The World’s Record Conflict of Interest: The Banker for the Pope Says There’s No Mushroom Imagery in Christian Art
Conveniently (suspiciously) not addressed by propagandist Huggins.
The Different Roles of Wasson, Panofsky, and Huggins in the Anything-But-Drugs Academia Cover-Up
Wasson = evil; Panofsky = stupid.
Huggins facilitates Wasson’s con-artistry:
by not citing Browns 2019;
by pulling Panofsky letters out of thin air in 2024 & 2025 (“drawer”?!, get out of here);
by pulling the Brinckmann citation out of thin air.
by not asking what the 2 “emphatic mushroom shape” mushroom-trees images that Panofsky sent Wasson in 1952.
Huggins tries to ally with the academic criminal Gordon . . . .🔍🧐🤔🤬 Wasson, so, Huggins doesn’t want it revealed, Popebanker Wasson’s deceitful chicanery; his academic obstructionism and pressure tactics.
Popebanker Wasson dishonestly and manipulatively censored the Panofsky letters, on p. 180 of Wasson’s 1968 book SOMA.
If Wasson were honest, in 1952 & in 1968, he would’ve helped investigation of mushroom-trees move forward, by showing the two letters, the Brin. citation, and the two mushroom-trees images, sent to Wasson in 1952.
As I deduced in 2006, confirmed by Brown 2019, Panofsky MUST have provided (weak) citations to Wasson in 1952. In 2006 I was cussing,
“Give me the goddamn citations that Panofsky MUST have provided to you!
“I WANT to “consult” the academics, as Wasson chastises (unconstructively) the “mycologists” ie Affirmers of mushroom imagery in Christian art, for having failed (in the past) to do.”
By replacing the Brinckmann citation and two art pieces by ellipses (. . . .), Wasson the liar & con artist ENSURED that Affirmers of mushroom imagery in Christian art are unable to check what Brinckmann wrote, showing that Wasson is insincere and dishonest, a sleazebag, deliberately deceiving and misleading people, while insulting and attacking mycologists, and misrepresenting what Panofsky sent to Wasson.
The Accidental Contributions to Entheogen Scholarship from Deniers, Despite Themselves
Hatsis’ articles WERE useful for me to construct the Hatsis Gallery of mushroom imagery in Christian art, until he deleted his articles, crazily. Hatsis’ providing hi-res Dancing Man was useful to me on Christmas 2015.
Hatsis provided the first hi-res, color image of Dancing Man, provided by an entheogen scholar, in his article for a UK zine.
We beggars can’t be choosers. Too few people work in entheogen scholarship.
Hatsis & Huggins while writing articles debunking mushroom imagery in Christian art, provide for the wrong reasons, benefits for entheogen scholarship.
Their project is futile, like defenders of the geocentric model 1510-1687, 177 years from proposal to widespread, dominant acceptance.
We’re in such a period now, despite some denier-morons claiming that we can draw negative conclusions now.
Proof that Entheogen Scholars Have Not Even Vigorously Begun to Try to Recognize Mushroom Imagery in Christian Art
I proved that we have not even STARTED looking.
Proof that entheogen scholars have not even STARTED looking, and are missing the most major mushroom recognition, even in the Great Canterbury Psalter folio page f11 images that they have been publishing since 2000, discovered by Paul Lindgren:
On Jan 13, 2025, I discovered proof that God in f11 Day 1 of Creation holds mushroom-filled {balance scale} pans, in Great Canterbury Psalter.
No entheogen scholar has even tried to imagine what’s in the pans.
If entheogen scholars are looking at f11, they have been looking with eyes squeezed tightly shut, until my eyes were finally opened Jan. 13, 2025, per Day 4’s {open book with God’s thumb over it} motif.
Day 1: Creation of Light: {balance scale} Pans Are Indicated as Containing Panaeolus & Amanita Mushrooms
Crop and Annotations by Michael Hoffman, Jan. 13, 2025
Before that, I proved that the blue vase in f134 row 3 middle contains psilocybin mushrooms.
Like f11 (Day 1 & 4), I similarly first “jokingly” asserted that the item contains mushrooms, but I was in error (defeatist attitude) in ASSUMING that the artist failed to indicate this.
Months later, I finally opened my eyes and actually looked for indicators, and found that the artist provided clear indicators.
Cubensis Harvest Cycle
Crop and annotations by Michael Hoffman, March 28, 2023
The Blue Krater Harvest Collector Looks Up at the Mushroom Dispensary Bins
Crop by Michael Hoffman, March 26, 2023
Entheogen scholars have not even started to look for evidence of psychedelics in Western religious history – yet deniers want to declare the field closed and finished, drawing extremely premature negative conclusions.
2012 or 2014: “No one has even TRIED to claim psychedelics in Buddhist religious history” – Patrick Lundborg’s book’s endnotes. 2016: Mike Crowley book comes out, making hash out of Lund premature closing and “conclusions”. 2026: AM, an Asian Studies scholar, finds more evidence than Crowley.
Wasson 1968 draws the same, prejudiced, way-premature negative conclusion, falling into his own pit of mockery that Wasson set up in 1957 for himself to fall into.
Motivation for this Page
A “cover-up” framing is useful for analysis.
Who is behind the cover-up operation? Why?
Getting a clear big-picture view on the anything-but-drugs agenda/ commitment/ academics/ propaganda/ academia, popebanker Gordon . . . .🔍🧐🤔🤬 Wasson’s cover-up operation & censorship of the two Panofsky letters including the Brin. citation.
Huggins Is Extremely Suspect in Not Citing Brown & Brown 2019, which Reveals the Panofsky Letters & Brinckmann Citation (& Two Mushroom-Trees) That Were Dishonestly Censored by Wasson
Huggins 2024 & 2025 articles fail to cite or address the args in Browns 2019.
SOMA p. 180 (More Cussing, Fewer Annotations, Dec. 2, 2024)
Hey Wasson, you phony; SELLOUT!: Tree Stylizations in Medieval Paintings (Brinckmann, 1906) as Panofsky extremely strongly urged mycologists to read – no thanks to your duplicitous censorship and going OUT OF YOUR WAY to fraudulently attack affirmers of mushroom imagery in Christian art, while you fakely chide them for failing to consult the IGNORAMUS art “authorities”.
The below sound like pompous, insincere, con-artist horse sh!t, because that’s exactly what it is:
SOMA, p. 180 (Less Cussing, More Annotations, Jan. 8, 2025)
And accused Wasson of withholding citations (weak ones) that Panofsky MUST have provided to substantiate the claim that art historians are familiar with mushroom-trees and have “considered”(?) them. CITATIONS NEEDED.
My accusations were confirmed by Browns 2019 exposing the two Panofsky letters.
Huggins points you to “drawer” (Jan Irvin is not permitted to enter the room at Harvard) instead of citing Browns 2019.
Why is scholar Huggins ignorant of Browns 2019, which is the ONLY place to publish Panofsky’s letters (sans 2 attached “emphatic” mushroom-trees)?
Huggins doesn’t cite Browns 2019 so that people other than Huggins can read the Panofsky letters, including Brin. citation, that were censored by Popebanker Wasson in SOMA on p. 180 top (1968) in order to prevent and obstruct research in mushroom imagery in Christian art.
Deniers of mushroom imagery in Christian art are shady, suspect, and have a conflict of interest, in the anything-but-drugs agenda/ commitment/ academics/ propaganda/ academia.
key words: Religion, New Religious Movements, Art History, Media Studies, Psychedelics, Medieval illuminated manuscripts, Mystery Cults, Entheogens and Religion, Ottonian Art, Art Historical Methodology, Ancient Near Eastern Studies, Amanita Muscaria, Medieval Art, Illuminated Manuscripts, Medieval History, Early Christian Art and Iconography, Medieval Frescoes, Medieval and Early Christian Art, Early Christian and Byzantine Iconography, John M. Allegro, Psychedelics and Mysticism
“This article is part of a special issue of the journal Religions, entitled On the Origins of Western Psychedelia: Exploring Allegro’s The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross The volume is edited by J. Christian Greer and Sharday C. Mosurinjohn.”
I’m tired of looking up this link for the letters that were censored by Wasson-Huggins, so I pinned the link in every section.
What’s wrong with Huggins, that he fails to cite Browns 2019, where other people besides Huggins are privileged to access and leverage the two, Popebanker Wasson-censored Panofsky letters?
“In his book The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross (1970), John Marco Allegro claimed that an obscure, 12th century CE fresco of the Fall of Adam and Eve in the Plaincourault Chapel in Mérigny, France, provided evidence of the persistence in Christian Europe of an underground sacred mushroom sect that had survived since New Testament times.
“At the heart of Allegro’s claim is the mushroom-like appearance of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the picture.
“Following up on Allegro’s claim, a small group of writers, led by Boston University’s Carl A. P. Ruck, spent decades seeking to validate Allegro’s theory by seeking out other examples of psychedelic mushrooms hidden in early Christian and Medieval art.
“The present article centers its discussion on the claims put forward by Allegro and his followers about the Plaincourault tree, but also about other images concerning which they have made similar claims.
“It concludes that the claims of Allegro and his followers concerning the Plaincourault tree fail due to their tendency to overpress similarities while ignoring differences.”
Field of Entheogen Scholarship Forced to Handle Allegro, Who Is Not an Entheogen Scholar
Often, the needed scholarship is criticism.
I read people’s criticisms of these topics.
In 2006, I reluctantly wrote the “final article” on Allegro, calling for retiring and sidelining him, yet:
Allegro’s book Sacred Mushroom & The Cross sells many copies, with Irvin & Ruck involved.
Ruck loves Allegro – I don’t. Ruck carries forward the social drama narrative from Allegro.
I have lately formed my equivalent of a social drama narrative: Evidently there was a mainstream mushroom-tree religion within Christianity, among (at least) artists.
Theologically, the mushroom-tree religion is couched or expressed in terms of alternating between ordinary-state possibilism (figured as branching) & altered-state eternalism (figured as non-branching).
I have specific criticisms of:
Pop Sike Cult
Allegro
entheogen scholarship
Ruck
Irvin
Wasson
Letcher
Huggins
Hatsis
Psychedelic pseudo science, the positive unitive model of “mystical experience”.
Religions Special Issue: How to Cover-Up Mushroom Imagery in Christian Art (2025)
So far, Greer is less annoying than Mosurinjohn & Ascough, because Greer says, assume some people in Christendom used psychedelics sometimes. With Chs Stang. The real question is: To what extent psychedelics in Western religious history?
Greer is not clumsy, attacking people, flailing like Shardog on a short leash held by the anything-but-drugs academic Ascough.
todo: image: photo of mushroom cluster with a big mushroom bracketed at the base by two smaller, attached mushrooms – quick fallback workaround: Image search: mushroom cluster: https://www.google.com/search?udm=2&q=mushroom+cluster
Exact Botanical Mushroom Explained Away as a “Tree”
below is copy 3, of 4 images: Sharday Mosurinjohn lecturing, dog-asp, {hand mushroom-tree}, asp, but this version has my added text at top:
Mosurinjohn’s Dogged Avoidance of Perceiving Psychedelic Evidence, of Non-Branching in the Eternalism Experiential State
Sharday Mosurinjohn (the religious fundamentalist denier of mushrooms in mystery religions and Christianity, and perpetrator of colonialist violence who is overlooking Indigenous Shams by erroneously trying to write a book on psychedelics in Western Esotericism, instead) wrote and spoke on:
“We then explore how the dogged pursuit of evidentiary mirages contributes to the [pathetic, invalid, illegitimate, in-vain] project of establishing a western civilizational pedigree to dignify the use of stigmatized drugs and revitalize experiential religion.
“Although the desire for [fake] legitimacy and meaning is understandable [though foolish, erroneous, hopeless, and futile], the strategies used by the writers [not scholars or researchers] of this pseudo-history constitute a kind of religious fundamentalism [“and colonialist violence“].” PROJECTION MUCH?!
“The Asp, or “aspido,” is a mythical creature in medieval bestiaries described as a snake that stops up its ears to avoid being enchanted by the music of snake charmers. It presses one ear against the ground and covers the other with its tail to ignore the charming, symbolizing a refusal to hear wisdom or divine truth.”
Unlike Ascough, has Huggins actually read my book-length, overwhelming article?
The journal’s article by Ascough cites Wasson and Allegro on the Tree of Knowledge as Amanita (Hoffman, 2006), http://egodeath.com/WassonEdenTree.htm. Ascough duplicates the articles ending’s call to retire and sideline Allegro, in entheogen scholarship.
Cyberdisciple not using real name impedes him from being cited.
Scholarship under Prohibition has Pros and Cons for the indiv contributor.
I Criticize 1st-Generation Entheogen Scholarship (the Secret Amanita paradigm, by Allegro then Ruck)
I Advocate 2nd-Generation Entheogen Scholarship (the Explicit Psilocybin Paradigm, by Samorini)
Huggins Is a Fraud Until He Cites the Article by Brown & Brown 2019 that Published the Two Panofsky Letters & Brinckmann Citation that Were Censored by Popebanker Wasson in SOMA p. 180
Panofsky’s drawers are mentioned in Notes section of Huggins 2025:
“9 Erwin Panofsky to R. Gordon Wasson (2 May 1952). See, Panofsky, Erwin, 1950–1953. Tina and R. Gordon Wasson Ethnomycological Collection Archives, ecb00001, Series IV, drawer: W3.2, Folder: 20. Botany Libraries, Economic Botany Library of Oakes Ames, Harvard University.”
“21 Erwin Panofsky to R. Gordon Wasson (2 May 1952), 1, in the Tina and R. Gordon Wasson Ethnomycological Collection Archives, ecb00001, Series IV, drawer, W3.2, Folder: 20. Botany Libraries, Economic Botany Library of Oakes Ames, Harvard University.”
Browns 2019 is not listed in Huggins References section, to avoid revealing that Wasson is a fraud trying as hard as possible to prevent scholarly investigation of the mushroom-tree religion.
What’s wrong with Huggins that he repeatedly, in multiple articles in 2024 & 2025, doesn’t cite Entheogens in Christian art: Wasson, Allegro, and the Psychedelic Gospels (Jerry Brown & Julie Brown, 2019) https://doi.org/10.1556/2054.2019.019?
Huggins continues referencing the GODDAMNED DRAWER AT HARVARD, greedily trying to leverage Panofsky against Affirmers of mushroom imagery in Christian art, while not letting or helping other scholars access the Panofsky arguments.
Jan Irvin is not allowed to access the drawer at Harvard. See his writeup probably in The Holy Mushroom: Evidence of Mushrooms in Judeo-Christianity (Jan Irvin, 2008) https://www.amazon.com/dp/1439215170
There’s a cover-up operation Huggins is participating in.
Wasson lost credibility in 2019 b/c of the Browns’ article, but Huggins tries to ally with Popebanker Wasson.
What’s wrong with Huggins, that he doesn’t say Wasson was banker for the pope, as pointed out in Browns 2019? Because Wasson’s credibility is tanking, on mushroom imagery in Christian art.
Huggins has no credibility. Deniers of mushroom imagery in Christian art have no credibility.
All that the Deniers have is bad, arbitrary arg’n based on prejudice and silent presupposition, like Panofsky saying:
The Plaincourault fresco can’t mean mushroom, because there are hundreds of mushroom-trees.
The OBVIOUS response is, all mushroom imagery in Christian art means mushrooms (giving a non-branching eternalism experience) – including Plaincourault fresco, with Eve {stand on right foot}.
Samorini finally made good on that 1952/1968 tip from Panofsky, in 1997/1998: let’s (obviously) cover the “disqualifying” hundreds of pilzbaum, by covering all pilzbaum as meaning mushrooms.
Shamelessly poor, 1-way arg’n is characteristic of Deniers of mushroom imagery in Christian art.
Affirmers of mushroom imagery in Christian art DGAF about the surrounding text.
Neither did the mainstream, mushroom-tree artists, in the artists initiation guild with psilocybin lockboxes.
Deniers of mushroom imagery in Christian art DGAF about valid arg’n that can withstand pushback.
The Deniers broadcast the propaganda, 1-way, ears closed.
But Wasson/Pan isn’t looking for a response to their poor arg’n.
It’s a Pope-funded cover-up operation, designed not to assist scholarly research and arg’n, but to SHUT IT DOWN.
Mentions of “Branch” in the Article
Huggins cites his 2024 fabricated, arb’y “rules” that are worth nothing and are sheer DECREE that we are able to use Panofsky branch arg to make a “rule” to “rule out” mushrooms.
An expression of a prejudice is not a compelling “rule” that anyone is compelled to agree to.
Rule: Ignore Huggins. By decree of Michael Hoffman, the Egodeath theory. Therefore, HUGGINS HAS BEEN “RULED OUT”. Such is the compelling force of Huggins’ “rules” in his misnamed Conclusion (Final Decrees) section.
Huggins uses a Begging the Question fallacy. Given the category: mushroom-trees are those trees that include mushroom elements/ features/ motifs. Then he args: IF one of those mushroom-trees has mushroom elements/ features/ motifs, ignore them.
This is a dishonest rhetoric move, where Huggins simply decrees that for ALL members of the class “mushroom-trees”, to ignore the mushroom elements, but misleadingly couched as “If a given mushroom-tree has any mushroom elements, ignore the mushroom elements, because I arb’ly decree so.”
Huggins’ “rule” carries no arg’n validity.
Huggins arg’s:
If a mushroom-tree has branching features, ignore the mushroom features; only respect the tree feature elements.
The “if” is stupid (it is hiding that this is a blanket an arb’y blanket dismissal of all the entire category, invented by art historians, of “mushroom-trees” meaning mushrooms.
BY DEFINITION the category in question, “mushroom-trees”, is PROPERLY defined as:
All trees that have mushroom features/ elements/ motifs — regardless of whether on the scale of a single, whole mushroom, or fragments of multiple mushrooms.
For example, Day 4’s 4 plants are NOT mushroom-trees, b/c they have no branches.
Yet, Huggins ’24 hastily rushes past these 4 (relatively) plain mushrooms, that have no branches, calling them “trees” for NO REASON, giving no justification for calling them “trees”. Day 4, God doees not create trees.
The ONLY reason Huggins lyingly dubs these 4 simple mushrooms as “trees” is to worship the anything-but-drugs academia agenda.
“On the fourth day of creation, God created the sun, moon, and stars, placing them in the sky to give light to the Earth, separate day from night, and serve as signs for seasons, days, and years, according to the Book of Genesis, 1:14-19.”
Day 4 only has encoded branching, not explicit direct branching motif.
The coded grid-cap of plant 1 & 2 in Day 4: Great Canterbury Psalter establishes grid-caps as indicating {branching}; that is, the Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control.
The term mushroom-trees was coined by art historians themselves, admitting their defeat right from day 1 of considering mushroom-trees.
I’m generalizing here that anything-but-drugs academics = art historians = Deniers of mushroom imagery in Christian art.
Panofsky/Wasson generalizes:
“Art historians” = Deniers of mushroom imagery in Christian art.
“Mycologists” = Affirmers of mushroom imagery in Christian art.
“Mycologists” meaning Affirmers of mushroom imagery in Christian art: eg John Ramsbottom who majorly busted Wasson admitting he’s a committed skeptic:
“Rightly or wrongly, we are going to reject the Plaincourault fresco [a proxy for all mushroom-trees] as representing a mushroom.”
