997 theory-spec as an example of this mytheme-free, pure Loosecog Science mentality).
, but are instead Mytheme-focused, or
The present, Theory Concepts page is focused on discussion of:
The Egodeath theory as an effective, successful explanatory framework.
The history of theory-development of the Egodeath theory, including the Cybernetic theory and then the Mytheme theory.
The history of mushroom-esotericism.
A difficult gray-area question: part of how the mind mechanically works in loosecog, is, it goes into “florid analogy mode”, which is, Mythemes.
Mytheme-analogies must be explained by resolving them to a non-mytheme “protected zone” of “pure direct modern Theory” — so, the Core Concepts page doesn’t rely on mythemes as part of its explanation of things that are observed and experienced in the altered state, just as my 1997 theory summary/outline spec, has almost no mythemes — either as a way of explaining things that are observed and experienced in the altered state, or as an explanandum to be explained.
My 2006 main article brings together and interweaves, or alternates between, the Core Concepts (the Cybernetic theory; psychedelic eternalism) and the Mytheme theory (analogical psychedelic eternalism).
A purely scientific, direct Modern Theory of how Mythemes work, must map mythemes to a non-mytheme domain — psychedelic eternalism; the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence; the Cybernetic theory.
The central basis of analysis is the non-myth-based explanation; according to the Mytheme theory, myth is explained in terms of the Core Concepts of the Cybernetic theory.
I’m analyzing Mythemes from a non-mytheme basis; with reference to a non-mytheme point of reference.
Using Optimized Concept-Labels, with Abbreviations
This great technique involves my latest steps, below. The motivation was largely, to compensate for my difficult awkward hand writing while capturing/developing an incoming rush of ideas.
This technique/system/approach for writing & idea development, expands upon my innovative, powerful April 1987 rapid idea-development technique.
That innovation enabled going from “0 to 60” during April 1987-January 1988 to have my most major breakthrough: the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.
Steps in the Technique
In the routine course of my writing/idea development, when I find I have a need for an optimized phrase that will serve as the handle/label for a good useful concept; an “optimized concept-label“:
1. Craft a Phrase; a new “optimized concept-label”: Write out a carefully designed phrase that I wish to type right now and wish to reuse moving forward.
2. Establish Acronym: Follow the phrase first-occurrence by square brackets officially defining the acronym:
When hand-writing (starting April 1987): BLAH BLAH THE CYBERNETIC THEORY OF EGO TRANSCENDENCE [CTET] BLAH BLAH
When typing on keyboard (starting June 1987), without defining keyboard shortcuts: blah blah the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence [CTET] blah blah
Starting December 2020 with heavy use of keyboard shortcuts; when typing (or multitouch on smartphone): blah blah the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence [ctet] blah blah
3. Enter Keyboard Shortcut. This step, I added officially & refined & documented in December 2020; I entered many keyboard shortcuts, a few years ago (probably on smartphone, first), but only utilized a few of them, eg: ‘ctet’ -> the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence Now I’ve stepped up my System for seriously utilizing keyboard shortcuts (an investment).
4. Test & Memorize the Keyboard Shortcut.
5. Add a Concept-section: In a WordPress page that contains my Concept/sections: o If it’s a new concept and not merely a new phrasing: Add a new Concept/section/ hyperbase entry. o If (usually the case) it’s merely an slightly improved phrasing/wording: In the existing concept/section, in the Synonyms field, add the new phrase.
6. Use, practice, & review the keyboard shortcuts/concept-phrases/ optimized concept-labels.
Good Phrasing Choices Is the Most Important Thing, but Use of Acronyms Was Part of That Mentality
1. The main, crucially most important thing is, good phrase-choices to attach a label on a concept: mental construct processing
2. After that phrase is formed, the next most beneficial thing is, defining an acronym for that phrase: mental construct processing [mcp] MENTAL CONSTRUCT PROCESSING [MCP]
3. Lastly important is incorp’ing an entire approach, for leveraging keyboard shortcuts, eg: mcp –> mental construct processing
The April 1987 Rapid Idea-Development Technique Breakthrough of Using Optimized Concept Labels, with Acronyms, Arose Consubstantially with Defining Acronyms for those Newly Defined Phrases
The April 1987 breakthrough of using optimized concept-labels, such as “mental construct processing”, arose consubstantially with defining and using shorthand “handles”, acronyms, to give fast use of each phrase or concept label, to use it like a word.