Rightly or wrongly, we are going to reject the Plaincourault fresco as representing a mushroom. This fresco gives us a stylized motif in Byzantine and Romanesque art of which hundreds of examples are well known to art historians, and on which the German art historians bestow, for convenience in discussion, the name Pilzbaum. It is an iconograph representing the Palestinian tree that was supposed to bear the fruit that tempted Eve, whose hands are held in the posture of modesty traditional for the occasion. For almost a half century mycologists have been under a misapprehension on this matter. We studied the fresco in situ in 1952.
Wasson, private letter of December 21, 1953, quoted in Ramsbottom, Mushrooms & Toadstools, post-1953 printing, p. 48
Mushroom-trees (a term coined by art historians themselves, admitting their defeat right from day 1 of considering mushroom-trees) are those trees in art that have both tree features & mushroom features; that have mushroom features/ elements/ motifs as well as tree features/ elements/ motifs.
The “whole image = mushroom” fallacy. Huggins frames “does the tree match A MUSHROOM?” Error. We must instead ask: Does the tree have MUSHROOM ELEMENTS/FEATURES.
Brown’s phrase (expansion of ‘MICA’) is incorrect/ imprecise: mushrooms in Christian art.
The correct, precise phrase: mushroom imagery/features/elements in Christian art.
“An ongoing impediment to accepting the validity of the PMTs’ [Psychedelic Mushroom Theorists’] claims is their tendency to over press similarities while ignoring differences.”
todo: by “differences”, does he mean specifically, branching motifs?
todo: Does he perceive or mention the non-branching motif? He discusses Bern Door prominent cut branch.
“In response to this I have elsewhere suggested three cautionary rules of thumb when considering whether a given medieval image might represent a mushroom: “
“suggested” = By arbitrary decree of Panofsky/ Huggins, WE ARE ABLE TO (WE MUST) “RULE OUT” THE MUSHROOM ELEMENTS IMAGERY, BECAUSE I SAY SO:
“(1) If it has branches, or multiple crowns, or a crown supported by multiple branches, it is a tree not a mushroom;”
“(2) If it has indications of layers of foliage [or, for that matter, of foliage period] in the crown, it is a tree not a mushroom;”
ie, we firmly commit to literalist ordinary-state possibilism
those on the outside
Ruck understanding of the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees} is poor, mistakes, limited, shallow, concretistic, reifies Prohibition perma, conforms to Suppression Prohib
Ruck focses on Amanita which isn’t even prohibited, wtf. anti-activist. a proxy?
Watch the trajectory context – hard to write …. the topic of mushroom imagery in Christian art became taboo, and forget ahistoricity – the Allegro violation , sirens go off. DISAVOW FOLLOW ALLEGRO, “follower of allegro” weaponized bunk arg rehe rhetoric
Ruck is 5 of 10, Hug is 3 of 10: Poor vs. junk irrelev args and concerns and errors by both of them, a new field, the Egodeath theory is LIGHT YEARS ahead of Ruck and Huggins; they are trapped eternity by their own Allegro Trap, limited to 1st-generation entheogen scholarship (the Secret Amanita paradigm)
i define … honor to Samorini lindgren arthur heinrich in elements here but everyone starts w/ Plaincourault fresco bc Amanita Kiddie Amanita mythic fantasy realm
Huggins says: We inappropriately commit to reading non-realistic religious mythic art in a literalistic way, to prop up and adhere to the the anything-but-drugs agenda/ commitment/ academics/ propaganda/ academia.
Mentions of ‘branch’ on p. 17 top
“and
“(3) If it has fruit, it is a tree not a mushroom, since mushrooms, being cryptogams, have neither fruit nor seeds” (Huggins 2024, p. 24).
Huggins Relies on Inappropriate Literalist Reading of Mythic Art, to Dismiss and Ignorae the Emphatic Mushroom Imagery
“emphatic” is Panofsky’s word in his first Aasson-censored letter, re the two censored-by-Wasson mushroom-trees images that Panofsky sent.
Huggins’ WORTHLESS, ARBITRARY, PREJUDICED DECREE, AKA “THE TEST”:
“The Reichenau trees fail the test because they have both branches and multiple crowns, several of which display fruit.
“In one case we even see birds eating the fruit (Figure 17).”
“The trees of the triumphal entry scene from Saint-Martin, Nohant-Vic, similarly would seem to fail because of the multiple branches and crowns (Figure 15)
“although I will say that the crowns on these trees look more like mushrooms than any I have seen elsewhere in Early or Medieval Christian art,
“apart from a mosaic of a basket of mushrooms in the Basilica of Aquileia in Italy (c. 330),
“and in medieval herbals where mushrooms along with other plants are depicted and described (see, e.g., MS M.652 fol. 316v (10th century) and BnF Latin 6823, fol. 68r (1301–1350).”
In the art scene “Christ’s Entry into Jerusalem”, why are branches important?
In art, palm branches in “Christ’s Entry into Jerusalem” scenes symbolize victory, triumph, and peace,
marking Jesus’s arrival as the promised King and Messiah.
Waved and laid by crowds, they [branches] signify
the triumphal entrance into Jerusalem, representing a “welcome” while foreshadowing both his spiritual triumph over death and his coming sacrifice.
Key reasons for the importance of branches in this scene include:
Symbol of Victory: Historically, in the ancient Near East and Roman world, [cut, removed from tree] palm branches were used to honor victory.
Fulfillment of Prophecy: They mark the fulfillment of biblical prophecy regarding the Messiah’s entry.
Sign of Kingship:By waving them, the crowd recognized Jesus as a King, even though he entered humbly on a donkey rather than a warhorse.
Context of Holy Week: They represent the start of Passion Week, connecting the joyful welcome to the impending crucifixion.
Juxtaposition with Passion: They often highlight the fickleness of the crowd, who lauded him with branches on Sunday and called for his crucifixion days later.
In artistic compositions, these branches often highlight the crowd’s adoration and create a narrative focus on the procession toward the city.
end of ai ans
Mentions of ‘branch’ on p. 17 middle
“The Plaincourault tree likewise fails the test by having branches, four of which have single crowns, with the largest crown being supported by a central trunk and two branches.”
The Purpose of Mushroom-Trees Is to Deliver a Message about Experiencing Ordinary-State, Branching Possibilism, Alternating with Experiencing Altered-State, Non-Branching Eternalism
The purpose of mushroom-trees is to deliver a message about branching vs. non-branching;
Ordinary-state possibilism vs. altered-state eternalism.
Not literalist ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control, but analogical psychedelic eternalism with dependent control.
Not literalist ordinary-state possibilism with monolithic, autonomous control.
But analogical psychedelic eternalism with 2-level, dependent control.
integrated branching & non-branching mental models = 2POV = two different points of view, two different mental models
Integrated branching & non-branching mental models is depicted by the YI hand shape, over more broad a range of era than just during the heyday of the mushroom-tree religion, 900-1300 AD.
Mentions of ‘branch’ on p. 17 middle, con’t
“Especially problematic for the PMTs’ [Psychedelic Mushroom Theorists’] identification is the three branches supporting the top-most crown.
“This would not be the case if the artist had intended to depict an Amanita muscaria mushroom and “nada mas [nothing more].”
“The cap of Amanita muscaria is supported by one central stipe.
“PMT [Psychedelic Mushroom Theorist] Samorini sought a way around this problem by suggesting that
“these ramifications [branches] might represent the membrane enveloping mushrooms of the family of the Amanitaceae at the early stages of development.”
[that clarifying note, “[branches]”, is from Huggins’ article]
“This membrane then breaks when the cap broadens out and separates from the stalk” (Samorini 1998, p. 89; 2001, p. 268).
“The same argument was in fact already put forward by Émile Boudier (Marchand and Boudier 1911, p. 32).
“Both however anachronistically project a greater interest in botanical accuracy than is justified for the artists of the period.8.”
Mentions of ‘branch’ on pp. 21-22
“This scene has been of particular interest to the PMTs [Psychedelic Mushroom Theorists] since they became aware of it via the English translation of Jochen Gartz’s Narrenschwämme: Psychotrope Pilze in Europa (1993, Fig. 1, cf. 1996, Fig. 6).
“Giorgio Samorini is very definitive on the identity of the tree in the picture:
“The mushroom-tree [between Adam and Eve] is realistically rendered with a precision not far short of anatomic accuracy and can be identified as one of the most common Germanic and European psilocybin mushroom, P. Semilanceata. . .” (Samorini 1998, p. 103).
Mosurinjohn & Ascough are very hypocritical in shifting, themselves, from possibility:
Maybe there were no psychedelics in mystery religions; there is no chemical evidence at Eleusis, because we academics/Deniers washed away the “dirt” in the Eleusis vessels.
to as-if-fact:
There were no psychedelics in mystery religions. Ruck’s been debunked.
I’m finding all over the place, lots of places where Mosurinjohn & Ascough assert outright, “There were no psychedelics in mystery religions”, as if fact.
They hide their dirty arg’n and hypocrisy by saying “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”, then immediately they do exactly that:
Mosurinjohn & Ascough Treat (Alleged) Absence of Evidence as Evidence of Absence
Deniers of mushroom imagery in Christian art are shameless in identifying themselves with the poorest quality of arg’n, that cannot endure any pushback.
Mosurinjohn & Ascough treat absence of evidence (because the anything-but-drugs academics washed out the cups, getting rid of the LSA from ergot) as evidence of absence.
Mosurinjohn & Ascough Hypocritically Shift from Possibility, to As-if Fact, While Criticizing Ruck for Shifting from Possibility, to As-if Fact
Deniers of mushroom imagery in Christian art are shameless in identifying themselves with the poorest quality of arg’n, that cannot endure any pushback.
Hypocrites: Mosurinjohn & Ascough make it a major objection to Ruck, that they have detected him shifting from possibility to as-if fact.
Mosurinjohn & Ascough shift from possibility to as-if fact, themselves, just in the opposite direction of Joe Rogan (or Brian Muraresku). (Almost forgot: or Ruck.)
“Samorini goes on to identify the tree as a “‘Saint-Savin’ type of mushroom (three striated mushrooms),” arguing that “the third mushroom has been consumed by Adam and Eve, as revealed by the broken branch springing from the lower part of the tree trunk” (ibid.).
“Hoffman, Ruck, and Staples follow Samorini, repeating his claim that the tree “is here represented as the ‘mushroom tree,’ usually shown with a triple branching, but in this version one branch is missing, the one that has been eaten” (Hoffman et al. 2001, p. 29).”
Mentions of ‘branch’ on p. 22
“But several missteps have been made here.”
[missteps, according to Huggins; that does NOT make them missteps. -mh]
“It is true that the crowns of mushroom trees, as well as those of other kinds of stylized trees, often appeared in groups of three. . .,
“but this does not occur regularly enough to be in any sense normative, such that we can assume that when there are two crowns one is missing, much less that it has been eaten!
“Indeed a previous panel on the same door showed two mushroom trees each with five foliage heads.
“Furthermore, although one of the broken-offbranches is prominent, more are indicated.
“We also know from the previous scene on the door that what Adam and Eve ate was a small, round fruit from a different tree, not a foliage head from the one shown.
“What does appear to be the case is that Adam and Eve are depicted covering themselves with foliage heads of the same sort as those on the tree they are standing beside.”
Mentions of ‘branch’ in End Note 23
… 1, Series IV, drawer, W3.2, Folder: 20. Botany Libraries, Economic Botany Library of Oakes Ames, Harvard University.
“22 I have discussed this at length elsewhere. See (Huggins 2024, pp. 14–19).
“23 The Latin Vulgate edition of John informs us that the boughs were palm branches (ramos palmarum). Neither Matthew nor Mark identify a particular species of tree.”
Mentions of ‘branch’ in End Note 24
“24 See Reichenau Gospel Book (BSB Clm 23338), fol. 184v; The Pericopes Book of Henry II (Clm. 4452) fols. 131v, 200r (1007–1012);
“Gospel Book of Otto III (BSB Clm 4453) fol. 34v (c. 1010 AD).
“The similarity in style could point to one miniature artist or group of artists.
[I conjectured in Feb. 2026: There was a mainstream initiation artists guild with psilocybin lockboxes, for many centuries.
These artists do not bow down to mere texts, but bring their own, driving concern: experiencing the two states and the two mental models: possibilism vs. eternalism. -mh]
“See, for example, the nearly identical depictions of Zachaeus in a multi-branched tree with a mushroom-like top in the Reichenau Gospel Book fol. 184v and the Pericopies Book of Henry II, fol. 200r.” See below.
Guy in Tree with YI Hand-Shapes Cited By Huggins End Notes
“24 – See Reichenau Gospel Book (BSB Clm 23338), fol. 184v; The Pericopes Book of Henry II (Clm. 4452) fols. 131v, 200r (1007–1012); The Bamberg Apocalypse (Staatsbibliothek Bamberg Msc. Bibl. 140) fol. 57r (c. 1010); Gospel Book of Otto III (BSB Clm 4453) fol. 34v (c. 1010 AD). The similarity in style could point to one miniature artist or group of artists. See, for example, the nearly identical depictions of Zachaeus in a multi-branchedtree with a mushroom-like top in the Reichenau Gospel Book fol. 184v and the Pericopies Book of Henry II, fol. 200r.”
[LCPE] List of Contrasts between Possibilism vs. Eternalism
Rabbit hole:
{fingers} vs. {thumb} or {index finger} or…. point got lost: MAIN REFERENCE FORM IS SUFFICIENT: SAY JUST {FINGERS} VS. {THUMB}
Crop by Michael Hoffman, 6:45 pm Feb. 15, 2026. WordPress: “img_8737.jpg”, 14 KB, 138 x 167 px
Analysis Procedure:
Sweep up from bottom
first hit R branch, where R branch goes right, and the main trunk goes up…
then hit L branch.
todo: add white lines crop
Tree has Y on L, I on R – relative to the point where the R breaks off.
YI Branching, {stand on right foot} Motif, Four Amanita Branches Point to Four Pairs of Arms & Legs
Section added Feb. 18, 2026, copied from page created that day (today).
Crop and annotations by Michael Hoffman, Feb. 18, 2026, fullscreen
Professional Propagandist Wasson Substitutes a Degraded, Copied Painting that Deletes the YI Branching Form and the {stand on right foot} Motif, Withholding the Actual Fresco Image
Section added Feb. 18, 2026, copied from page created that day (today).
Photo and annotations by Michael Hoffman. Corrupt degraded painting copy that OMITS THE YI BRANCHING AND {STAND ON RIGHT FOOT} that proves this is a mushroom-tree meaning psychedelic eternalism. 1:03 p.m. Feb. 18, 2026, fullscreen
Double Fail, Illiterate/Blind to Motifs: Michelle Bory’s Painting of Plaincourault
Bory is grossly inaccurate & motif-illiterate by standards of the mushroom-tree artists.
Huggins p. 5:
“In 1959 he [Aasson] arranged to have Michelle Bory of Paris’ Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle visit the chapel and make a reproduction,8 which he published in his 1968 book Soma (Pl. XXI, between pp. 180–81).
“Bory’s painting is truer to the original than the earlier published picture.
“For one thing it correctly depicts not only the caps but the entire tree as red. It still naturally fell short as an alternative to a good photograph of the image, inevitably leaving out important details.”
Bory deleted the YI message of this branching-message mushroom tree.
Bory:
Moved Adam far away, for legs to not be touched by branch.
Deleted the offset of L vs R beam forming the YI.
The YI is centrally important in the medieval art genre of {branching-message mushroom trees}.
From the Esoteric Branching Language POV, Bory’s version is MUCH LESS accurate than the color-added photo in the 1911 Bulletin.
esoteric branching lang
Warning: ‘esoteric’ sounds like “hidden, secret, suppressed”; avoid the Secret Amanita paradigm.
Mr. “dont give a shit about compelling arg’n” hypocr writes:
“My own view is that the images turned up by the PMTs since have done little to undermine the validity of Panofsky’s* assessment of the Plaincourault fresco.”
*90% CENSORED BY WASSON, WHAT HAVE YOU TO SAY FOR YOUR COMPANY YOU KEEP, Huggins? WASSON A SLEAZY LIAR, EXTREME CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST, NO-CREDIBILITY, PROFESSIONAL PROPAGANDIST CON ARTIST, DECEIVER trying to get rid of standard scholarly practices re: this “special”, taboo topic:
Wasson deletes scholarly writing, publishing, and citation (replaced by the . . . . ellipses of the censor), telling Affirmers they need to abandon standard academic practice and instead, “consult” the art authorities personally, with stopwatch in hand, to test and confirm (predictably and meaninglessly) that all “certified competent” indoctrinated anything-but-drugs academics, art history operatives are trained like dogs (on condition of employment) to blurt and disavow mushrooms promptly.
Logical Fallacy: Scholarly Assessment Not via Writing, Publishing, & Citation (Normal, Standard Scholarly Methods), but Instead, by Measuring the Personal Emotional Reaction Degree, Only on this “Special”, Exceptional, Taboo-Charged Topic
Name of Fallacy: Argument by Degree of Personal Emotional Reaction (by Conditionally Employed Art Doctrine Operatives, the Mandated Doctrine Being Anything-But-Drugs)
Allegro made everything more complicated by abusing Amanita to smear Christianity with a disgusting sex-cult fungus.
Why is Jan Irvin’s/ Rucks’ book 2009 so popular?
BECAUSE SMEARING Christianity IS POPULAR, along w/ psychedelics being popular.
Amanita is barely “psychedelics”.
It’s all proxy concerns.
I’m now creating a J I 09 page…
Jan Irvin & Carl Ruck, The Sacred Mushroom and The Cross, 40th Annual Edition, 2009,
Allegro impeded scholarship by charging-up the topic of entheogen scholarship.
Much of this compromised academic/scholarly situation is Allegro’s fault.
How to do scholarship: Measure the emotional reaction degree when probe an art history flunky who has been propagandized – ESPECIALLY in the post-1970, after Allegro’s smear-Christianity abuse of Amanita and the provoked reaction: anything-but-drugs academia forbade THE ALLEGRO VIOLATION of asserting that Christianity came from mushrooms + ahistoricity of Jesus.
BECAUSE THEY KNOW AND WROTE NOTHING, Brinc exception proves rules per Huggins “notable” [ie, cit. censored by Wasson] Brinc book.
“A key reason for this, I believe, is a casualness among PMT writers in the manner in which they handle evidence, which often displays a tendency toward ignoring obvious explanations in favor of rather tendentious, often overly ingenious and esoteric ones garnered from sources very remote to the images they are attempting to describe.”
Mushrooms Were Suppressed by Church Society Only to a Degree: Mushrooms Were Not Allowed in Writing, Were Allowed in Art, Because Sensitive Theology: Everything Is Ultimately God’s Fault; God Made Eve Eat
The Middle Ages Were MORE Literate than the Age of Literacy, in the Visual Language Genre of {branching-message mushroom trees}; {mushroom}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} Motifs
Scholars in the Age of Textual Literacy after 1687 (Newton & heliocentric) are illiterate at the visual art language of {mushroom-trees}, including {mushroom}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs.
the visual art language of {mushroom-trees}, including {mushroom}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs valm
the visual art language of {mushroom-trees}, including {mushroom}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs [VALM]
No one could read textual writing.
The Middle Ages were MORE literate than the age Age of Literacy; literate VISUALLY IN A SPECIALIZED GENRE, the medieval art genre of {branching-message mushroom trees}.
Mushroom was forbidden in writing AND allowed in art.
Cybermonk, April 28, 2022 – This may be my “pay dirt” crop. stand right foot. [yeah but that page fails to say it’s a YI under the cap – Michael Hoffman 6:45 & 8:43 p.m. Feb. 15, 2026] The Question that I ID’d: What % of weight on R foot? Ans: 100%. https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/img_8713.jpg
Feels like a new insight but can’t trust that intuition.
Plaincourault fresco follows standard patterns for {mushroom}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs, in the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}:
{stand on right foot}
YI mushroom-tree the primary Reference branching form; more branching on L than R. Elaborated and violated creatively; only a starting pattern.
Eve’s YI hand-shape pair is a pair of YI hand shapes: [YI, IY]
New, Hand Pair Notation: In Plaincourault Fresco, Eve’s Hand-Pair: [YI, IY]
Beggars Can’t Be Choosers: Entheogen scholarship Has so few researchers, need at least some bad articles contributed by Deniers
Overlapping jackpots come in clusters (the Plaincourault fresco & medieval YI hand-shape theory, this time)
Example of how, bad articles accidentally contribute to progress, despite fallacy-fest, addled-mind writers like Thomas Hatsis:
Huggins’ focus on the trident branches of Plaincourault fresco made me bothered by the weird trident that fails to conform to my correct theory.
Then Sunday, I recognized that only by having the offset does the “trident” become the correct, YI form,
proving this means Amanita, because this image fits the patterns of the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}.
Michelle Bory’s fake copy of the painting omits many of the key indicators, in Soma 1968 p. 181
with a confusing caption that falsely says that this painting by Bory is the Plaincourault fresco.
Bory moves Adam far to the left, so that the Amanita branch* no longer touches his left leg.
*Panofsky: “an Italian pine, meaninglessly corrupted by inept artist craftsmen who have no intentionality”;
yet Wasson, later: “an A.N.E. tree species”.
Panofsky:
“The fact that pine steadily changed to mushroom shape, proves that the mushroom shape was accidental and meaningless.”
Retort: That’s arg’n from bias.
The fact that pine steadily changed to mushroom shape, proves that the mushroom shape was deliberate and meaningful.
Panofsky:
If mycologists (Affirmers) weren’t ignorant about the hundreds of mushroom-trees, they would not have made the mistake of saying Plaincourault fresco means mushrooms.
Plaincourault fresco can’t mean mushroom, because there are hundreds of other mushroom-trees.
[arg. from silent presupposition, of a shared presupposition]
The Samorini Retort:
The Plaincourault fresco means mushroom, consistent with all of the hundreds of mushroom-trees meaning mushrooms.
— Michael Hoffman, B.S.E.E., the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism
/ end of email
Carl Ruck in “Daturas for the Virgin” p. 56 falsely credits Wasson with asserting (publicly) that mushroom-trees (as a class) mean mushroom.
In retaliation, Jan Irvin in The Holy Mushroom falsely credits Allegro with asserting that mushroom-trees (as a class) mean mushroom. Irvin’s lack of a quote is bankable proof that Allegro never wrote that.
Clearly, Samorini 1997 & 1998 is the scholar who asserted that mushroom-trees (as a class) mean mushroom.
“There’s no evidence of LSA in kykeon vessels at Eleusis” – after we Deniers washed all the “dirt” away – and no other type of evidence “counts”, because we (Deniers) Say So
What a strong case the Deniers have!
When Shardog insults the pathetic imaginers of psychedelics in Western religious history (while working on her own book asserting the same), she just makes HERSELF look the fool.
Yes, there is pathetic foolishness in the field: pointing at YOU Sharday.
Her: Smug, condescending: “Can you believe Rogan/ Muraresku so pathetically ignorant and fantasy based. There’s no evidence after we washed it away, and so, we know there was definitely no psychedelics in Western religious history.”
Who is made to look foolish here?
Shardog’s attack and discrediting-attempt backfires and reveals HER to be ignorant, converting possibility to fact, projecting, namecalling, self-contradicting.
We agree that the field needs corrections. See Cyberdisciple for constructive approach to that.
Got No Direction? No Ideas? Read The Immortality Key and Become an Entheogen Scholarship Critic
photo of Shardog chastising and finger waving her betters at Harvard, who created BOTH the field of Indigenous Shams Studies that she fakely glorifies to beat entheogen scholars with a blunt club make from the field that THEY created. The audacity!the ignorance!
asp-dog from f109 Great Canterbury Psalter
{hand mushroom-tree} from f109
bestiary asp
Sharday Mosurinjohn Retracted Her Bullsh!t Smears, Defamation, & Smug Discrediting & Insulting of Her Betters
See in the 10-minute video how she desperately walks back her rude ignorant namecalling and “analysis” and “corrections” of the field:
“DONT MISHEAR ME AS IF I’M CALLING ALL OF YOU COLONIALIST VIOLENCE & RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM;
“It is kinda “good” for you PATHETIC, retarded, DELUSIONAL, thoroughly misguided fantasizers to hallucinate psychedelics in Western religious history.”
“NOW EXCUSE ME WHILE I WORK ON MY BOOK about psychedelics in Western religious history in Western Esotericism.”
Contradict yourself much?
Shardog vs. Shardog, who wins? Both lose.
More Lazy, Opportunist, Toxic-Parasitical, Self-Serving Scumbags Entering the Field to Make a Name for Themselves by Simply Reading One Book: The Immortality Key
What opportunist scumbags, anything-but-drugs academics this Popular field of Pollan/Mura 2018/2020 has attracted.
Makes Hatsis’ args look intelligent (but not really).
You can rely on the entheogen scholarship field for examples of self-contradiction and conflict of interest, and generating logical fallacies.
This field (entheogen scholarship) is where log-falls are spawned from, thanks to Popebanker Gordon . . . .🔍🧐🤔🤬 Wasson, who was PAID TO LIE and cover-up the mushroom-tree religion and obstruct & harass & pressure & yell at anyone trying to pursue research in mushrooms in Western religious history.
Wasson was working AS HARD AS POSSIBLE to obstruct and impede and shut down academic scholarly research in mushrooms in western religious history. For decades! Never retracted!
Gordon Aasson was a lifetime actor, fake con artist put-on to deceive ppl. re: Xn history.
While at same time wasson brags to the skies “we are the first to cover psychedelics in OUR OWN (fkking Hindu, Indian, WTF!) religious history.”
And fanboi Lash says any idea AT ALL re: entheogen scholarship is “Wasson’s theory”.
F*ck Wasson!
Slightly redeeming himself at last hour, disgusting Wasson-fanboi John Lash says on tape, “but, it’s suspected that Wasson was a double/Rushin agent.”
Mosurinjohn’s Dogged Avoidance of Perceiving Psychedelic Evidence, of Non-Branching in the Eternalism Experiential State
“We then explore how the dogged pursuit of evidentiary mirages contributes to the project of establishing a western civilizational pedigree to dignify the use of stigmatized drugs and revitalize experiential religion. Although the desire for legitimacy and meaning is understandable, the strategies used by the writers of this pseudo-history constitute a kind of religious fundamentalism.”
Search – “The Asp, or “aspido,” is a mythical creature in medieval bestiaries described as a snake that stops up its ears to avoid being enchanted by the music of snake charmers. It presses one ear against the ground and covers the other with its tail to ignore the charming, symbolizing a refusal to hear wisdom or divine truth.”
Motive
The present page is a placeholder page for my joke book review of forthcoming book by the #1 hypocrite and rudest, meanest, most ignorant person to enter entheogen scholarship. Sharday Mosurinjohn
Who pulls her chain is anything-but-drugs academic Richard Asscough. She needs to ditch him.
But they are caught in the Sharborg borg, the anything-but-drugs agenda/ commitment/ academics/ propaganda/ academia.
What she’s trying to do is impossible, so, she’s mean, and contradictory of herself.
Shardog is hopelessly waffling, trying to appease both, warring parties:
entheogen scholarship (ie, Affirmers of mushroom imagery in Christian art)
the anything-but-drugs agenda/ commitment/ academics/ propaganda/ academia — Deniers
Deniers = eg, newcomers pumping out cheap, ignorant, self-congratulatory articles to easily pad out their cv, like Foraging for Psychedelic Mushrooms in the Wrong Forest: The Great Canterbury Psalter as a Medieval Test Case (Ronald Huggins, 2024)
Huggins’ Conclusion section’s arg’n is junk; nothing but “We should ignore mushroom imagery, because we can – by citing the [Wasson -censored] Panofsky arg about branches.”
Trash-quality arg’n from Huggins, cited favorably by Shardog:
“Day 3 plant 2 is a tree, b/c has branches” (that look exact mushroom).
“Day 4 plant 3 is a tree.” (tho the 4 plants have no branches; they’re plain mushrooms).
The Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism & Mytheme Analogy
The Egodeath theory is the Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism & Mytheme Analogy.
The Marketing brand name of this brand of Transcendent Knowledge: the Egodeath theory.
Compare the names of the two theory-halves within so-called “relativity” theory:
the theory of Relativity (Petkov: yuck, no!)
special relativity (Petkov: yuck, no!)
Ein. 1907: “Minkowski math is TOO HARD! 😭”
Ein. 1908: “Minkowski math is CRUCIAL for gen rel”
1908: Minkowski dies (bad strategy to become famous).
general relativity (Petkov: yuck, no!)
By my stds for theory-naming, these are poor names like my poor name “the Core theory”, non-descriptive
Describing my 1997 theory as Core is a vague, low-value descriptor (even if phase-by-year-cutoff is seemingly clean and useful (fact: i
In 1997, though i PUBLISHED strictly the core theory spec, I also knew a lot about esotericism analogy eg Rock Lyrics mapping to psychedelic eternalism; eg I was reading all issues of
Smoley’s Gnosis journalzine (probably no coverage there of mystery religions).
No Newage bookstore has any mystery religion books.
The Theosophy bookshop hasn’t any mystery-religion books.
Describing my 1997 as the Psychedelic Eternalism theory is high-value descriptors.
The theory of Relativity (Petkov hates this and retitled his book to avoid “relative” and advocate “absolute four-dimensional spacetime”; ABSOLUTE is a rebuttal to RELATIVITY.
As I observed and experienced in the university Modern Physics course, Minkowski is badass and knew that Block-Universe Mysticism is total mind blowing revolutionary.
I Am a Follower of Minkowski, Not a Follower of Einstein
(or Allegro)
Einstein DID NOT inspire me in Jan. 1988. Minkowski inspired me in Jan. 1988. the Egodeath theory does not thank Einstein.
The Egodeath theory thanks Minkowski, in accordance with Petkov’s Intro chapter in Minkowski’s Block Universe: Spacetime: Minkowski’s Papers on Spacetime Physics (Petkov, 2021).
But then we studied Einstein, and he didn’t grok ramifs of non-branching Block-Universe Mysticism.
The Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism & Mytheme Analogy [TPEMA]
The Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism
The Psychedelic Eternalism Theory
The Theory of Mytheme Analogy
The Mytheme Analogy Theory
The Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism & Mytheme Analogy
VERY CLEAN!! 🏆
The Egodeath Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism & Mytheme Analogy
Includes my brand name of a brand of Transcendent Knowledge: “the Egodeath theory”.
The Egodeath Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism & Mytheme Analogy [EPM]
Summary: Names of the Component Halves of the Egodeath Theory
the Egodeath Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism & Mytheme Analogy epm
the Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism & Mytheme Analogy tpema
the Eternalism theory et
the Mytheme theory mt
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory tpet
the Mytheme Analogy theory tmat
the Phase 1, Psychedelic Eternalism theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism p1t
the Phase 2, Mytheme Analogy theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism p2t
the Phase 1, Psychedelic Eternalism theory p1mat
the Phase 2, Mytheme Analogy theory p2mat
psychedelic eternalism p-e pe
mytheme analogy m-a
the theory of psychedelic eternalism tope
the theory of mytheme analogy ttma
Resolved: Notation Goes in “Technical-type Language”
Assessed/decided:
I had:
tech
everyday
analogy
[oddball: notation]
Solution:
Does Notation fit in Everyday Lang? No.
Does Notation fit in Analogy Lang? Maybe. Define “analogy”. broad flexible – can it not include notation? Science uses analogy always and notation always, separating is unreal.
Does Notation fit in Technical Lang? Yes.
If the 3 buckets are everyday, analogy, & technical, CLEARLY notation fits well as a special thing within Technical Lang.
branching vs. non-branching fits all 3.
The Nesting Problem: The Core Half of the Theory Has Same Name as the Entire Theory (a Natural Shared Emphasis)
the theory of psychedelic eternalism ambig. This term 2/3 connotes the entire Egodeath theory. This term 1/3 connotes just the core half of the Egodeath theory.
the theory of mytheme analogy
Simple formatting to show the nesting problem:
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory[broad sense] includes two component theories: …… the Psychedelic Eternalism theory[narrow sense] – poor at communicating. …… the Mytheme Analogy theory – good at communicating.
The entire Egodeath theory (“the theory of psychedelic eternalism”) mainly means just one, privileged half: the core half: ie, the theory of psychedelic eternalism, ie, “the Psychedelic Eternalism theory”.
The Mytheme theory brings a LOT of knowledge too; the Core ain’t worth much, without the P R Marketing Communication that’s acccomplished by the Mytheme Analogy theory, as seen so well in 2007 main article interweaving direct terms with analogies from myth:
This is the nesting problem. Naturally, the total entire overall Egodeath theory MOSTLY means the Core theory, which call “the theory of psychedelic eternalism” or “the Psychedelic Eternalism theory”.
The broad term “the theory of psychedelic eternalism” also means / includes the other half: the Mytheme Analogy theory.
The broad term “the Psychedelic Eternalism theory” also means/ includes the other half: “the Mytheme Analogy theory”.
Vague “Core Concepts” Page (Originally a “Glossary”)
the core concepts of the Phase 1, Psychedelic Eternalism theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism
the core concepts of the Egodeath theory
the core concepts of the theory of psychedelic eternalism the core concepts of the theory of mytheme analogy the c c’s of tma ttma ttma the theory of analogy mythemes ttam – need revsersed, todo:
the theory of mytheme analogy ttma
the core concepts of the Psychedelic Eternalism theory the core concepts of the Mytheme Analogy theory
the Mytheme Analogy theory tmat
Notes
A myth is an analogy. Thus the order: Mytheme Analogy, not Analogy Mytheme.
“Analogy Mytheme” reads nonsensically. “Mytheme Analogy” reads sensibly, b/c a myth is an analogy.
Try Switching from “Analogy Mytheme” to “Mytheme Analogy”
strategy: DONE:
find old term “Analogy Mytheme” below. only 2 hits!
copy main keyboard shortcuts to here.
swap order of words,
create new keyboard shortcuts.
the Mytheme Analogy theory the Mytheme Analogy theory
Analogy Mytheme
the Phase 2, Analogy Mytheme theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism p2t
the Phase 2, Mytheme Analogy theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism p2t
the Phase 2, Analogy Mytheme theory p2amt
the Phase 2, Mytheme Analogy theory p2mat
The Name Nesting Problem
It kind of makes sense (even if awkward) that the name of the overall theory is same as the name of the Core theory: “psychedelic eternalism”.
The complete Egodeath theory, which is the Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism, consists of two sub-theories:
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory
the Analogy Mytheme theory
The Egodeath theory includes the Psychedelic Eternalism theory & the Analogy Mytheme theory.
Repeat that, now using 1-word terms:
The complete Egodeath theory, which is the Theory of Eternalism, consists of two sub-theories:
the Eternalism theory
the Mytheme theory
The Egodeath theory includes the Eternalism theory & the Mytheme theory.
4 Sections: Headings Have 1 Descriptive Word (‘Eternalism’ or ‘Mytheme’)
1-Word Name of the Eternalism (Core) Theory
the Eternalism theory et
1-Word Name of the Mytheme Theory
the Mytheme theory mt
2-Word Name of the Eternalism (Core) Theory
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory tpet
2-Word Name of the Mytheme Theory
the Analogy Mytheme theory tamt
4 Sections: Headings Have 0 Descriptive Words (‘Core’ or ‘Myth’)
1-Word Name of Core Theory
the Eternalism theory et
1-Word Name of Myth Theory
the Mytheme theory mt
2-Word Name of Core Theory
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory tpet
2-Word Name of Myth Theory
the Analogy Mytheme theory tamt
New Names of “the Core theory” & “the Mytheme theory” [those are 1-word names]: the Psychedelic Eternalism theory & the Analogy Mytheme theory”
New Names of “the Core theory” & “the Mytheme theory” [those are 1-word names]: the Psychedelic Eternalism theory & the Analogy Mytheme theory” [those are 2-word names; thus this is CHEATING]
Those are history-focused, history-derived terms, not descriptive of the content.
IS THERE a good 1-word name for the core theory and the myth theory? resort to bad word “cybernetic”?
New 1-Word Name for “the Core theory”: “the Eternalism theory”
New 1-Word Name for “the Mytheme theory”: “the Analogy theory”
the Eternalism theory
the Analogy theory
The Egodeath theory consists of the Core theory and the Mytheme theory.
The Egodeath theory consists of the Eternalism theory and the Analogy theory.
the phase 1,
the Phase 1, Psychedelic Eternalism theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism
notice the last part says that the entire Egodeath theory = psychedelic eternalism.
but i’m now saying half the Egodeath theory is psychedelic eternalism, the other half of the Egodeath theory is analogy mytheme.
Hierarchy of Theory Components Names
the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism , contains:
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory
the Analogy Mytheme theory
awk, often need 1-word names of the two halves of the Egodeath theory:
the Eternalism theory eternalism-thinking ego transcendence cybernetic eternalism
the cybernetic eternalism theory
I like these 1-word theory-half names:
the Eternalism theory et
the Mytheme theory mt – good, already def’d
todo: define keyboard shortcuts for those 2.
eternalism-thinking et – current def. e t h – new def.
possibilism-thinking pt pth – defined now
eternalism-thinking
now do pair:
possibilism-thinking [PTH]
eternalism-thinking [ETH]
that frees up the new pair of keyboard shortcuts/ acros:
the Eternalism theory [ET] = the Core theory 1988/1997 + the 2000/2025, 3-level correction.
the Mytheme theory [MT]
the Eternalism theory
the Mytheme theory
starate: strate: 1: define desired new hi-pri keyboard shortcut
2. change the adjacent old keyboard shortcut
the Eternalism theory (Core)
the Mytheme theory (Mytheme)
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory [TPET]
tmat
the Analogy Mytheme theory [TAMT]
the Analogy Mytheme theory a m t
the Analogy Mytheme theory t a m t
Alas, “pet” is no good of an acro. so, it is T-PET; so, this acro is T-AMT, to match that.
tpet
tamt
or just: amt
but not: pet
psychedelic eternalism pe
analogy mytheme anmy
psychedelic eternalism
analogy mytheme
New Name for the Egodeath Core Theory: the Psychedelic Eternalism theory (Excludes Analogy/ Mythemes)
I often said, the past 2 years: the Egodeath theory is the theory of psychedelic eternalism I didn’t dwell, there, on whether Analogy/Myth is included
Analogy/Myth is included in the theory of psychedelic eternalism, as a separate add-on.
Analogy/Myth is included in the Psychedelic Eternalism theory, as a separate add-on
Analogy Mytheme theory is NOT in the core of the Psychedelic Eternalism theory.