My inventions for idea-development in April 1987 are inseparable, including:
The ideas of “mental constructs” & “mental construct processing”.
The [ACRO] notation to define a shorthand “handle”, initially for use with hand writing, and then by June 1987, also used with computer keyboards — a system of defining and then using acronyms.
Designing a new style of analysis-approach and explanation-style, and defining a new field of knowledge (transcendent thinking; Transcendent Knowledge). I was intentionally designing a new explanatory paradigm for what “ego transcendence” is really about, driven by my urgent interest in examining & repairing our dis-integrity of cross-time self-control.
I successfully used optimized concept-labels, together with acronyms, to develop the new scientific field, of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.
I used this set of rapid idea-development techniques to specifically define Transcendent Knowledge; to enable doing highly efficient Transcendent Knowledge development.
These rapid idea-development techniques enabled me to design & form the foundation of the field of Loose Cognitive Science, quickly, from April 1987 to January 1988.
In April 1987, FIRST I thought of optimized concept-labels, then SECOND, hot on its heels, I turbo’d that good idea/invention, by adding acronyms, to compensate for my difficult awkward hand writing while an incoming rush of ideas, and also to speed my typing by typing acronyms (non-auto-expanding) (on PC from June 1987-December 1987+, then also Mac starting Jan 1988).
“Why exactly do we have poor cross-time self-control?” My driving question. My solution to analyze that question while … o Rapid idea development, for rapid idea-capture & idea development, for Transcendent Knowledge development. o Optimized concept-labels. o Acronym usage system. o Arose w/ labeled concepts “mental construct” & “mental construct processing”. o Threw away my 10/1985-3/1986 blank books w/ conventional writing/thinking.
All of that happened together in one blow, in April 1987, when my father was dying.
For my 21st birthday, my father gave me Alan Watts’ book The Way of Zen.
The formation of Egodeath theory had an incredible rampup as I read the book The Way of Zen during late 1987.
The explosion of my (1980s) 2nd phase, my 2nd stab at the Problem: everything happened together: the April 1987 technique-explosion where I all-at-once developed … Loose Cognitive Science.
In April 1987, I started forming the new scientific field of Transcendent Knowledge and Loose Cognitive Science by using Transcendent Knowledge development , idea development, producing in January 1988, the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.
The problem I had around October 1985 and April 1987, was the need to capture rapid new ideas, and form new ideas by thinking-by-writing, being able to see my thoughts and get a kind of feedback and a way to hang onto ideas and see them, on paper, during a rush of ideas.
At one and the same time, April 1987, I invented:
Optimized concept-labels.
A notation for defining [acronyms] to use as shorthand, for rapid idea development.
The specific concepts “mental construct processing” & “mental constructs”, and similarly flavored phrases/concepts.
Around 2011, I started defining multi-touch smartphone shortcuts.
Around 2016, I defined some laptop keyboard shortcuts, and used a few of them.
In early December 2020, I took a more serious, systematic, intensive approach to defining and using laptop keyboard shortcuts, making it routine and mass-production, to create the best phrases while writing, and entering shortcuts for those phrases, and documenting this rapid idea-development technique.
The concept-label “mental construct processing” is a great, characteristic, April 1987 first-batch example provides good example of optimized characteristic phrases — those terms have stood the test of time.
Lately, I use the term ‘cognitive’ more than “mental constructs”, because ‘cognitive’ is shorter. But ‘cognitive’ doesn’t have as good of connotations as “mental constructs”.
Hit-counts in the Core Concepts page: cognitive — hits: 31 mental construct — hits: 20 20/31 = 0.65 20/(20+31) = I use ‘cognitive’ 61% of the time, and “mental construct” 39% of the time.
Hit-counts in the Key Mythemes page: cognitive — hits: 13 mental construct — hits: 1 1/13 = 0.08 1/(1+13) = I use ‘cognitive’ 93% of the time, and I use “mental construct” 7% of the time.
Hit-counts in the present Theorizing-Concepts page: cognitive — hits: 26 mental construct — hits: 18 18/26 = 0.69. 18/(26+18) = I use ‘cognitive’ 59% of the time, and I use “mental construct” 41% of the time.
I want to move back to more use of the concept-label “mental construct” than ‘cognitive’/’cognition’. The contenders / usage: loose mental construct binding loose cognitive binding
connections among referents. No myth-analogies; direct scientific speaking/explanation. eg block universe contains worldlines, when you experience this, it suspends the sense of wielding control.
connections from mythemes to referents. For example, {rock} = block universe.
General versus specific; for example, {non-branching} vs. {ivy}.
Can be purely within the referent domain (for example, re-conceiving ego transcendence as switching the mental model to block-universe-premised no-free-will in the loosecog state).
Or, a breakthrough can involve the mytheme domain — large-scale revision and expansion of recognized connections among mythemes, and from mythemes to referents (key concepts).
The idea-development work that I’ve been doing since October 1985, to produce and expand the Egodeath theory — first the Cybernetic theory (1985-1997), then the Mytheme theory (1998-2020).
In April 1987, I found my distinctive idea-development style, on open expansive binder sheets or free-form computer text files, with heavy use of acronyms (similar to keyboard shortcuts) to speed-up writing tenfold and also to identify key terms such as the entries in the present document.
The work I’ve done since October 27, 1985, thinking and writing, writing-thinking, thinking-through-writing.
The main distinctive phases of my idea development:
October 1985 – April 1987 — idea development (mostly conventionally styled self-help writing) on the project of repairing dis-integrity of cross-time personal control, including rationally figuring out ego transcendence/ spiritual enlightenment, because that would help.
April 1987-January 1988 — idea development with innovative style of optimized concept-labels for loosecog; expansive ruled binder paper with optimized concept-labels along with acronym usage, and same on PC. I was deliberately working on a new technology to explain ego transcendence; Transcendent Knowledge, to write up and publish for everyone.
January 1988-1997 — discovered the Cybernetic theory. During this period, idea development consisted of writing up the true nature of ego transcendence. Writing a good article on this content was difficult, so I summarized the Cybernetic theory in a theory-spec, uploaded February 1997.
1998-2006-2013-2020 — idea development about mapping religious mythology to the Core theory of 1988-1997; idea development work on the Mytheme theory.
The non-mytheme-oriented, Core portion of the Egodeath theory, directly conceptualized in scientific terms, per Loose Cognitive Science.
Ego transcendence is about entering the loose cognitive association binding state, to experience the block universe with pre-existent worldlines of control-thoughts, so no-free-will; producing cybernetic non-control seizure, thereby producing mental-model transformation about time, possibility, and control.
The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence was formed in 1988, and was published as a summary outline theory-specification in 2 Comment/Annotation posts at the Principia Cybernetica website in 1997.
The Cybernetic theory portion of the Egodeath theory doesn’t cover the full set of all three major terms, “analogical psychedelic eternalism”, but only the latter two terms: psychedelic eternalism, with added emphasis that ‘eternalism’ includes cybernetic non-control, or control-instability and cancellation, revealing nullity of the local locus of personal, pseudo-autonomous control.
The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence was formed on January 11, 1988, by combining these key ideas: o The block universe o No-free-will o Loose cognitive association binding o Cybernetic non-control o Mental model transformation o Ego transcendence.
Synonyms: the Core theory the Cybernetic theory the psychedelic eternalism theory of Transcendent Knowledge
Cognitive Science’s most popular lecture sessions (about Psychedelics and Cog Sci); 2-state Cognitive Science. (Charles Tart’s idea of 2-state Science.)
Cognitive Science used with the Egodeath theory.
Loosecog Science describes things in direct, modern, scientific, non-analogy language, so Loosecog Science is related more closely to the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence (psychedelic eternalism), than to the Mytheme theory (analogical psychedelic eternalism).