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory VERSUS the add-on, [which caused a maturing of the Core]
The Added-on, Mytheme Analogy Theory Forced Improvement of the Core Theory
The Analogy Mytheme theory forced correction of the psychedelic eternalism theory
the theory of psychedelic eternalism
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory
not loving thse new keyboard shortcuts, two
do better parallelism of these 2 keyboard shortcuts
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory tpet – curr def’d
the Analogy Mytheme theory tamt – added. amt
test of [TPET] & [TAMT]:
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory
the Analogy Mytheme theory
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory (“the Core theory”)
the Analogy Mytheme theory (“the Mytheme theory)
That’s a better set of 2 keyboard shortcuts. Parallel now, even though longer acro.
The phrase “the Core theory” omits the important, load-carrying words ‘psychedelic eternalism’.
The phrase “the Mytheme theory” omits the important, load-carrying explanatory word ‘analogy’.
Myth is analogy.
Mythic art motifs are analogies describing control transformation etc.
The mere add-on, analogy mytheme, the Analogy Mytheme theory, caused revision of the Egodeath Core theory: the core theory had to stop the “from possibilism to eternalism; get rid of possibilism-thinking ” huge long-lasting error like 1994-2025. Even after Coraxo corrected me from 2- to 3-level to “transcend fate”, I waited to 2025 to stop in any way disparaging possibilism-thinking.
the theory of psychedelic eternalism tope
transformation from possibilism to eternalism tpe
t p e t
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory tpet
Precedent: I’ve already characterized the entire Egodeath theory (but mainly the Core) as “psychedelic eternalism” theory.
i wrote like:
the Egodeath theory (psychedelic eternalism)
When i wrote that, i was thinking, of myth/analogy as an outer layer of that, a distinct outer layer, tacked-on as a sep. thing.
the theory of psychedelic eternalism tope
the Egodeath Core theory is the Psychedelic Eternalism theory
the Egodeath Mytheme theory is the Analogy Mytheme theory
the price to pay for the marketing word “Egodeath” — doesn’t carry much load of descritpive meaning. or explayanatory meaning.
eras:
1985[start], 1988 [core theory born]-1997 [core theory outlined], plus in 2000 & 2025 the 3-phase correction (integrated possibilism/eternalism).
for History purpose, “core” works great. BUT, for content-description purpose, “core” says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
Abandon, move away from history focus; it’s confusing, vague, a lost opport, and there are BETTER WORDS WATING WAITING TO COMPETE & DEMONSTRATE THEIR SUPERIOR LOAD-CARRYING STRENGTH.
the Egodeath Mytheme theory BUT LATELY I EMPHASIZE ANALOGY, NOT MYTHTHEME; i emph myth AS analogy. thus the two words: Analogy Mytheme;
analogy mytheme anmy
the Analogy Mytheme theory amt
the theory of analogy mythemes ttam
the Phase 1, Psychedelic Eternalism theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism p1t
the Phase 1, Psychedelic Eternalism theory p1pet
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory tpet
the Analogy Mytheme theory amt
so:
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory
the Analogy Mytheme theory
i often lately say the Egodeath theory = the theory of psychedelic eternalism – when i say that, i’m thinking of mytheme analogies too.
define:
The Egodeath Core theory (1988/1997) is psychedelic eternalismwithout analogy/ myth/ mythic art.
(Core had some adjustments, really 1 adjustment w/ 2 examples:
2000: Coraxo corrected my core theory: Classical Antiquity = 2-level change from possibilism to eternalism [handled by my 1997 core theory outline; BUT: Late Antiquity = 3-level: from basic possibilism, to basic eternalism; to integrated possibilism/eternalism (= “transcend no-free-will/ heimarmene“).
The 2000 correction and the 2025 correction BOTH are the same fix of same flaw: in both cases, I tried to do a binary toggle, from possibilism to eternalism as if exclusive and not summed/ cumulative.
The mind is actually cumulative:
Adding Eternalism causes qualifying of Possibilism – NOT “getting rid of” Possibilism!
End up with not just eternalism (I shape).
End up not just same possibilism now w/ eternalism added (YI shape).
End up actually with eternalism added and with possibilism QUALIFIED (Y’I shape).
the Analogy Mytheme theory (1998-2026)
Need Better Name than “the Cybernetic Core theory”
the Phase 1, Psychedelic Eternalism Theory p1pet
the Phase 1, Psychedelic Eternalism theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism p1t
the Phase 1, Cybernetic Core theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism p1tc
the Phase 1, Cybernetic Core theory p1cct
‘Cybernetic’ Is Too Technical
non-analogy.
direct modelling.
control transformation.
psychedelic
eternalism
not:
analogical psychedelic eternalism
analogical psychedelic eternalism with dependent control
rather:
psychedelic eternalism
psychedelic eternalism with dependent control
the theory of psychedelic eternalism tope
theory of psychedelic eternalism
rename
within the Egodeath theory, rename the main sub-theory (1988/1997) from
the Cybernetic Core theory
to:
the theory of psychedelic eternalism
the Psychedelic Eternalism theory
the “Psychedelic Eternalism with Dependent Control” theory
omits 2-level, dependent control – ok, we already estab’d that:
when only have 1 word, use ‘eternalism’
when 2 words, use eternalism + “control”:
eternalism with dependent control
eternalism & 2-level, dependent control
eternalism & dependent control
omits analogy (good)
‘Core’ Is Too Vague
Looking for More Load-Carrying, Descriptor Term than “Core”; eg. “eternalism”, “psychedelic””
“cybernetic” sucks: Need better term than “the Cybernetic Core theory”: ‘cybernetic’ is too technical, & ‘Core’ is too vauge
Title’s Names of the Two Theories
the Cybernetic Core theory within the Egodeath theory cct
the Analogy Mytheme theory within the Egodeath theory keyboard shortcut amt
Great Terms Derived from Titling this Page in Summary.
Longer Names from Expanded Title
the Phase 1, Cybernetic Core theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism p1t
the Phase 2, Analogy Mytheme theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism p2t
Longer expansions are easy to truncate case-by-case.
If too often truncating the expansion, then define a shorter version, and revise keyboard shortcuts (acroynms) as needed.
Short Names of the Two Theories
the Cybernetic theory ct
the Mytheme theory mt
Medium-Length Names of the Two Theories
the Egodeath Cybernetic theory ect
the Egodeath Mytheme theory emt
Long Names of the Two Theories
the Cybernetic, Core theory portion of the Egodeath theory; direct model of eternalism-driven control-transformation ctl
the Mytheme theory portion of the Egodeath theory; analogies describing eternalism-driven control-transformation mtl
The Two Halves of the Egodeath theory Mutually Corroborate and Confirm Each Other (“It’s Circular! 😭” )
Sharday Mosurinjohn is wrong if she attributes (she’s so briffilaint, attachking their motivations, presentsed as her big-brain much-needed analysis that is SO helpful to the field of entheogen scholarship
She claims that the bunk motives are to try to find psychedelics in Western religious history in order to bolster brand new NRMs by FANTASIZING psychedelics in Western religious history, which this PUNK Shardog in 7th grade GIRLISH namecalling fashion, SMEARS Rogan/ Ruck/ Muraresku as “colonialist violence” and “religious fundamentalism”.
Rude AF Newcomer Shardog 🤬🖕🐶 Mosurinjohn, Enters the Field We Created, Fists Randomly Swinging – and a Train of Morons Following Behind Her
& Huggins whose POS Article She Mutely Cites as if Substantive Arg’n
Richard Asscough Misreps my 2006 Plaincourault fresco article to accommplish his preset goal of Discrediting entheogen scholarship via Allegro’s Linguistic Basis.
First of all, a general F*CK YOU SHARDOG 🤬🖕🐶 from every journal that trashcanned this smear piece hit job by Mosurinjohn & Ascough opportunitist self-promotoer butthead anything-but-drugs academics
Rude, Mean & Ignorant HYPOCRITE Shardog Is Writing a Book Asserting Psychedelics in Western Religious History (Western Esotericism)
but YOU Are Doing “Colonialist Violence” and “Religious Fundamentalism” When You Did That, Long Before Her
Rather, the image is proof of Myth forcing me to revise Core theory.
Two instances where Myth (my work developing the Mytheme theory) caused me to revise the Core theory:
In 2000, Myth (Gnosticism) Revised the Core Theory: 2-Phase vs. 3-Phase Models of Psychedelic Transformation
2000
in Gnosticism Yahoo Group, Coraxo found error in my simple 2-phase model, “desire to end up w/ Fate/ eternalism”.
That’s true of Classical Antiquity but false of Late Antiquity.
Thanks Cyberdisciple for help on the periodization name-pair, “Classical Antiquity vs. Late Antiquity”.
Classical Antiquity = 2-phase: mental model transformation from possibilism to eternalism.
Late Antiquity = 3-phase: transcend heimarmene, ie do sequence: possibilism-thinking; then eternalism-thinking; then integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking. Y, then I, then YI. Lower hand: Y-then-I; upper hand of a medieval hand-pair: YI, or Y’I. per von Trimberg scanned bottom to top, by the Manesse Codex artist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Manesse –
Late Antiquity moved to a 3-phase model: possibilism-thinking; eternalism-thinking; integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking =
In 2025, Myth Revised the Core Theory: Embrace and Include Possibilism-Thinking; Marry the 2POV Like Dionysus Weds Ariadne
2025 – Stop disparaging possibilism-thinking!
I keep being shown by the gods, by the muses, by Saraswati, that the mind ALWAYS includes using possibilism-thinking , but, now have a higher vantage point in altered-state, to SEE the possibilism-thinking (Isaac) going on.
Do not “get rid of” Isaac; qualify him.
Then my church founder Aug 2025 gave sermon on Alan Moore block-universe eternalism comic book novels, which pushed me over hump to finish my church Reader article
Though bizarrely I have to add “block” (somehow missing?!)
Now with that article, finally I have presented a BALANCED HARMONIZED view.
You shoulda been there when I told Debunker Rick that I am harmonizing branching multiverse physics with Minkowski absolute four-dimensional spacetime / “relativity”.
Rick misread momentarily me and thought I was advocating branching Quantum Mysticism against non-branching Block-Universe Mysticism.
He showed me internet research which 100%, more than expected, corrob’d
my hatred for branching Quantum Mysticism since 1988, &
my 1997/2001 first posts at Egodeath Yahoo Group talking about stupid branching vs smart non-branching IN PHYSICS (but failed yet to connect branching vs. non-branching IN MYTH/ mythic art: that started w/ snake then tree around 2002-2004).
The Dionysus and Ariadne victory wedding procession mosaic, provided by the Egodeath community ~2005, made me revise my 1988-1997 Core Cybernetic theory in 2025, to stop my long-standing since 1995 mistaken expectation of “get rid of possibilism-thinking”.
Per emails with wrmspirit in April 2025. To solve big problem, How am I going to sell “no-free-will” to my church?
Ans: Do not get rid of freewill thinking. egoic freewill thinking (albeit qualified) is standard for the possibilism state of consciousness and is used 24 x 7 x 365 even during peak state of loose cognition.
Possessed by My Patron God Dionysus in 1987
Besides Michael the Archangel, my patron god is Dionysus b/c in Fall 1986-Spring 1987 dorm room of awesomeness, I felt as if possessed by eg Dionysus.
Notes
the Core, Cybernetic theory ccct – a ‘c’ for comma
I have had to get fast at swapping and redefining the acronyms / keyboard shortcuts. = core concepts.
the Egodeath Core Concepts catalog ccc
next episode of Transcendent Knowledge Podcast by Max Freakout & Cyberdisciple & Alan Houot & Michael Hoffman promises to cover:
the Mytheme theory
psychedelic cognitive phenomenology done right
cognitive phenomenology cp
psychedelic cognitive phenomenology pcp
Alan Houot ah
The Core Theory vs. the Mytheme Theory: Need Better Concept-Labels, Core Concept Keyboard Shortcuts/ Acronyms – done 😓
Finished, at 10:50 Feb. 10, 2026.
I now have updated, useful short/med/long terms for “the Core theory” (ie the Cybernetic theory, which is more directly descriptive & less relational-contrast dependent) & “the Mytheme theory”.
Short Core-Concept Labels/Acronyms: the Cybernetic theory & the Mytheme theory
the Cybernetic theory ct
the Mytheme theory mt
Medium-length Core-Concept Labels/Acronyms: the Egodeath Cybernetic theory & the Egodeath Mytheme theory
the Egodeath Cybernetic theory ect
the Egodeath Mytheme theory emt
Long Core-Concept Labels/Acronyms: the Cybernetic theory blah blah & the Mytheme theory blah blah
the Cybernetic, Core theory portion of the Egodeath theory; lacking analogies for eternalism-driven control-transformation ctl
the Mytheme theory portion of the Egodeath theory; analogies for eternalism-driven control-transformation mtl
Notes about the Need to redo keyboard shortcuts
Fallback: verbose/clumsy articulate phrases for the Egodeath Core theory (defined by Feb. 1997 outline) vs. the Egodeath Mytheme theory (well-articulated in Sep. 2007 main article, but, lacking: YI/ handedness/ branching vs. non-branching).
When did “the Mytheme theory portion of the Egodeath theory; analogies for eternalism-driven control-transformation” become mature?
I still need my personally meaningful phrases:
the Core theory
the Mytheme theory
or maybe:
the Egodeath Core theory the Egodeath Core theory of cybernetic psychedelic eternalism; eternalism-driven control-transformation
the Egodeath Mytheme theory
Notes re: short terms the Cybernetic theory / the Mytheme theory
the Cybernetic theory ct
= phase 1 1985-1997 = the Core theory of the Egodeath theory
The CORE did change due to mytheme research: eg in mid 2025, when I stopped “get rid of possibilism-thinking”, and changed to integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking. two different points of view, two different mental models = 2POV.
Notes Developing Long Expansions of Core / Myth theory names
the Cybernetic theory blah blah blah ctl todo: build out expansion, with points eg:
core theory (not analogies/ peripheral/ myth/ art)
phase 1; 1985-1997
lacks analogy/ myth/ history eg the ahistoricity of religious founder figures
That period includes Rock lyrics, as first decoded (mapped as analogies describing psychedelic eternalism) in 1989-1992.
the Mytheme theory portion of the Egodeath theory; analogies for eternalism-driven control-transformation mtl
straegy to construct long version of the Cybernetic theory phrase:
copy/paste/modify the long mytheme phrase:
the Cybernetic, Core theory portion of the Egodeath theory; lacking analogies for eternalism-driven control-transformation c t l
Developing Short Terms for “the Cybernetic theory” (or, “the Core theory”, vaguely) & “the Mytheme theory”
the Cybernetic theory ct
the Mytheme theory mt
Long Terms for “the Cybernetic theory” (or, “the Core theory”, vaguely) & “the Mytheme theory”‘
the Cybernetic theory blah blah blah ctl
old: the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence ctet
the Mytheme theory portion of the Egodeath theory; analogies for eternalism-driven control-transformation mtl
the Egodeath Core theory ect
the Egodeath Core theory of cybernetic psychedelic eternalism; eternalism-driven control-transformation ectl
ctl -wtf no expand??
the Mytheme theory
the Mytheme theory portion of the Egodeath theory; analogies for eternalism-driven control-transformation m t l
eternalism theory of mental transformation e m t – inconsis w/: e c t or e c t l
expect shortcuts:
e c t = egodeath core theory the Egodeath Core theory ect
the Egodeath community edcy
the Egodeath Core theory of cybernetic psychedelic eternalism; eternalism-driven control-transformation e c t l
e m t = the Egodeath Mytheme theory emt
eternalism theory of mental transformation etmt
the Egodeath Mytheme theory emtl
and:
the Mytheme theory mt
the Mytheme theory portion of the Egodeath theory; analogies for eternalism-driven control-transformation mtl
c t – core theory — c t now = the Cybernetic theory the Cybernetic theory
c t l – core theory long the Cybernetic Core theory the Core, Cybernetic theory c t l = ctl
“core” is an indirect descriptor. Core vs Mytheme (pereiph)
bad as bad term would:
the Peripheral theory vs. the Core theory
the Egodeath Peripheral theory – true but dumb. = the Mytheme theory; the Egodeath Mytheme theory
want both with and w/o “egodeath”:
the Egodeath Core theory – bad: “Core” vague (only make sense when list both of the two theories: Direct Core & Analogy Periphery; the word “Cybernetic” is better than “Core” if only have 1 word. ect = the Egodeath Core theory = bad, change to “Cybernetic”
the Egodeath Cybernetic theory [core; phase 1, non-analogy] ect
the Egodeath Mytheme theory emt
the Cybernetic theory ct
tcct
the Core, Cybernetic theory cct
the Cybernetic theory blah blah blah ctl avail i reserved the keyboard shortcut / acro this way
psychedelic
altered-state
eternalism
cybernetic
monolithic, autonomous control
2-level, dependent control
analogical vs. literalism; mytheme = analogy
The Core, Cybernetic theory omits analogy/ mythemes.
The Mytheme theory covers analogy/ mythemes; it’s built on and cross-reifying the Core, Cybernetic theory.
the Core theory | the Cybernetic theory | the Cybernetic Core theory, Phase 1 1985-1997
the Mytheme theory , Phase 2 1998-2026
How the Mytheme theory Finally Caused Revision (Reshaping) of the Core theory
Mythic Art Made Me Stop Trying to Abandon and Disparage as “Childish Delusion to Sacrifice”
Dionysus and Ariadne victory wedding procession mosaic dvp
the orig d v p keyboard shortcut sucked: the jpg url image cut off to only bottom of spear; redid keyboard shortcut to include jpg url for bigger crop [done, Feb. 10, 2026]
Harmonizing/integration of possibilism & eternalism thinking
Affirming YI (two states = two models).
The mind learns and retains the 24 x 7 x 365 use of both ordinary-state possibilism & altered-state eternalism, conjoined in one mind.
The completed initiated mind ends up with two different states (experiential modes) & world models of time, possibility, & control.
This means you can shake fist at God and confidently enter high dose.
NO.
Learn the fear of God, profound implic that God can make you do anything as God is making ppl want all kinds of terrible things.
This is the psychotomimetic revelation: the more inspired your thinking, the more unstable and vulnerable. Why did the mushroom-tree religion decline in 1300?
Why does Manesse ditch {mushroom} motif and go nuts with the {YI hand shape} motif instead?
b/c mushroom revelation is: full enlightenment = full unstable vulnerability.
That’s not my final idea; it’s tentative/recent. Past 4 months. Now Feb. 10, 2026.
YI hand shapes yhs
The “Mytheme” Conception in Strauss’ Structuralism Is Inferior to the Mytheme Theory within the Egodeath theory
My usage fits ok w/ that, but, just as several writers have their own brand of “mytheme theory”, i mean, the EGODEATH THEORY’s version of the Mytheme theory, NOT Strauss’s network of meanings.
Even stupid ideas like “Secret Christian Amanita Cult” would be ok concept if done right, per the Egodeath theory.
Blame for that stupid Pop idea of “Secret Christian Amanita Cult” originates with Wasson/ Allegro/ Ruck.
Weed out this god-forsaken stupid fkking idea, “Secret Christian Amanita Cult”, from infesting the field of entheogen scholarship.
social drama narrative wags entheogen scholarship dog
“The big bad church got rid of entheogens, as proved by all the entheogen mushroom imagery in Christian art”.
I give Ruck yet more evidence of mushroom imagery in Christian art BUT he responds as always:
Thank you for yet more evidence of mushrooms in HERETICAL Christianity.
thus Ruck NEUTRALIZES the evidence at the same time as delivering it.
Ruck shows that the mushrooms in mushroom imagery in Christian art DOESN’T COUNT, because it was “HERETICAL” and “Suppressed”; it’s merely an ALIEN INFILTRATION into the very heart of Christianity.
By Ruck’s perverse attitude and framing: (the minimal/moderate entheogen theory of religion)
keyboard shortcut
the minimal/moderate entheogen theory of religion below is better:
the Moderate (= Minimal) entheogen theory of religion mmetr
Ruck’s Perverse, defeatist, Prohibition-compliant, social drama narrative Constructs the Moderate (= Minimal) entheogen theory of religion
Shardog Mosurinjohn gets it all wrong. “entheogen scholars try to validate their NRM via hallucinated history doggedly pursued in vain”
No, Ruck does NOT have that motive. Ruck’s mission (following Allegro) is to defame Christianity, through abusing the field of entheogen scholarship: convert each mushroom imagery in Christian art into “Christianity sucks because it got rid of this mushroom imagery in Christian art”
Ruck OUGHT to say, with maximal entheogen theory of religion:
“Christianity is cool, b/c it contains all this mushroom imagery in Christian art.” Like 2nd-generation entheogen scholarship (the Explicit Psilocybin paradigm) (
Samorini
Ruck – momentary half-right attitude in Conjuring Eden: Art and the Entheogenic Vision of Paradise
Michael Hoffman,
Jerry Brown.
Ruck – momentary Ruck sometimes in Conjuring Eden: Art and the Entheogenic Vision of Paradise
But then in Apples of Apollo book, they reverted back to the main narrative: suppression & titillation, Amanita is the engine of all Mystery Religions
At which point in 2002/2003 I posted F this S, I part with this LAME trajectory, I take the [2016 Brown] approach:
The maximal entheogen theory of religion.
The copious mushroom imagery in Christian art does NOT “neutralize” mushroom imagery within Christianity; it BOLSTERS it.
See John Rush’s intense contradiction on back of book cover. I color-hilited his contradictions, at this site. Conflict of interest within 1st-generation entheogen scholarship (the Secret Amanita paradigm) causes the misguided, 1st-gen entheogen scholars to not want to find “TOO MUCH mushroom imagery” in Christian art in Great Canterbury Psalter.
Allegro-Ruck-Rush Fears Finding “Too Many Mushrooms” in Christian art
Allegro-Ruck-Rush has a restrictive conflict of interest, because for him, holding up the social drama narrative takes precedence (wrong priorities mixed up) over the presence of mushroom imagery in Christian art.
Ruck BOTH wants to find mushroom imagery in Christian art, AND, BUT, intensely desires what Andy Letcher mocks on p. 35 of Shroom:
Ruck: “Thank you for yet more evidence of mushroom imagery in HERETICAL Christian art, proving that Christianity 100% eliminated mushrooms”
The Allegro-Ruck Foregrounding of their social drama narrative wags the entheogen scholarship dog, causing blindness to evidence and failure to perceive the mushroom-tree religion within MAINSTREAM Christianity
See end of Brown 2016 book & 2019 article, emph’g Mainstream Christianity having mushrooms – and trashcanning the Allegro/Ruck 1st-generation entheogen scholarship (the Secret Amanita paradigm).
The fact that mushroom heresy penetrated into the heart of Christianity, shows the total removal and compelte absense of mushrooms from mainstream normal proper actual Christianity.
Over-emph on conjectured social drama narrative prevents recognizing add’l mushroom imagery.
The Egodeath theory’s equiv of social drama narrative: the artists initiation guild w/ psilocybin lockbox teaching {mushroom}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs.
the “Secret Christian Amanita Cult” idea, including “the big bad church got rid of entheogens, as proved by all the entheogen mushroom imagery in Christian art”) social drama narrative, is poison ergot contaminating the field of entheogen scholarship.
THE PROBLEM OF ALIEN LEXICON, “MYTHEME”. Myth theme. Tainted, LOADED with HIS network of meanings not MINE.
Structuralism is stupid. If done wrong.
Their Alien Lexicon Would Be OK If Done the Right Way
I DO STRUCTURALISM THE CORRECT WAY.
I DO MYTHEME THEORY THE CORRECT WAY.
I DO COMMON-CORE MYSTICISM AND PERENNIALISM THE CORRECT WAY.
I DO MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE THE CORRECT WAY.
I DO EGO DISSOLUTION THE CORRECT WAY.
I DO DMN THE CORRECT WAY.
I DO RELIGIOUS MYTH INTERP THE CORRECT WAY.
Related core concepts
core concept c-c
control cancellation cc
the Core, Cybernetic theory cct
cybernetic control transformation ccx
Short version of “the Core theory” (or, “the Cybernetic theory”) concept-label
the Egodeath Core theory ect
the Cybernetic eternalism theory cet
the Cybernetic theory ct
the Mytheme theory mt
Long version of “the Core theory” (or, “the Cybernetic theory”) concept-label
the Egodeath Core theory of cybernetic psychedelic eternalism; eternalism-driven control-transformation ectl
problem: lately I re-emphasize:
“eternalism” (as an experiential mode) is specifically, emphatically psychedelic eternalism; altered-state eternalism; loose cognition.
“possibilism” (as an experiential mode) is specifically, emphatically ordinary-state possibilism; tight cognition.
Short version of “the Mytheme theory” concept-label
the Mytheme theory mt
Long version of “the Mytheme theory” concept-label
the Mytheme theory portion of the Egodeath theory; analogies for eternalism-driven control-transformation mtl
Wiki Crazy Person Said “Ego death” is not a proper encylopedia entry, should be [stupid term everyone rejected] – but Canterbury Says {death} Is the Right Motif
The person used the phrase “ego dissolution” way back in 2005?
Great Canterbury Psalter Vindicates the Ego “Death” Ossuary Motif Analogy.
“Ego death” is too colloquial and debatable and arbitrary – says 1 of 100 ppl, against the other 99 ppl.
Great Canterbury Psalter says u r full of it. Great Canterbury Psalter is packed with the “psilocybin = ego DEATH” motif. eg
{rock ossuary} motif.
Threatened by blades of DEATH.
Lifted up from passive DEAD state.
Resurrected from a DEATH state.
Proving us 99% of wikipedians correct, against the fool who pooh-poohed the term “ego death”.
I can provide wiki url where some fool tried to nuke the wiki title “Ego death” – did he try to rename the article to “Ego dissolution” way back in 2005?
AI Accidental Query: “define Core Theory vs. Mytheme Theory”
“define Core Theory vs. Mytheme Theory”
AI ans:
“Mytheme Theory (specifically structuralist) and various “core” approaches to myth analysis (like functionalism or archetypal analysis) differ primarily in their focus on structure vs. content, and universal cognitive patterns vs. universal social functions.
Mytheme Theory (developed by Claude Lévi-Strauss) treats myths as language, breaking them down into minimal, irreducible units of meaning (mythemes) that are organized into binary oppositions to reveal universal structures of human thought.
Core Theories (often referring to functionalism, archetype, or thematic analysis) focus on identifying the “core” message, social purpose, or recurring, universal motifs that satisfy human psychological or social needs.”
Core vs. Mytheme Theory: Names of Sub-Theories; Theory-Portions; Component Theories
the Egodeath Core theory of cybernetic psychedelic eternalism; eternalism-driven control-transformation ectl
the Mytheme theory portion of the Egodeath theory; analogies for eternalism-driven control-transformation mtl
Those are temp placeholders, haven’t figured the best concept-labels yet.
Related lexicon terms:
the Cybernetic theory ct
the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence ctet
Motive
Transcendent Knowledge Podcast About the Phase 1, Cybernetic Core theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism
Max Freakout & Cyberdisciple etc need useful standard terms
soon episode Transcendent Knowledge Podcast on summarizing the Mytheme theory. need straight out concept-labels/ names of the 2 parts of the theory.
“In this episode, Max and Cyber explain the core, phase 1 part of the ego death theory. [good: today’s work fits w/ that]
“Topics covered include:
Mental modelling
The egoic and transcendent mental worldmodels
States of consciousness, ordinary and altered
Stages of psychospiritual development
Tight and loose cognitive association binding, dissociation
Mental representations and their referents
Metaperception, explicit representationalism
Conceptions of person-hood
Cybernetic homunculus, control agency
Time as the 4th spatial dimension, time-slices and timelessness
Popular attitudes and misperceptions about ego death
Cybernetic instability, control-death
Fatedness and its transcendence
The will to exist in Schopenhauer’s philosophy
Postulating higher control, humble prayer
Helpless dependence on higher control, Schleiermacher’s theology
Struggling to control the future, panic-attack freakout
Physical metabolism and thought-processes
Next Episode of Transcendent Knowledge Podcast: cognitive phenomenology, & the Phase 2, Analogy Mytheme theory, within the Egodeath theory of psychedelic eternalism
Planned panelists:
Alan Houot
Max Freakout
Cyberdisciple
Michael Hoffman
Titles of this Page
Page title was:
Names of the Phase 1, Psychedelic Eternalism Theory & the Phase 2, Mytheme Analogy Theory, within the Egodeath Theory
then was:
The Egodeath Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism & Mytheme Analogy
latest:
The Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism & Mytheme Analogy
The Codex Manesse (YI Hand-Shape Fest) Was Painted by “the Master of the Codex Manesse”; “the Foundation Master”; “the anonymous artists of the Codex Manesse”
Query: Who painted the Codex Manesse? Will I need to say “the Codex Manesse painter” or can I give a person’s name?
“he Codex Manesse (also known as the Große Heidelberger Liederhandschrift) was not painted by a single, named individual.
“It was illustrated by at least four anonymous artists in Zurich between approximately 1305 and 1340.
“Because the artists are unknown, you should refer to them as “the Master of the Codex Manesse” or “the Foundation Master”.
“The Foundation Master (Grundstockmaler): This primary artist is credited with 110 of the 137 full-page illuminations.
“Additional Painters: The remaining portraits were created by at least three other, later artists.
“How to Refer to the Artist:
“You should not give a specific personal name (like a single painter’s proper name), as the artists are only known by their stylistic, descriptive names (e.g., “The Master of the Codex Manesse” or “The Foundation Master”).
“Best terminology: “The Master of the Codex Manesse” or “The anonymous artists of the Codex Manesse.”
“Context: The manuscript was commissioned by the Manesse family of Zurich, and the paintings depict 140 different poets.”
Crop by Michael Hoffman “Codex_Manesse_Süßkind_von_Trimberg-figure-1-hands-pair.jpg” 15 KB, 3:23 Feb. 3, 2026
Features:
von Trimberg: Pair of Hands of Figure 2
Crop by Michael Hoffman “Codex_Manesse_Süßkind_von_Trimberg-figure-2-hands-pair.jpg” 16 KB, 3:24 Feb. 3, 2026
von Trimberg: Pair of Hands of Figure 3
von Trimberg Figure 3’s Hands-Pair: Lower Hand and Upper Hand Are Inverse: YI’ vs. Y’I
Crop by Michael Hoffman “Codex_Manesse_Süßkind_von_Trimberg-figure-3-hands-pair.jpg” 24 KB, 3:26 Feb. 3, 2026
von Trimberg: Pair of Hands of Figure 4
Crop by Michael Hoffman “Codex_Manesse_Süßkind_von_Trimberg-figure-4-hands-pair.jpg” 15 KB, 3:26 Feb. 3, 2026
von Trimberg: Each Hand Isolated
Person 1, Upper Hand: IY
Crop by Michael Hoffman “Codex_Manesse_Süßkind_von_Trimberg-figure-1-upper-hand.jpg” 8 KB, 10:32 a.m. Jan. 31, 2026
Person 1, Lower Hand: IY
Crop by Michael Hoffman “Codex_Manesse_Süßkind_von_Trimberg-figure-1-lower-hand.jpg” 7 KB, 10:31 a.m. Jan. 31, 2026
Person 2, Upper Hand: Y’I
Crop by Michael Hoffman “Codex_Manesse_Süßkind_von_Trimberg-figure-2-upper-hand.jpg” 9 KB, 10:50 a.m. Jan. 31, 2026
Person 2, Lower Hand: Y
Crop by Michael Hoffman “Codex_Manesse_Süßkind_von_Trimberg-figure-2-lower-hand.jpg” 5 KB, 10:57 a.m. Jan. 31, 2026
Person 3, Upper Hand: IY’
Crop by Michael Hoffman “Codex_Manesse_Süßkind_von_Trimberg-figure-3-upper-hand.jpg” 9 KB, 10:38 a.m. Jan. 31, 2026
Person 3, Lower Hand: YI’
Crop by Michael Hoffman “Codex_Manesse_Süßkind_von_Trimberg-figure-3-lower-hand.jpg” 7 KB, 10:57 a.m. Jan. 31, 2026
Person 4, Upper Hand: YI
Crop by Michael Hoffman “Codex_Manesse_Süßkind_von_Trimberg-figure-4-upper-hand.jpg” 8 KB, 10:41 a.m. Jan. 31, 2026
Person 4, Lower Hand: YI
Crop by Michael Hoffman “Codex_Manesse_Süßkind_von_Trimberg-figure-4-lower-hand.jpg” 7 KB, 10:40 a.m. Jan. 31, 2026
Motivation for this Page
I wanted more from vonTrimberg’s painter.
Existing problem was: I had lots of crops of the von Trimberg foliio image, but, they were in a page that’s not specialized as a gallery of von Trimberg image or artist other images.
The von Trimble painter provides clearly important evidence for understanding the shared lang of medieval hand shapes.
Not surprising that a few seconds inspecting another picture from same book, all the hand activity starts yelling signals.
My project now is not only read Great Canterbury Psalter, but, describe the mushroom-tree religion.
medieval YI hand shapes mhs
An hour ago, 10:03 p.m. Feb. 9, 2026, I again went to wiki > jewish hat article, to try to find more images from this artist b/c Trimberg is so excellent and handy for YI hand shapes establishment of standard patterns / sequences of two hands, holding hands.
bias: bottom-up reading, end up with 2POV. Different pov when analyze 1 hand scope, vs. sequence of lower hand (1`-2 phases)
then higher hand: read upper fingers & thumb together.
eg higher hand read as:
YI – entire fingers
Y’I – partial fingers
I’Y – won’t see {cut thumb}
I’Y’ – won’t see {cut thumb}
Rule: The Integrated Sequence from Lower to Upper Hand Is More Important than Isolated YI Shape of Lower or Upper Hand
When deciding how to classify the YI branching form of a given hand in medieval art, the dominant context is the pair of hands, it should tell a coherent story:
You begin in ordinary-state possibilism (Y), ignorant of altered-state eternalism (I).
Changes occur. Add I, qualify Y. Add altered-state eternalism (I), qualify or partly repudiate relying only on ordinary-state possibilism (Y).
You end with having two different points of view, two different mental models: I has been added to Y, and Y has been qualified.
Per my …. said before: I long have waited for the day when my work on the Mytheme theory affects
keyboard shortcut
the Egodeath Core theory ect – expands to egoic control thinking
egoic control thinking ect
the Mytheme theory mt
I don’t like my concept-labels (~= keyboard shortcuts; acronyms) for
the Egodeath Core theory (sans history/ myth/ analogies)
the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence
the general theory of psychedelic eternalism / altered-state eternalism
the Mytheme theory includes history/ myth/ analogies/ Rock lyrics.
analogy/ myth is the promised theme for the next episode of the Transcendent Knowledge Podcast, tho Max Freakout is currently focused on altered-state cognitive phenomenology.
eternalism-driven control-transformation edct
the Egodeath Core theory of cybernetic psychedelic eternalism; eternalism-driven control-transformation ect
the Mytheme theory portion of the Egodeath theory; analogies for eternalism-driven control-transformation mt
See the “eat from tree of knowledge” panel in f11 Great Canterbury Psalter row 3 col 2 Eden scene zoom close up of tree of knowledge grid cap Liberty Cap w/ L & R arms & ball fruit L & R.
Detail in tree of knowledge zoom panel defines the grid cap lib cap implied features throughout the psalter. Each contained Liberty Cap in the grid cap, has 2 fruit L & R; two arms L & R. Emphasis Left & Right arms/ fruit. ie , the Way of Zen by Alan Watts type of binary: pre/post satori; possibilism vs. eternalism.
2 States time/control models together learned both moving between the two states: ordinary-state possibilism vs. psychedelic eternalism.
ordinary-state possibilism vs. psychedelic eternalism
the “ordinary-state possibilism” & “psychedelic eternalism” experiential modes
the altered-state eternalism experiential mode aeem
the psychedelic eternalism experiential mode peem
the entheogenic eternalism experiential mode
Grid-Cap Details in Tree of Knowledge (f11): L & R Fruit
Today Is the 3rd Anniversary of Decoding Finger Shapes, Feathers, & Sticks, in Saint Martin > Entry into Jerusalem
Feb. 9, 2026
For the past couple years I have been wondering about the awkward, sore-thumb finger shapes in the two Otto images.
I created this page because I need to take another look at the finger shapes in the two Otto Gospel images, after the recent Tue., Feb. 3, 2026 breakthrough of fingers & thumb YI shapes.
That breakthrough was not one day, but a series of breakthroughs, from mid-Jan to Feb 9, 2026.
Motivation for this Page
Feb. 9, 2026
At the present site there are a couple or few or how many crops of Otto pages scattered.
Now that I am literate at reading YI hand-shapes at the “fingers, thumb, base of fingers, tips of fingers” level, need to re-inspect psalters to integrate YI hand-shape analysis:
Golden
Great Canterbury Psalter
Otto
todo: look for all 4 motifs in Otto: {mushroom}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs.
High-Context Culture vs. Low-Context Culture
Now that I have looked at “all” the art across the large Great Canterbury Psalter and across the entire the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}, it is far easier to read semi-explicit, semi-clear motifs.
When a motif is universal among the art initiation guild, it is not necessary in every instance of the art motif to be clear and definitive.
It’s possible to sloppily sketch an allusion, eg the dog blocking its ears from hearing music is clear to its audience that it alludes to the Asp myth.
The Folly of Deniers of Mushroom Imagery in Christian Art Ignoring the High-Context Meaning: The Isolate-and-Deny Strategy
You can’t prove that this one, lone, isolated mushroom-tree (Plaincourault fresco) means mushroom. It’s agreed that the other 999 mushroom-trees don’t mean mushroom, because:
You can’t prove that this one, lone, isolated mushroom-tree (pilzbaum instance 2) means mushroom.
You can’t prove that this one, lone, isolated mushroom-tree (pilzbaum instance 3) means mushroom.
…
You can’t prove that this one, lone, isolated mushroom-tree (pilzbaum instance 1,000) means mushroom.
We insist that – per Science Evidence – this isolated motif instance must be self-contained to prove that it means mushrooms, with no reliance on any higher-order evidence and arguments spanning the whole genre.
It’s like arguing about the meaning of one letter, while claiming that the Science way means ignoring the higher-order scope, of the word-level or sentence-level.