Loose Cognitive Science can incorporate and cover and study and employ the Mytheme theory (analogical psychedelic eternalism), as defined in the Egodeath theory.
The Mytheme theory is the science of mapping and decoding mythemes as a network of analogies describing the experiences covered by Loose Cognitive Science.
Non-analogy-based description of things that are observed and experienced in the altered state.
Mythemeland: Contrast {Mythemeland}, which describes the same otherworld, but using analogies (the language of Mythemese), rather than direct explicit description.
Mythemese: A language that seems (to those on the outside) to speak about the things that are observed and experienced in the mundane, ordinary state of consciousness, when actually speaking about things that are observed and experienced in the altered state.
For example, the Mythemese phrase “the woman was naked” has nothing to do with either a woman or being naked; it’s a statement about the mind in the altered state, by analogies; things that are observed and experienced in the altered state.
Short version of the name of 2nd half of the Egodeath theory.
Developed 1998-2002-2006-2011-2013-2020.
The “analogical psychedelic pre-existence” theory of religious mythology.
The Mytheme theory maps mythemes to scientific direct Transcendent Knowledge per the the Cybernetic theory.
The Egodeath theory consists of the Cybernetic theory + the Mytheme theory, mapping from the Mytheme theory to the Cybernetic theory.
In long form: the Egodeath theory consists of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence + the “analogical psychedelic pre-existence” theory of religious mythology.
Synonyms: The “analogical psychedelic pre-existence” theory of religious mythology.
A complete decoding of a mytheme requires specifying connections between mythemes, connections from mythemes to referents, and connections among referents (listed in the Glossary of the Altered State).
A mytheme is a description by analogy, of something that is experienced or perceived in the altered state (the loose cognitive binding state).
Mythemes are themes in Greek, Christian, and World religious mythology, art & texts, which describe, by use of analogies, things that are observed and experienced in the altered state from mushrooms or other entheogens.
Mythemes connect in a network (or cluster) to other mythemes. See decoding a mytheme.
Decoding a mytheme: To decode a mytheme means making 4-way connections: mytheme>mytheme mytheme>concept (main meaning) concept>mytheme concept>concept
Synonym mythemes: for example: {serpent, ivy, vine, ribbon} = worldline.
Antonym mythemes (or duo-pairs of mythemes): {tree versus snake} = Possibilism versus Eternalism {accursed versus blessed} {wrath versus mercy} = self-control cybernetic turmoil and self-threatening due to adhering to naive-Possibilism-thinking versus resolution to calm, stable self-control upon relying on Eternalism-thinking
General-to-specific mythemes: branching, tree non-branching, snake
Narrative cluster of mythemes: {apolytrosis} = {release a captive who will be killed unless the ransom price of release is paid}
myth is analogies describing psychedelics revealing eternalism and personal non-control
Religious mythology is analogies describing things that are observed and experienced in the altered state.
Entheogens reveal the control-thoughts injector-worldline, with personal non-control of control-thoughts; pre-existence of control-thoughts; and monopossibility.
Synonyms: analogical psychedelic pre-existence the analogical psychedelic eternalism theory of religious mythology the “analogical psychedelic pre-existence” theory of religious mythology
All 3 words in this compound theory-label are commonplace and close to the intended connotations — unlike an earlier term, “metaphorical entheogenic eternalism”.
The entheogen pre-existence theory of religious mythology.
Religious mythology describes by analogies, entheogens revealing and giving an experience of the pre-existence and uncontrollability of personal control-thoughts.
An idea I used profitably around 2011 leading to the 2013 {tree vs. snake} breakthrough.
To be absolutely bold and assertive in applying the general idea, “All mythemes represent transformation of the mental worldmodel from Possibilism to Eternalism in the altered state.”
When decoding any mytheme, you merely have to specify in what particular way, the above “represent” means; identify the particular isomorphism/ analogy.
Synonyms: Hephaestus’ magic hammer of interpretation
Esotericists are apathetic about Jesus’ historicity; the truth of esotericism is independent of whether there was a single, identifiable Mr. Historical Jesus, who was literally physically harmed.
The salvific vision of Christ crucified and resurrected/risen out from the rock cave, is what matters.