Reductionism, divide, isolate, shatter-apart the pieces of evidence. Ignore the general theory or hypothesis; attack (Hatsis strategy) attack each instance in total isolation, and make-sh*t-up an on-the-spot fabricated off-the-wall (the more off-the-wall an arg, the better to throw-off the opponents). Ad hoc, invented-on-the-spot, special pleading:
Fabricate one rule specifically to neutralize instance A; create a different new rule, to neutralize instance B; etc.
Day 3 plant 2 (Great Canterbury Psalter) has branches, so, doesn’t count, so, no mushroom imagery in Christian art. [ignore that the L and the R branch match mushroom exactly]
Day 4 plant 3 is a tree, because Huggins article is about trees. [ignore that the plant has no branches, contradicting Huggins, and he states no reason to call the 4 Day 4 plants “trees”, when they are plainly, simple basic mushrooms [other than {grid cap} = branching].
You can’t prove that this one, lone, isolated mushroom-tree eg Plaincourault fresco, means mushroom.
Panofsky via Wasson: “First, you mycologists are ignorant, stupid, uninformed, blundering dolts, who failed to consult the art authorities, who are experts on related matters of art.”
Main fallacies there: Distract ’em w/ personal attacks (ad hominem), though that’s totally irrelevant & unnecessary of a framing.
“a matter related to art” is a euphemism for “The Art Authorities are entirely ignorant about mushrooms and about trees in art, yet, since they are committed Deniers, you must submit to their entirely ignorant agenda to reject and deny mushroom-trees.”
“rightly or wrongly we are going to reject…” – The top mycologist/Affirmer, John Ramsbottom, busted the hell out of popebanker Wasson admitting that he’s a committed skeptic arguing in bad faith.
“Given that there are hundreds of mushroom-trees, therefore, this mushroom-tree cannot mean mushroom.”
Main fallacies there: Argument from silent presupposition. Begging the question.
When I entered the field of entheogen scholarship in 1998-2000, I was better than entheogen scholars, in that I was coming from Feb. 1997 having summarized the the Egodeath core theory; the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.
When Shardog Mosurinjohn — totally directionless — spotted the trendy new field of Pollan 2018 & Muraresku 2020, totally organic, astroturfed forced-bestsellers, she saw the field of entheogen scholarship as a cheap and easy way to make a name for herself.
Shardog switched focus from NONE to ENTHEOGEN SCHOLARSHIP, then became an Associate Professor.
Asp in Aberdeen Bestiary
The Culturally Understood Context for Reading the Asp-Dog Image
Search – “The Asp, or “aspido,” is a mythical creature in medieval bestiaries described as a snake that stops up its ears to avoid being enchanted by the music of snake charmers. “It presses one ear against the ground and covers the other with its tail to ignore the charming, symbolizing a refusal to hear wisdom or divine truth.”
Asp (Aberdeen Bestiary). Asp (the egoic, possibilism-premised personal control system) is trying to avoid hearing the attractive song. Posted at present sit
When detail is shown in Great Canterbury Psalter f11 > eat tree of knowledge, that establishes the pattern, that is then understood in mere shorthand implementations (small & blurry, lacking the details).
We can deduce and derive the most unambiguous standard reference implemntation of an art motif, by looking at the assorted variant instances.
Main Form {lower hand Y, then upper hand YI} vs. Variant Forms
Variants of the main, Reference, 2-hands pattern/sequence:
{lower hand Y’, then upper hand Y’I}
{lower hand Y’, then upper hand Y’I’}
Even though many instances are variants, we have to intelligently figure out the main form, vs. the creative expressive variant forms, NOT get lost in the variety.
What I hate about Wouter Hanegraaff’s call for “radical empiricism”: it sounds like saying “Avoid all generalization; get lost in varied particulars.”
If I am a perennialist doing perennialism, it is my rebel countervailing version: everyone presupposes common-core mysticism and perennialism = the positive unitive model of “mystical experience”.
Everyone is WRONG including Ken Wilber (his system flaw: no psychedelics, Popular Neo-Advaita starting 1893).
REAL, TRUE common-core mysticism and perennialism is: mental model transformation from possibilism to eternalism, producing 2POV.
Not the positive unitive model of “mystical experience”.
“Reality is not at a general level; reality is at the level of buzzing confusion of unique senseless details.”
Good theory = good generalization, like Maxwell’s equations of electromagnetism.
“In anthropology, high-context and low-context cultures are ends of a continuum of how explicit the messages exchanged in a culture are and how important the context is in communication.
“The distinction between cultures with high and low contexts is intended to draw attention to variations in both spoken and non-spoken forms of communication.[1]
“The continuum pictures how people communicate with others through their range of communication abilities: utilizing gestures, relations, body language, verbal messages, or non-verbal messages.[2]
“High-” and “low-” context cultures typically refer to language groups, nationalities, or regional communities.
“However, the concept may also apply to corporations, professions, and other cultural groups, as well as to settings such as online and offline communication.[3]
“High-context cultures often exhibit less-direct verbal and nonverbal communication, utilizing small communication gestures and reading more meaning into these less-direct messages.[4]
“Low-context cultures do the opposite; direct verbal communication is needed to properly understand a message being communicated and relies heavily on explicit verbal skills.[5]
“The model of high-context and low-context cultures offers a popular framework in intercultural communication studies but has been criticized as lacking empirical validation.[6]”
Discovered a Major, Refined, Developed, Psychedelic Christian Religion
The simplest possible Religion, Focused on possibilism vs. eternalism (branching imagery).
Psychedelic eternalism alternating with ordinary-state possibilism experience.
This page was started based on a [txt msg to AM 3:29 p.m. Feb. 8, 2026].
Motivation of this Article
I discovered among mainstream artists guild, across eras, initiation into altered-state motifs of possibilism vs. eternalism.
The classic artists’ guild has a lockbox of psilocybin mushrooms.
As depicted in f134 Great Canterbury Psalter, the art guild teaches by using art, the motifs best techniques to depict the experience of alternating experiential modes:
experiential mode: ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control
experiential mode: altered-state eternalism with dependent control
A pure cognitive phenomenology approach.
Use a pure Cognitive Phenomenology approach.
Reject a Neuroscience approach.
Reject an Epistemology approach.
Reject an Ontology approach.
Reject a Metaphysics approach.
Discovered the Medieval Mainstream “branching vs. non-branching” Religion
especially,
The Mushroom-Based Art Form of the Medieval Non-Branching Religion
The mushroom state is the source of that religion. Then build institution on mushrooms. Then deny and forget mushroom.
A free-floating baseless instit DENATURED lost touch w/ mushroom origin.
The Explicitly, Centrally Mushroom-Based Art Form of the Medieval Non-Branching Religion
The mushroom-tree version of the religion of non-branching, is the peak, best, Reference version.
I discovered the medieval mainstream “branching vs. non-branching” religion, including its sub-form, mushroom based imagery.
The mushroom based version of medieval non-branching religion, is the authentic version of the and is the source of the non-branching religion.
First, there was the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees}, packaging the non-branching religion. Then, the bad guys removed the mushrooms, leaving free floating non-branching religion sans mushroom inspiration (1400-1687)
1687 CoperNewton – forget the 4 motifs entirely, not only forgot the mushroom motif long ago 1400, forgot the other 3 motifs by 1687: the {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs.
The Purpose of Mushroom-Tree Art Is to Communicate, Teach, Instruct, Report, Explain, Advise, Prepare, Warn, and Guide
Mushroom-tree art Was for Teaching Art Guild Initiates
The best artists depict a standard shared art-guild visual lexicon vocabulary of {mushroom}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs. Standard and shared, but flexible, as a visual langusage, opposite Panofsky robot copying prototypes with no comprehensino or intention or expression by the artist.
Authoritarian tone of Panofsky re: taboo topic, unlike any other art topic.
Must see artists as robots – no intentionality. Hirling.
A slave-craftsman idiot robot artist – but only re: this taboo Special Topic of mushroom imagery in Christian art.
This art has an instructional, communication Role Built-in, Designed to Clearly Teach and Communicate and Reveal mental model transformation from possibilism to eternalism
moving from ordinary-state possibilism to altered-state eternalism mopae
moving from ordinary-state possibilism to psychedelic eternalism moppe
The Simplest Theory Is the Main Theory to Trace in the Mythic Evidence Base
Altered-state non-branching vs. ordinary-state branching; I vs. Y; {tree} vs. block-universe worldline {snake} in {rock}
the simplest theory:
the maximal simplest entheogen theory of religion and culture
to discover the religion of psychedelic branching vs. non-branching , in mainstream Christian history:
ignore the noise,
trace that signal:
the psychedelc non-branching state, snake worldline in rock block universe
harmonized with
the ordinary-state branching experience, tree , king steering in a tree
from {king steering in tree} through {mixed wine at banquet} to {snake frozen in rock}
the mainstream mushroom-tree religion reached a developed, refined form
the religion was taught by guild artists lockbox shown in the images initiation education in combining these motifs
the mushroom-tree religion in mainstream Christian art
was a tech/ technology/ technique
using these motifs
u must b creative, not parrot the basic shapes motifs
be unpredictable in ur visual poetry of visual analogy motifs
expressing the mushroom-tree religion
a binary, harmony,
integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking across two states
hand displayed:
Y fingers AND I thumb contrasted, but joined, to usefully hold things, such as the king’s scepter
the mushroom-tree religion motifs ran across greco roman ane jewish christian
throughout christendom
a bestiary is not a religious book, doesnt count, says Hatsis
, so, no mushroom imagery in Christian art
1st pic: Christ.
a bestiary painted by initiated guild lockbox students of the mushroom-tree religion
and integrating 4 motifs depicting altered-state
mushroom artist fanatics showing us their mainstream medieval religion art technology
The type of mysticism that matters is simply 2-state possibilism vs. eternalism per the Egodeath theory, so simply look at fingers branching vs thumb non-branching, while studying mushrooms.
The Mushroom-Tree Art Religion of Non-Branching, 2-level, dependent control
All is ultimately depicted in terms of branching.
the mushroom-tree art religion
Entry into Jerusalem (Otto Gospel)
Entry into Jerusalem: Right Tree (Otto Gospel)
Entry into Jerusalem: Right Tree Closeup of Coil to Self Visually Cut the {cut right branch} (Otto Gospel)
[11:04 p.m. Feb. 8, 2026] went to hi res lib and saw self cut. possibly mentioned before; search site.
Otto Entry Left Tree Left and Right Fruit Arms Balls of Gnosis
See eat tree of knowledge f11 Great Canterbury Psalter row 3 col 2 Eden scene zoom close up of tree of knowledge grid cap Liberty Cap w/ L & R arms & ball fruit L & R.
Detail in tree of knowledge zoom panel defines the grid cap lib cap implied features throughout the psalter. Each contained Liberty Cap in the grid cap, has 2 fruit L & R; two arms L & R. Emphasis Left & Right arms/ fruit. ie , the Way of Zen by Alan Watts type of binary: pre/post satori; possibilism vs. eternalism.
2 States time/control models together learned both moving between the two states: ordinary-state possibilism vs. psychedelic eternalism.
ordinary-state possibilism vs. psychedelic eternalism
the “ordinary-state possibilism” & “psychedelic eternalism” experiential modes
the altered-state eternalism experiential mode aeem
rightmost guys: classic hand pair: Y’ + YI. Y’, in that the wrist is visually cut.
left ppl: IY hand 3x.
Christ Reigns Kosmokrator, Full Image (Otto Gospel)
Titles of This Article
The Mushroom-Tree Art Religion in the Mainstream Medieval Art World: Psychedelic Non-Branching & Ordinary-State Branching Possibilities
The Mushroom-Tree Religion in the Mainstream Medieval Art World: Psychedelic Non-Branching & Ordinary-State Branching Possibilities
The Mushroom-Tree Religion in the Mainstream Medieval Art World: Contrasting Psychedelic Non-Branching (with Dependent Control) & Ordinary-State Experience of Branching Possibilities
The Mushroom-Tree Religion in the Mainstream Medieval Art World: 2-State, Psychedelic Non-Branching with 2-Level, Dependent Control
The Mainstream Medieval Religion of Mushroom-Trees and Non-Branching
The Religion of Mushroom-Trees
The Mushroom-Tree Religion in Medieval Art
The Mushroom-Tree Art Mystery Religion
The Psychedelic Guild of Artists with Psilocybin Lockbox Shown
Artist guide psilocybin wine guild initiations tradition in Western art guild lockbox psilocybin mushroom mixed wine artists education in integrating altered-state motifs:
ordinary-state possibilism vs. altered-state eternalism. non-branching snake in rock block-universe eternalism
The Mainstream Medieval Mushroom-Tree Religion: 2-State Psychedelic Non-Branching with 2-Level, Dependent Control
The Medieval Mushroom-Tree Religion in Mainstream Art
The Mushroom-Tree Religion in Mainstream Medieval Art
Including Integrated {mushroom}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs
Visual Techniques to Depict and Teach and Express Moving between Ordinary-state Possibilism and Altered-state Eternalism, Left foot in possibilism world, right foot in eternalism world
Left thumb, a Traitor (the Cross-Over Effect), identifies with Right Arm
Eternalism-Thinking
the Eternalism Experiential Mode & Experiential Mental Model
On a local scale, the thumb of L hand = the R limb = non-branching.
big scale: R arm / R leg = non-branching . L = branching; possibilism. incl L thumb.
zoomed local scale: L thumb = non-branching eternalism. also by token, R hand’s Leftmost component is “bad” , is possibilism branching. relatively, on local scope.
IY Hand Rule Doctrine of Art Religion Guild Psilocybin Lockbox Club
Spazzout like me with Sharborg (and the predictable copycats invading the pop trendy field why) 🙄🧊
A cheap-shot POS pos “art history debunker” article by Ronald Huggins who invades entheogen scholarship from the “anything-but-drugs academia” angle,
todo: re-read for real his Dancing Man article
his article good for wrong reasons
he throws down the Great Canterbury Psalter Day 3 gauntlet in 2024 i already won
that i solved by feb 9 2023:
explain branching on mushroom-trees
done already.
Your terms are acceptable.
Huggins Calls Day 4’s Four Exact, Branchless Mushrooms “Trees”, without Explaining Why
todo: con’t from where?
Fact check: DEBUNKED: In fact, Day 4 panel has 4 mushrooms, which Huggins calls “trees” for no reason, though they have NO branching.
Plant 1 & 2’s grid caps are counted as “branching”, but Panofsky or later Huggins wouldn’t know that {grid cap} has been established/ communicated by the artist as equivalent to branching.
Huggins and I agree and seize upon Letter 2 juicy branch ramif arg:
argument from passivity-framing: the art world came to accept mushroom shapes accidentally YET “EMPHATICALLY” writes Panofsky,
Studerus in 11-Factors questionnaire concoction process, invents the factor, Shadow Factor 13
Shadow Factor 13 Includes {shadow dragon monster}:
Dittrich’s OAV94 questionnaire’s “Item 54: I was afraid to lose my self-control.”
Left behind in only the top level Unpl Dim, b/c that effect was too broad to fit in their terrible categ factors:
ANX – Dread, feare
ICC – Impaired Control and Cognition
Stud sez where to put Item 54: I was afraid to lose my self-control.?
it strongly fits both ANX and ICC factors.
Better reject from our nice factors,
hide it with 8 fx only in the top-level Unpl Dim, not in any lower level Factor we badly concocted
Studerus article but do they even name their POS questionnaire
11-Factors (questionnaire that has no name) just hid, in Shadow Factor 13, 8 of 21 items from OAV Angst/Dread DED dimension, including Item 54: I was afraid to lose my self-control. Magic: trashcan 18 of 21 Angst/Dread effects, keep lamest 3; add ton of overemph of Grief Factor $$$$ counseling, F all this psychedelic-specific Unpl Dimension,
Broad dread of loss of control can’t fit ANX factor nor –
“have cross-loading, so we dropped the items, for that reason or some other reason”
The FOUNDATION OF SCIENCE = fog. Marketing dept is happy w result. Popular-shaped science; popular-driven science driven by wishful thinking, created bad 11-Factors questionnaire, which spawned new monster worse, the Challenging Experience Questionnaire (CEQ).
Great: OAV94 (better than 5D-ASC)
Meh: 11 Factors’ “update and improvement” of OAV” ie add confusion and create a monster, {shadow dragon monster}, Shadow Factor 13. THEY PUT THEIR REJECT ACADEMICS ON THE “CREATE UNPLEASANT EFFECTS FACTOR CATEGS” JOB: TERRIBLE FACOTRS RESULTED. See my ecq ecq the Challenging Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) ecq
the Eternalism and Control Questionnaire (ECQ) (Cybermonk 2022) ecq
The Forgot Plot of the 4 Art Motifs
500 BC – greeks invent everything: {mushroom}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs
900-1300 AD – heyday of the mushroom-tree religion , max explicit use of mushroom imagery and full use of the other 3 motifs
1400 AD – forget mushroom imagery, tiny now.
1687 – forget all 4 motifs, rejected as part of Myth, Superstition, Magic, Esotericism. Prot’m & nascent Science in 1687 rejected baby bath water psilocybin thrown away, 4 art motifs thrown away, forgotten, hardly findable anymore 1687-1975.
1975: Adolph Dittrich APZ questionnaire became 1985 OAV+2 dumb dims v2 was main, best, OAV 94, joined w/ the stupid dumb dims to form pointless 5D-ASC which then the OAV parts via 11-Factors (invents two, poor, stupid negative lower level Factors within Unpleaseant Dimension which is = OAV94’s Angst Dread DED dimension of 21 items, 18 destinted for the the Challenging Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) garbage can (disincluded there). Already 11-F set up in 2nd round, hid 8 of 21 effects in Shadow Factor 13. which 8? the 8 that so strongly spanned both of Studerus Stupidus malformed 2 factors. Ugly clumsy arbitrary process.
i discovered the mainstream Christian religion,
possibilism vs. eternalism
branching vs. non-branching
{mushroom}, {branching}, {handedness}, and {stability} motifs. 900-1300 approx;
non mushroom motifs lasted broader duration era than mushroom-tree heyday of psychedelic eternalism religion in Christianity mainstream.
end & reject & forget all 4 motifs in 1687; Newton + Copernicus modern era start
after mulling copernicus 177 years, see an overnight revolution,
in 1510, Cope private circulated his sun centric cosmos model
my antique astral ascent mysticism is better
The mystic truth: the cosmos revolves around the earth.
Panofsky the Top Anything-But-Drugs Art Historian
The term “art world” is in the title of this page, as a retort to smug con-artist popebanker Aasson & his dumb sidekick Panofsky, the top anything-but-drugs art historian.
von Trimberg: {stand on right foot/ left foot lifted}
phallic garment {mushroom hem} = psychedelic state like {billow cloth}
{stand on right foot/ left foot lifted} = use & experience eternalism-thinking not possibilism-thinking [i don’t like ‘thinking’]
The eternalism experiential mode not the possibilism experiential mode
R hand 3 fingers
R hand Index finger = splayed = I = thumb = eternalism worldline snake in block-universe rock, not a tree branching / possibilism experiential mode.
recent week ago discovery, now p.m. Feb. 8, 2026 – lower hand holds mushroom sure John Rush, but, displays Y’ lower hand, per standard progression motif:
Y or Y’ lower hand + IY upper hand via thumb = I or splayed Index = the I shape, snake; worldline in block-universe rock.
{no L or R thumb} – instead, upper hand signals IY, via Index finger. GIVEN THAT THIS IS NOT A STANDALONE IMAGE; it’s in the LANGUAGE shared by the genre.
You have to see every instance, to judge what the normal pattern is, vs. expressive variants.
Only then are you literate, to read the mushroom-tree genre.
read the mushroom-tree genre rmtg
the mushroom-tree genre mtg
Y Morphology Under Dancing Man’s Tree Cap
Right Branch Cross-Behind; Visually {cut right branch}
ALWAYS analyze at micro scope and macro scope, zoom all the way in like fine details layer in Eustace window artists continue to apply YI to all scales scopes, overlapping.
Underneath the tree cap, is a green-branch cross-under/ cross-behind, visually {cut right branch}.
{right branch cross-behind} = R branch is visually cut, prior to the upper left split minor split branching on L side of cap.
R = not branching.
R side of a mushroom-tree standardly mapped to eternalism
L side of a mushroom-tree standardly mapped to possibilism beware, OFTEN not {handedness} involved – 10% OF THE TIME, HANDEDNESS APPLIES – TRICKY! USE GOOD JUDGMENT AND INTENSIVE FAMILIARITY W/ THE GENRE.
the mushroom-tree artists turn {handedness} on and off to earn creativity points.
The artists can’t be restricted to static parrot patterns (“L always = possibilism”) that shackle you by Panofsky on this taboo topic only.
The Sheer Treachery of {handedness}: Simultaneously Used and Discarded
The important thing is motif {one foot 5 toes, one foot 2 toes) – don’t care whether L or R has the 2 or 5 toes.
Standard side angle feet view positioning, it is filled with meaning.
5 toes = possibilism-thinking 2 toes = eternalism-thinking = non-branching. blessing fingers: 2 fingers together = non-branching. side of foot, same.
I’m constantly adjusting and qualifying my reading of the art motifs.
10:00 p.m. Feb. 8, 2026
on right: asleep = splay fingers = no thumb = possibilism = branching = left arm = left fingers = left face
so, this image strictly follows handedness? NO.
guy on left Jonah, favors L over R; equaetes L w/ good = eternalism-thinking. or w/ integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking.
do not say static rules “the R foot is good and shows 2 toes, the L foot is bad and shows 5 toes”. yes the starting rule is that, but, can instantly reverse as on left side of “Jonah gourd” Golden.
right hand = ignorant branching thinking ; l hand = enlightened mature, integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking = affirming Y & I; via L middle finger = I = non-branching = eternalism; harmonized with:
L pinkie & ring represent branching, negative by hiding finger tips.
Sage at Fiery Hellmouth
L hand: Y’, R hand: IY (index splayed). Summary: a standard Y’ to IY progression.
From branching possibility thinking, to branching and non-branching integrated across the psilocybin and ordinary experiential states.
Wasson/ Panofsky/ Huggins talk in high baloney tones,
“the art world came to accept the degradation of umbrella pine into mushroom intense shapes”
Let Panofsky speak, without Gordon . . . .🔍🧐🤔🤬 Aasson censoring Panofsky in SOMA on p. 180:
I enclose two [art] specimens: hardening of the pine into a mushroom-like shape … and … emphatic schematization of the mushroom-like crown.
the medieval artists … worked from … prototypes which in the course of repeated copying* became quite unrecognizable*. – Letter 1, Panofsky to Wasson
The only possibility I should be prepared to admit is that, once the transformation had taken place and was generally accepted in art, some especially ignorant craftsman may have misu[n]derstood the finished product, viz., the “Pilzbaum,” as a real mushroom.
But even that is not very probable because even the most mushroom-like specimens show some traces of ramification; if the artists had labored under the delusion that the model before him was meant to be a mushroom rather than a schematized tree he would have omitted the branches altogether.
In addition, religious mediaeval art at least had little reason to think of mushrooms at all.
– Letter 2, Panofsky to Wasson
*”repeated copying” — sloppy, bad artists, on this special topic. For this topic only, we must think of artists as stupid as a rock following garbled templates that Panofsky LIES and says this falsehood he confabulated, purpose-built: “artists didn’t work from nature, but from corrupted prototypes”.
Sounds like made-up bullsh*t purpose-built, special pleading.
Panofsky is full of BS.
Even if prototypes were used, they were not used in the dumb robot fashion that Panofsky tries to paint.
*”Unrecognizable” — as umbrella pine, since mushroom-trees look recognizably “emphatic mushroom-like shape”.
4:26 p.m. Feb. 8, 2026 Plant 1 of Day 3 is like thumb; non branching ; Plant 2 is like fingers; branching (grid cap of about 5-6 Liberty Caps)
All Liberty Caps in Great Canterbury Psalter are depicted as having 2 arms and 2 fruits, through this mechanism: per the detail zoom-in that’s provided in 2 panels down from Day 3
Eat from tree of knowledge is given pride of place, as the most zoomed in mushroom-tree is eat from tree of knowledge,
tree of knowledge is below Day 3 and is highly isomorphic w/ Day 3 Plant 2 cap is zoomed in in 2 panels down:
The “eat tree of knowledge” cap is zoomed; its details apply to Day 3 Plant 2 and all Liberty Cap mushroom-trees caps in the book.
I intensively YI-decoded this {eat tree of knowledge} mushroom-tree: row 3 col 3.
The master mushroom-tree in the book, sets the patterns in blurry small instances.
With flexibility, creativity, not rigid parrot forms like Panofsky wants us to fantasize but only for this taboo special topic requiring abnormal views about art/ artists and intentionality.
Must factor-in the artists guild that’s on a mushroom mission associating mushroom = non-branching eternalism experiential mode; vs. ordinary-state = branching possibilism experiential mode; then integrate across both modes, the mental model or pair of mental models like 2POV – two different points of view, two different mental models.
A long tradition before the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees} (which did not invent the motifs, but refined and developed them), and a long trad after, dying in 1687 CoperNewton Modern revolution ditched the artists guild.
The 4 motifs were rejected, forgotten, no longer taught in the The Mushroom-Tree Art Mystery Religion.
Orthodox {rock} in Spain Images in Great Canterbury Psalter
Finally organized the Spain images and Great Canterbury Psalter 3 gallery pages. Lots of Orthodox {rock} imagery at the end. Snakes are scarce, serpents sometimes, in Great Canterbury Psalter. Want exist there:
from {king steering in tree} through {mixed wine at banquet} to {snake frozen in rock}
king, ruler, control agent
tree, hydra – yes dud mushroom-trees; vine-leaf trees, or other YI plants.
mixed wine – lots of eat & drink. wine presses at end.
upsidedown king (steering)
mixed wine
banquet
snake – rare. serpent semi frequent in this book.
rock – only at end, Spain images. No {rock} motif in Eadwine vocab lexicon.
I am now formally registering this idea that I been getting clearer on the past week:
[10:15 a.m. Feb. 8, 2026]: often; typically:
{fingers} = [ie, touch] 4-5 pages that are closed; or closed scroll (mentioned during past year & earlier) (multiple winds).
{thumb} = [ie, touches] the open book page or open scroll.
Exceptions as always, make this obvious pattern not so obvious.
You must CONFIDENTLY JUDGE — forcefully apply the paradigm-force, the diamond hammer of interpretation — which instances are the normal, master pattern, vs. deviant variants of the normal standard Reference pattern.
A successful theorist must commit to assuming the paradigm:
The simplest possible contrast is the most central message, most important.
Weed out the noise from the signal, on that principle of selection among the mytheme data base. MUST have some such JUSTIFIED selection criterion.
Culminating in affirming the combination (in/across the TWO EXPERIENTIAL MODES) of integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking/ mental model.
Y
I “Get rid of possibilism-thinking!” “Must repudiate!” That’s mistaken; the mind/ experiencing, across the two modes, doesn’t work that way. King Theseus abandoned his wife Ariadne; but Dionysus, correctly, wedded Ariadne instead. Facts of the matter: It is rumored that king Theseus piously abandoned his wife Ariadne so that the god Dionysus could marry her.
YI Integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking; experiential dual-modes.
The most relevant to religious experience is psychedelic experiencing of block-universe eternalism.
ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control vs. altered-state eternalism with dependent control
Crop by Michael Hoffman, 11:29 p.m. Feb. 7, 2026
At 3am, tried to look up in Golden psalter Entry into Jerusalem & in Eustace window at Chartres Cathedral window.
Was able to now check Golden & Eustace at 7:40 a.m. Feb. 8, 2026.
Got confirmation now at 7:45 a.m. Feb. 8, 2026.
It IS a motif across the medieval art genre of {mushroom-trees} – in the the mushroom-tree religion that i discovered within mainstream Christianity – to show all toes (branching) of L foot but only show inner side of R foot big toe and a HINT of other toes ie shows TWO toes vs. FIVE toes.
Panofsky, the top art historian in the anything-but-drugs academia agenda commitment:
“There are TOO MANY mushroom-trees (too mainstream) for the Plaincourault fresco to mean mushrooms.”
Argument from Silent Prejudice and Presumably Shared Presupposition
Any anything-but-drugs academic who attacks maximal entheogen theory of religion is an ignoramus shouting their ignorance when they fail to cite all of:
If you don’t cite all of those, you have NO CREDIBILITY and have FAILED to read the BASIC data in the field you PRESUME to enter, Andy Letcher in Shroom, 2006 and his personal rebuttal to me specifically at his site, “you can’t show: 1); 2); 3); or 4).”
I proved Letcher’s challenge to me, in Nov. 2020 using f134 Great Canterbury Psalter, I proved his “unprovable” points 1-4 AND also point 5, beyond that:
Provable depictions of psychedelic eternalism PEAK religious experience from deliberate ingesting id’able psilocybin mushrooms.
. . . .🔍🧐🤔
It’s an argument from silent prejudice and presupposition:
Given that everyone knows OF COURSE there are not hundreds of mushroom-trees meaning mushrooms, in Christianity, we can “RULE OUT” [Huggins’ magic words] that indefensible conjecture, silently, without even having to state it, in the (censored) condensed (two!) letterS to Gordon Aasson 1952.
“The Plaincourault fresco is only one example — and, since the style is very provincial, a particularly deceptive one — of a conventionalized tree type, prevalent in Romanesque and Early Gothic art, which art historians actually refer to as “mushroom tree” or, in German writing, Pilzbaum.
“It comes about by the gradual schematization of the impressionistically rendered Italian pine tree in Roman and Early Christian painting, and there are hundreds of instances exemplifying this development – unknown, of course, to mycologists [irrelevant distraction by personal-insult tactic].
SENTENCE 1.6 (LITTLE BOOK BY BRINCKMANN)
“If you are interested, I recommend a little book by A. E. Brinckmann, Die Baumdarstellung im Mittelalter (or something like it), where the process is described in detail.”
See Gordon . . . .🔍🧐🤔🤬 Aasson top of p. 180, SOMA, at: . . . . for the citation – or, where the citation WOULD have been.
SENTENCE 1.7 (ENCLOSE SPECIMENS PINE INTO MUSHROOM)
“Just to show what I mean, I enclose two specimens [CENSORED BY ASSON]: a miniature of ca. 990 which shows the inception of the process, viz., the gradual hardening of the pine into a mushroom-like shape, and a glass painting of the thirteenth century, that is to say about a century later than your fresco, which shows an even more emphatic schematization of the mushroom-like crown.”
There are numerous, sufficient instances in Great Canterbury Psalter eg f107 Christ’s toes & angel’s toes:
gotta go church – another sermon today on Block-Universe Mysticism by church founder reading Alan Moore?
we aint #1 for nothin
The Stupidometer, the Embarrassometer Test
The dumber I Feel about So Long Failing to Recognize the motif of fingers vs thumb = possibilism vs. eternalism, the more basic & profound the discovery.
so obvious this mapping, utility of hand’s opposition contrast branching fingers vs non-branching thumb
but many instances in art do NOT always carry this meaning, that makes it tricky to recog the main pattern idea: confusing variants & exceptions complicate the pattern recognition provability
common-core mysticism and perennialism would be corect IF not focused on the “positive unitive” model of “mystical experience” — Popular-driven Neo-Advaita made-up, substitute shiite in the ordinary-state.
TRUE common-core mysticism and perennialism is based on the Egodeath theory instead, ie possibilism vs. eternalism: the SIMPLEST, 2-state explanatory model:
ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control
vs
psychedelic eternalism with dependent control
Letcher Site Map
made a Letcher section in site map
The Letcher-Panofsky Intelligence Test
added to letcher iq test page:
day 3 plant 1&2 – “tres, not mushrooms, because they have branches” – that exactly match mushrooms.
day 4 plant 3 – Huggins calls these simple mushrooms “trees” for no reason – they have no branches, contradicting him.
tree or mushroom?
per anything-but-drugs academia agenda – mushroom-trees always mean tree, never mushroom, because too many mushrooms
see the logic (declaration of commitment) in the Conclusion Declaration section of:
It is now possible to follow Panofsky and declare a rule: just ignore mushroom elements, because no one can explain the branching/ branches.
unless:
The type of mysticism that matters is simply 2-state possibilism vs. eternalism per the Egodeath theory, so simply look at fingers branching vs thumb non-branching, while studying mushrooms.
Crop by Michael Hoffman, Jan. 22, 2026, fullscreen
Interesting contrast between how extremely simple the Y and I hand-based shapes are, yet, so profound in depicting two mental models / experiential modes, and a 3rd, combined compound mental model.
That contrast between ultra basic forms (fingers vs. thumb) vs. two complex world models, is a sign of profundity and power.
I am impressed with the highly complex two world models that Medieval artists held.
The mushroom-tree artists elegantly played with depicting the two mental models, through a method so natural and simple, it is invisible and imperceptible: obvious or subtle branching and non-branching via fingers & thumb.
eternalism [“This means, I expect I have gotten rid of possibilism-thinking” – WRONG!]
integrated possibilism/eternalism
A pair of hands or even a single hand, can readily represent two state-specific experiential modes or mental models.
Around 2011-2013, I was working on a book cover for the Egodeath theory, as 4 quadrants (left half: egoic: king above, tree below; right half: snake above rock).
Nov. 2013 I discovered that that can collapse to two contrasting images: tree vs. snake.
Now this breakthrough week around Jan. 30, 2026 – Feb 6, 2026, upon discovering the Jewish Hat picture, von Trimberg, it struck me…
That was not my first foray into analyzing finger shapes. I’ve been working on this “overnight breakthrough” for 3 years: Feb. 9, 2023 – Feb. 6, 2026.
On Feb. 9, 2023, I wrote Dr. Jerry Brown about the finger shapes in Saint Martin Church Entry into Jerusalem, and the sticks and feathers shapes.
Branching feathers (Y) held along with non-branching sticks (I).
Jesus’ L hand fingers fully splayed along with R hand Index and Middle fingers pressed together, opposite of splaying.
Around maybe late 2025, I did a couple passes of inspecting all the fingers, thumbs in Great Canterbury Psalter. Supposing that was two passes, let’s say Nov. 2025 I did a second sweep, and the outstanding realization and problem (puzzle) was:
Often a person displays one thumb and hides the other thumb – but sometimes L, sometimmes R thumb. My current hypoth Feb. 6, 2026 is that L vs R is not guiding here, but rahter, sweeping from lower to upper.
initially stand on left foot. the image of {stand on right foot} already implies that PREVIOUSLY, you were stand on left foot. stand on left foot is what to analyze ground up.
MUST expand “fingers”, because TYPICALLY you MUST analyze at the exteme level of half-finger. lower pinkie (base, tip).
Simpler = Better; Interweave Direct & Analogy: Y {fingers} branching possibilities; I {thumb} non-branching eternity
That wording contains:
Y vs. I
{fingers} vs. {thumb}
branching vs. non-branching
possibilism vs. eternalism
{tree} vs. {snake}
Y shape
{fingers}
branching
possibilities / possibilism
re: the technical, non-daily lang, jargon: “possibilism[??] vs. eternalism[??]”
It’s not too bad to include technical non-daily lexicon, IF accompany by relatable analogies or semi-tech terms.
I shape (clearly explicitly contrasted vs. Y shape)
{thumb}
non-branching
eternity / eternalism
to express in terms of binaries, to analysze where these terms fit on the spectrum from direct to analogy terms:
Y vs. I
{fingers} vs. {thumb}
branching vs. non-branching
possibilism vs. eternalism
{tree} vs. {snake}
keyboard shortcuts/ key concepts kskc
Y vs. I yvi
{fingers} vs. {thumb} fvt
branching vs. non-branching bvn
possibilism vs. eternalism pve – already def’d.
{tree} vs. {snake} tvs
The Mushroom-Tree Artists Start with the Basic Idea: Possibilism vs. Eternalism, Depicted by Y & I Finger-Shapes, Then Creatively Elaborate Variants
That’s the game they are playing.
The first important elaboration, is, you do not the mind does not toggle between
entirely exclusively using possibilism-thinking
entirely exclusively using eternalism-thinking
more like:
possibilism-thinking with no eternalism-thinking
possibilism-thinking with some eternalism-thinking [during peak]
possibilism-thinking with some eternalism-thinking [forever after, after the series of 10 initiation sessions]
ie:
possibilism-thinking
eternalism-thinking
integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking
Or in terms of experiencing that drives the mental model thus drives thinking:
the possibilism experiential mode
the eternalism experiential mode
the integrated possibilism/ eternalism experiential mode
The hallmark misunderstanding during phase 2 is “I discovered eternalism-thinking, this means I should “get rid of” possibilism-thinking”. Wrong.
You should INTEGRATE and harmonize the two mental models from the two …. that are produced by the two experiential states:
possibilism experiencing [psmexp]
eternalism experiencing [etmexp]
integrated possibilism/ eternalism experiencing
I like “mental model” rather than “thinking”
“mental model” can accommodate experiencing. “thinking” can’t accommodate experiencing.
experiential model
I like words/terms:
experiencing [to shut out armchair metaphysics, ontology, epistemology]
need keyboard shortcut for evil trio:
Cognitive Phenomenology, Not armchair metaphysics, ontology, epistemology
Cognitive Phenomenology, Not Metaphysics, Ontology, Epistemology
Phenomenology, Not Metaphysics, Ontology, or Epistemology
The basic idea of YI finger shapes mapped to possibilism & eternalism, quickly rasises Q of what twists to communicate more than the bare basic idea?
A progression/series.
{fingers} = possibilism {thumb} = eternalism
What other formulas are comparable in the Egodeath theory?
1986 era:
egoic thinking transcendent thinking
not satori satori
freewill determinism
possibilism eternalism – ie, get rid of possibilism-thinking” – that error lasted from ~1994 to April-Aug 2025; in 1994, during cat / lie on bed / yawn / peak state: I observed that, since Jan 1988 to 1994, I expected to “get rid of freewill thinking”, yet I observed that I had continued to use freewill thinking. I misunderstood; I wrongly expected that satori-thinking means “get rid of” / “no longer have” ordinary thinking. Taht si NO That is NOT how the mind works.
The mind does NOT — in the main — “get rid of” youthful developmental structure (Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control).
Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control why does p m m expand so verbose?
keyboard shortcut
Possibilism mental model of time, self, and control pmmtsc
But “time, self, and control” lacks “possibility branching”.
That’s not a model of “time” unless per Snodfart’s Jr. Academy’s ency phil, you say “models of time = possibilism & eternalism”.
Then yes, a “model of time” is either possibilism or eternalism. eternalism is “a model of time, …..”