The ahistoricity of religious founder figures: Paul, Augustine, Jesus, Mary, John.
Synonyms: the Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Authors the Ahistoricity Theory of Ancient Religious Founder Figures ahistoricity of religious founder figures
Fruitless dispute mis-centered around Allegro, without any actual 2-way debate; just throwing darts past each other and strawmanning (misrepresenting) the field of entheogen scholarship; misrepresenting:
What the research questions of interest are.
What the defined positions are on those various distinct research questions.
What constitutes types of evidence for the distinct research questions.
Founded on pure presupposition, intense bias, conflict of interest, a substitution scam for profit, empty moral posturing, and ignorance of the plain copious evidence.
The official position of Egodeath theory is that all Hellenistic Mystery Religions are native Christmas shamanism per the “secret Amanita cult” theory.
Overplayed. Outsiders to mushroom scholarship fixate on Allegro as far more important than he is, in order to block and prevent research into mushrooms in religion.
Instead of learning the state of the evidence in the field, people get good book deals with publishers by reading a couple books on Allegro instead.
The cheap-opportunist Allegro-bashing industry is unrelated to mushroom scholarship.
There is, or was, only one positive follower of Allegro, but he left the field years ago.
Newbies and outsiders and pretenders negatively orbit Allegro, who appears to be an easy target, to make themselves look good.
The entirety of the Egodeath theory is summarized thusly: the Egodeath theory is the Maximal “native Christmas shamans”, 🎄🍄🦌🛷🎅🎁 “secret Amanita cult” theory of Hellenistic Mystery Religions; {mixed wine} was Amanita wine — and so was the {bread of heaven}.
That is the great secret hidden inside the mind, revealed at the climax of Mystery Religion rites, to the utter profound amazement of the minds of the day, and of to-day: the sacrament is a mushroom!! See Ruck & M. Hoffman for info.
“Strict critical historiography” is a specialty term from Wouter Hanegraaff, for discussing what constitutes “properly conducted historical scholarship” on the history of Western Esotericism, as opposed to the bad methodology, of “religionism”.
the maximal psychedelic theory of religion and culture
The theory that religion and culture are based on central, normal, mainstream use of psychedelics.
Examples of a maximal position: the maximal entheogen theory of religion the maximal mushroom theory of Hellenistic religion. the maximal “native Christmas shamans”, 🎄🍄🦌🛷🎅🎁”secret Amanita cult” theory of Hellenistic Mystery Religions. the maximal mushroom theory of religion. the maximal ahistoricity theory of religious founder figures the maximal metaphor theory of religious mythology the maximal entheogen theory of religion and culture the maximal eternalism theory of mental transformation the maximal psychedelic model of religion the maximal psychedelic theory of religion and culture
Conversely: the minimal mushroom theory (of religion, or of Christian art, or of ancient Greek culture, or of Christian mysticism)
Synonyms: maximal X theory of Y (general characterization of position along a spectrum of positions)
unlawful to reveal the mysteries to the uninitiated
Revealing the mysteries to the uninitiated (the untrained, the unprepared) could potentially: o Cause dangerous self-control seizures. o Harm child’s psychology. o Lead to physical self-harm. o Harm social structure.
The Egodeath theory, openly published on the world-wide web, may violate “It is unlawful to reveal the mysteries to the uninitiated.”
A series of loose-cognitive sessions culminating in complete elimination of naive-possibilism-thinking, resulting in eternalism-thinking plus qualified-possibilism-thinking.
The source of many mythemes: o The Sacrifice of Isaac, or of the ram that got itself helplessly caught in a thicket. o Moses’ brass serpent on a pole, to cure the disobedient Israelites from fatal snake-bite by looking at it. o The tree of the knowledge of good and evil, with serpent bringing Eve and Adam fruit that does, and does not, cause dying on that day, in the garden of Eden. o King hanging from a tree. o Jonah and the short sea-serpent beast (ketos).
Collection of books, genre: pseudonymous Hellenistic mystic tales written in the language of Mythemese, which is translated by the Egodeath theory’s Mytheme theory.
Religious mythology is description-by-analogy of repeatedly taking psychedelics, producing transformation of the experiential mental worldmodel from literalist ordinary-state possibility-branching to analogical psychedelic pre-existence.
Definitions of Common Terms that I Mean in a Specific Way, Throughout My Writings
‘Psilocybe’ is shorthand for “non-Amanita psychoactive mushrooms”.
‘Christian’ is shorthand for “Christendom”, such as Christian moral-instruction bestiaries.
‘Greek’ is shorthand for “Hellenistic”.
‘Brown’ means Brown & Brown, the co-authors of the book The Psychedelic Gospels.
‘mushroom’ means psychoactive, probably non-Amanita, mushroom species, ingested deliberately for the purpose of inducing mystical religious altered state.
unless otherwise specified.
My Usage of the Phrase “Greek & Christian art”
My Usage of the Word ‘Christian’, as in “Christian art”
My Usage of the Word ‘Greek’, as in “Greek religious mythology”
General note for this website: when I say “Greek & Christian”, it is shorthand for “Hellenistic & Christendom, integrated”, seen as interpenetrating, not as if hermetically isolated and separated and at odds with each other.
The phrase “Greek & Christian” means Hellenistic+Christendom; or, “in Helleno-Christian history”; in the history of Helleno-Christianity.
My Usage of the Word ‘Psilocybe’
‘Psilocybe’ is shorthand for “non-Amanita psychoactive mushrooms”.
When I write ‘Psilocybe’, I mean all species of mushrooms that contain psilocybin and/or psilocin. Psychoactive mushrooms other than Amanita muscaria.
I do not mean all species within the Psilocybe genus.
I mean psychoactive mushroom species other than Amanita muscaria.
I mean “non-Amanita psychoactive mushrooms”.
Science does not know, no one knows, which mushroom species were in Mediterranean antiquity or medieval France, or Britain.
Unknown various non-Amanita psychoactive mushrooms were available for use throughout Greek & Christian religious history.
My Usage of the Name ‘Brown’
‘Brown’ means Brown & Brown, the co-authors of the book The Psychedelic Gospels.
My Usage of the Word ‘Mushroom’
My use of the word ‘mushroom’ means psilocybin mushrooms, not Amanita.
This is a time of peak bullsh*t, centering around Amanita, with people using the weakest Amanita theories they can dredge-up and fixate on, to participate in the scholarly cover-up of mushrooms in Greek & Christian history.
The #1 problem right now in the field of mushrooms in Greek & Christian history, is the mis-centering of the field around Amanita instead of Psilocybe.
My use of the word ‘mushroom’ mean primarily, mainly, normally, and centrally psilocybin mushrooms, not Amanita.
Amanita in art and texts mainly represents the use of Psilocybe, not Amanita.
‘Mushrooms’ means psychoactive mushrooms ingested deliberately to induce the mystical religious altered state. Read “psychoactive mushrooms” there as Psilocybin mushrooms, as opposed to Amanita.
Given that the current #1 problem in the field is mis-centering the field on Amanita, I cannot use the unqualified word ‘mushroom’ in many places I normally would.
I am forced to counter-conflate the word ‘mushroom’ to be a synonym of ‘psilocybin mushrooms’ and shut-out Amanita.
I will rarely write just ‘mushroom’, and I am forced to use every opportunity to narrowly specify “psilocybin mushrooms”.
That is required, to force the re-centering of the field of mushrooms in Greek & Christian history from Amanita to psilocybin mushrooms, where the focus belongs.
My Usage of the Word ‘Determinism’
‘determinism’ means timeless, preexisting, all-at-once, block-universe Eternalism, trans-temporal. Not domino-chain determinism, where state S at time t causes State S+1 at time t+1, and so on, with an open, non-existent future.
All-at-once creation; God didn’t create the universe a long time ago and then, hands-off, let it play out, with one moment in time causing the state of the physical world of the next moment in time.
My Usage of the Word ‘meditation’
When I say’ meditation’, usually I mean bunk lying non-drg meditation that tries to steal credit from plants and then disparage the plants and deny that plants are the origin of religion and the inspiration driving religion.
The Egodeath theory 