As branching (or, non-branching). branching model of time.
the possibility-branching model of time
the the possibility-non-branching model of time
the possibility-non-branching model of time pnbmot
“At house church 👼🏡⛪️ Aug. 24, 2025, a church founder gave a sermon on Alan Moore’s comics novels about:
psychedelic block-universe eternalism (non-branching snake worldline embedded in rock block universe)
Psychedelic Block-Universe Eternalism: Non-Branching Snake Worldline Embedded in Rock Block Universe
Analyze: why is that wording so good, clear, effective? Elements:
The wording ONLY addresses the new state, not the old state (implies we nuke / get rid of the first, old state / mental model – “dangerous” / misleading)
Different strategies for communicating the model(s):
Only describe the new state/ mental model.
Contrast the old vs new mental model/ experiential state.
Contrast old, new, then INTEGRATE/ harmonize.
Wiser, mature artists emphasize the harmonizing.
Foolish artists emphasize only the new: {stand on right foot}!
“We move from WRONG to RIGHT, from EVIL FOOLISH ERROR TO NUKE, to GOOD WISE TRUTH TO ADHERE EXCLUSIVELY TO.”
Foolish newly enlightened artists, have oversimple, brittle expectations:
“Now we will use eternalism-thinking; will no longer use dirty, polluted, possibilism-thinking.”
“Abraham Must Get Rid of Isaac”
“King Pentheus Must Abandon & Repudiate Ariadne”
That’s a wrong attitude and misunderstanding of how the mind works/ transforms.
Instead, “embrace and include” possibilism per Ken Wilber – since 24×7 including trip, always are {stand on left foot}.
Even though images show {stand on left foot} -> {stand on right foot}, it’s way more like,
First, {stand on left foot}, then, {stand on left foot & right foot}.
I imagine RL pushing back, “There is a wealth of interps of hand shapes. Why fixate on your YI theory that NONE of the published interps say?”
Ans: They overshoot. My theory is not inferior for being butt-simple; my theory is SUPERIOR b/c it is infinitely SIMPLER than their strained interps.
Them, in 2002: “Snake means shed skin & toxin high.”
Me, in 2002: “Snake means non-branching means block-universe determinism.”
Me in 2026: “Snake means worldline [embedded] in block-universe eternalism.”
Interweave Analogy, Direct Daily Language, and Direct Tech Language
analogy: snake
direct daily language: life path from birth to death
direct technical language: worldline
now can omit “direct”:
Interweave Analogy, Daily Language, and Tech Language
analogy: snake
daily language: life path from birth to death
technical language: worldline
snake-shaped worldline frozen in the rock block universe eternalism
Hands, Fingers, Thumbs Are Able to Express and Articulate the 3-Level Model: Lower Fingers = Basic Possibilism; Lower Thumb = Basic Eternalism; Higher Fingers & Thumb = Integrated Possibilism/ Eternalism
Guy on Right = a basic standard pattern, that’s elaborated freeform in the Left guys:
Crop and annotations by Michael Hoffman, Feb. 6, 2026
todo next: do another pass of Great Canterbury Psalter images looking for:
lower hand lacks thumb
upper hand has thumb
That’s my Science Prediction to test and disconfirm, at which point (ignoring the actual history of how Science actually has worked) I entirely, immediately discard the Egodeath theory, because it failed and was disconfirmed aka BEEN DEBUNKED!
Same as Mosurinjohn & Ascough point out that because we don’t have the chemical evidence that their side of the debate carefully washed away to get rid of the “dirt”, in the Eleusis vessels, this means “There is no evidence” “of Joe Rogan’s Pop speculations [also agreed to by Muraresku, and also Ruck]”, and that’s the same as,
“There were no psychedelics in Western religious history”
And regardless of whether there were or not, the important thing – Mosurinjohn & Ascough dictate, to the very creators of the field that Sharday has entered with her fists flailing – is:
We must not try to find [more] evidence for psychedelics in Western religious history, because that effort is “religious fundamentalism” and is “colonialist violence”.
The Egodeath Theory, World’s Headquarters Firmly Committed to Religious Fundamentalism and Colonialist Violence (aka Finding Psychedelics in Western Religious History, per Sharborg)
Leaving Indigenous Shams in the Dust, and Disrespecting the Anything-But-Drugs Academia Agenda Commitment Propaganda
See the red, bolded quotes of shame by Mosurinjohn & Ascough – trashcan-ready pseudo-argumentation. –> 🗑
Got no case? Try character assassination bullying instead, as you enter the field, fists swinging and flailing in all directions indiscriminately, defaming all entheogen scholars, and crying about:
No type of journal accepted our yellow-journalism, hit-job, smear-piece article, for YEARS! 😭 😭
We must not try to find [more] evidence for psychedelics in Western religious history, because that effort is “religious fundamentalism” and is “colonialist violence”.
This shows the level of compelling argumentation that’s typical of Deniers of psychedelics in Western religious history.
The 2007 Main-Article Formula for Max Communication:
Interweave Direct (but Plain, Daily) Language with Analogies (ie Myth Themes/ Motifs)
from {king steering in tree} through {mixed wine at banquet} to {snake frozen in rock}
from {king steering in tree} through {mixed wine at banquet} to {snake frozen in rock} – BLOCK UNIVERSE ETERNALISM WITH FROZEN EMBEDDED WORLDLINES.
My article for church reader is maybe weak, not leveraging that interweaving enough.
How in the HELL did my article fail to say “block”?! One would think it IMPOSSIBLE to summarize in 2 pages, the Egodeath theory, w/o saying “block”.
todo: print the text pages of church article, two color highlighters:
red: direct lang
blue: analogy
Interweave the two modes of expression.
from {king steering in tree} through {mixed wine at banquet} to {snake frozen in rock} – LACKS DIRECT WORDS/ referents
from {king steering in tree} = possibilism = fingers = Y = monolithic, autonomous control
through {mixed wine at banquet} = psilocybin, 10 sessions (in the artists’ initiation guild with lockbox of Liberty Cap or blue fruit Cubensis).
to {snake frozen in rock} = eternalism = thumb = I = 2-level, dependent control
Non-analogy:
ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control
altered-state eternalism with dependent control
or latter:
psychedelic eternalism with dependent control
Flexicon: Flexible Custom Lexicon for the Egodeath Theory
These phrases are interchangeable, and have different connotations:
altered-state
psychedelic
analogical psychedelic eternalism
analogical altered-state eternalism aase or aae (no letter for “state”, precedent: l o p = literalist ordinary-state possibilism (no ‘s’). b/c that was for parall w/: psychedelic eternalism (just 2 letters).
PHASE 1: literalist ordinary-state possibilism with monolithic, autonomous control lopmac
omit “literalist”:
ordinary-state possibilism with monolithic, autonomous control
or shorter:
ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control — short, and omits “litm/analogical”
PHASE 2: analogical psychedelic eternalism with 2-level, dependent control ape2dc
omit “analogical”:
psychedelic eternalism with 2-level, dependent control
or shorter:
psychedelic eternalism with dependent control — short, and omits “litm/analogical”
PHASE 3: integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking Now that I have short terms lacking lit’m/anal’l, combine:
integrated o p a c & p e d c or if “altered-state” instead of “psychedelic”: o p a c & a e d c ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control altered-state eternalism with dependent control combine: i opac aedc ie: meta/condensed acro: ioa expand to integrated ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control & altered-state eternalism with dependent control ioa – in terms of state i p e c – in terms of time-model. c for “type of control”.
integrated ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control & altered-state eternalism with dependent control ipec = integrated … possibilism … eternalism … control
integrated, ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control & altered-state eternalism with dependent control
integrated possibilism/eternalism [IPE]
literalist ordinary-state possibilism with monolithic, autonomous control [LOPMAC]
analogical psychedelic eternalism with 2-level, dependent control [APE2DC]
ordinary-state possibilism with monolithic, autonomous control [LOPMAC]
analogical psychedelic eternalism with 2-level, dependent control [APE2DC] or
analogical altered-state eternalism with 2-level, dependent control [APE2DC]
analogical altered-state eternalism with 2-level, dependent control [AAE2DC] altered-state eternalism with 2-level, dependent control [AAE2DC] psychedelic eternalism with 2-level, dependent control [PE2DC]
psychedelic eternalism with 2-level control pe2l pe2c
altered-state eternalism with 2-level control ae2c
ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control opac
ordinary-state possibilism with monolithic, autonomous control opmac
thus now can type:
ordinary-state possibilism with autonomous control
altered-state eternalism with dependent control
longer form re: control descriptor:
ordinary-state possibilism with monolithic, autonomous control
psychedelic eternalism with 2-level, dependent control altered state alt: altered-state eternalism with 2-level, dependent control ae2dc
test w/ high parallelism (ie. ordinary-state, altered-state [not “psychedelic”]):
ordinary-state possibilism with monolithic, autonomous control
altered-state eternalism with 2-level, dependent control
fwiw, “altered-state” avoids problem of mixed wine (psilocybin) vs. kykeon (ergot/LSA)… poor example b/c both are psychedelics maybe. altered-state is broader than “psychedelic”; covers mystery plants, scopolamine, mixtures.
altered-state eternalism with dependent control aedc
With YI Branching-Shape Indicators on Each Hand or Foot
Why “Toes” or “Fingers” Is Often Not Granular Enough: Which Toe? Which Finger?
In some pictures (f177), big toe is splayed, or only big toe shown; other foot shows branching uniform toes.
Rough Ground-Up Sequence of Analysis
Initially lower foot
Initially higher foot
Lower fingers
Lower thumb
Higher fingers
Higher thumb
Lower foot [in phase 1, stand on left foot; but typically shown is phase 2: {stand on right foot}.] therefore in a picture that shows {stand on right foot}, that’s AFTER previous picture which would show stand on left foot.
Don’t say “which foot is lower in the picture”, re: sequnce of analysis.
FIRST DESCRIBE THE LIFTED FOOT, THEN DESCRIBE THE ON-GROUND FOOT, b/c prior to {stand on right foot} was {stand on left foot}.
Say “Initially lower foot”
Initially lower foot. (ie, initially, the L foot was on the ground; tho L foot is now shown lifted, we’ll start w/ L foot, breaking rule “start ground up”)
Initially higher foot. (ie, R foot; before psychedelics, had {right foot lifted}.)
Granular Ground-Up Sequence of Analysis
Lower foot: stand on left foot. Big toe splayed?
Higher foot: right foot lifted. Big toe splayed?
Lower Pinkie finger (base, tip).
Lower Ring finger (base, tip).
Lower Middle finger (base, tip).
Lower Index finger (base, tip).
Lower thumb.
Higher Pinkie finger (base, tip).
Higher Ring finger (base, tip).
Higher Middle finger (base, tip).
Higher Index finger (base, tip).
Higher thumb.
Index finger can serve as either:
The I in a YI pair. By splaying.
Part of the Y in a YI pair.
Motivation for this Page
I feel that RL is wondering, how I so nonchalantly IGNORE and DISMISS the learned, learned explanations of hand shapes in art and religion.
My interp of hand shapes is primitive, basic, simple, tiny.
Don’t I want a big-brain complicated SOPHISTICATED, learned, well-informed explanation by the authorities?
No. The simpler, the more basic, the better: basic shape of tree vs of snake.
I posted about this a couple years ago.
When I look up myth themes / motifs in books, it’s a joke: they are all fake, irrelevant, pseudo-explanations, to lead me away from the sensible solution.
In 2000 era, I saw how “snake” got tons of false explanations, but NO ONE PAID ATTENTION TO ITS BASIC SHAPE; non-branching. vs. shape of tree (branching).
By 2002, I was increasingly certain that my unique maverick explanation of why snake is #1 mytheme, is correct, and EVERYONE ELSE IN THE WORLD IS WRONG.
My 1997 summary: something so simple as branching fingers vs. non-branching thumb, is so simple, so basic, that it overlays right into my non-mythic, technical core theory summary, in which I say “branching & non-branching”.
YI Hand-Shapes Breakthrough Confirms Simple Possibilism/ Eternalism Theory
YI Hand-Shapes Breakthrough Confirms Simplest Theory: Possibilism & Eternalism
YI Hand-Shapes Breakthrough Confirms Simple Theory of Possibilism & Eternalism
YI Hand-Shapes Breakthrough Confirms Simple Possibilism & Eternalism Theory
YI Hand-Shapes Breakthrough Confirms Simple Possibilism/Eternalism Theory
YI Hand-Shapes Breakthrough Confirms the Simplest Theory: Possibilism vs. Eternalism
YI Hand-Shapes Breakthrough Confirms the Simplest Theory, Possibilism vs. Eternalism
YI Hand-Shapes Breakthrough Confirms Simple Theory of Possibilism/ Eternalism
Why Recognizing YI Medieval Hand Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough: Validates Extreme Simplicity and Elegance of Theory
YI Hand-Shapes Breakthrough Confirms Simple Possibilism/ Eternalism Theory
YI Hand-Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough Because Confirms Simple Possibilism/ Eternalism Theory
YI Hand-Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough Because Confirms Simplicity of Theory Based on Possibilism & Eternalism
YI Hand-Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough Because Confirms Simplicity of Theory Focused on Possibilism & Eternalism
YI Hand-Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough Because Confirms Extreme Simplicity of Theory Focused on Possibilism & Eternalism
YI Hand-Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough Because Validates Extreme Simplicity of Theory Focused on Possibilism & Eternalism
Extreme Simplicity and Elegance of Theory: Why Hand Shapes Are Such a Breakthrough
YI Hand-Shapes a Major Breakthrough: Validates Extreme Simplicity of Theory, Focused on Possibilism & Eternalism
YI Hand Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough: Validates Extreme Simplicity of Theory, Highlighting Possibilism & Eternalism
YI Hand Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough Because Validates Extreme Simplicity of Theory, Depicting Possibilism & Eternalism
possibilism & eternalism is more mature than possibilism vs. eternalism
I’m wary of writing “possibilism vs. eternalism”; its downside is, implies the “get rid of possibilism” error. The cost of writing that.
{fingers} = Y (Possibilism); {thumb} = I (Eternalism); {hand} = YI ( Integrate)
YI Hand Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough Because Validates Extreme Simplicity of Theory: {fingers} = Y (Possibilism); {thumb} = I (Eternalism); {hand} = YI ( Integrate)
Read {thumb} as shorthand for “or {index finger}”.
YI Hand Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough: Validates Extreme Simplicity, Economy, and Elegance of Theory
validates “simpler is better”
Why YI Hand Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough: Validates Extreme Simplicity and Elegance of Theory
Why Recognizing YI Hand Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough: Validates Extreme Simplicity and Elegance of Theory
Why Recognizing Medieval YI Hand Shapes Is a Major Breakthrough: Validates Extreme Simplicity and Elegance of Theory
Extreme Simplicity and Elegance of Theory: Why Recognizing YI Medieval Hand Shapes Is Such a Major Breakthrough
WordPress likes short pages, not 100 sheets long, idea development pages.
It’s easy for me to START a page that has a target topic, and then, freeform add ANY ideas that day, on daily basis.
Each day, start a page on a target topic, then add random idea development to it.
Works well for me.
This site is optimized for idea development, NOT for publishing polished final work.
This site has a lot of rough idea development AND some “flagship” polished publishable work.
At Egodeath Yahoo Group, I never did choose whether to do long-running generic idea development threads, or, per-topic short threads.
Starting a new page is placing a bet. Sometimes it is certain what value the page will add.
Sometimes, fishing and speculating that a new page will inspire discovery.
Must Confidently Pick the Best Version of Mystical experience and Transcendent Knowledge to Track Through “History”
[1:49 a.m. Feb. 8, 2026]
Trace as the RIGHT Signal Hidden Obscured by All the Noise: Where’s Waldo, the possibilism vs. eternalism throughout “history” ie the Mythic Esoteric Evidence Database.
I hate “secret” “suppressed” “hidden” like Letcher mocks.
Andy Letcher’s book Shroom, 2006 UK
keyboard shortcut
todo: add site map section w all “Letcher” pages
Main Objection from Panofsky/Huggins: Mushroom-Trees Have Branches
[1:49 a.m. Feb. 8, 2026]
Branches are the main thing preventing mushroom-trees from meaning mushrooms.
Huggins’ whole argument, like Panofsky, comes down to one main objection:
Mushroom-trees have branches/branching.
Someone must explain like Michael Hoffman did in Feb. 1997 at PrinCyb on the World Wide Web.
Even if the time axis is warped, relative, or branching, and there are more than 3 dimensions of space, one can coherently and usefully frame the experienced world as an ultimately unchanging, 4-dimensional spacetime block.
Time, change, flexibility, variability, and movement are all fixed at all points along the time axis or branching axes.
3 more sentences about branching vs. non-branching in Physics, in the first 50 posts June 2001 at Egodeath Yahoo Group.
Applied to hand/finger/thumb shapes Feb. 9, 2023 re: Jesus’ fingers and sticks and feathers identified and explained, by using branching theory and possibilism vs. eternalism, emailed to Dr. Brown.
My designated breakthrough day is Tue, Feb 3, 2026, midst of jackpot of unknown duration, re: hand-shape theory.
Judging the Best Myth, Religion, Mystical Experience, Science, & Brand of Transcendent Knowledge
[1:49 a.m. Feb. 8, 2026]
I trust myth. I steer by myth.
I steer by my judgment on the BEST myth.
Tracing the Best Signal Thread, not the Popular Signal Thread, Through the Esoteric Myth History Evidence Base
[1:49 a.m. Feb. 8, 2026]
Possibilism vs. eternalism is the best thread / signal to tune into through the history evidence base collection of world myth and mythic art.
free will vs. determinism is still undoc’d.
There’s no book on the history of determinism or the eternalism model of time.
possibilism vs. eternalism and control agency control transformation, tied to the two states:
loose cognition = eternalism-thinking.
tight cognition = possibilism-thinking.
My thread I trace as by MY id’n based on MY judgment of what’s BEST mystical experience , what’s the BEST esotericism; what’s the BEST of ancient phil: ans: astral ascent mysticism as figured out by me (not Wouter “Star Destroyer” Hanegraaff) based on David Ulansey.
Brands of Transcendent Knowledge: thoughout history aka the evidence base, which thread of brand of Transcendent Knowledge is the BEST one, the REAL hot property; the REAL mystic CLASSIC mystical experience that DESERVES to be the authentic real deal in gold cups only one REAL gold cup
by my judgment, +U the positive unitive model of “mystical experience” Pop INSANE Popular Neo-Advaita (which def’n to use? the most insane one, most pop one)
need judgment of selecting & rejecting the signal – radio frequency tuning and rejection. What is the good, worthwhile station?
the positive unitive model of “mystical experience” is objectively a failure not integrating {shadow dragon monster}
Transcendent Knowledge based on possibilism vs. eternalism integrates and respects {shadow dragon monster}:
enlightenment = awareness of being threatened by the 4D spacetime block & 2-level, dependent control.
the four-dimensional spacetime block 4D spacetime block fdsb
People are demonizing normal thinking, smashing, blunt club, mind is not real, words are not real, neg neg negative “explnation”, SUBTRACTIVE ELIMINATIVE PSEUDO EXPALANTION is insanity. the self-other boundary isn’t real.
separation between me and you is illusion.
people don’t exist.
nothing exists.
everything is illusion and unreal.
insanity is when you cannot function in daily life and despise all normal thinking, to get rid of it to be enlightened.
destroying the self-other boundary = Transcendent Knowledge = enlightenment
The Egodeath theory 
