Definition of New Field: the Maximal Mushroom Theory of Western Religion

Site Map

Contents:

Differentiate Between the Field of Study, Personalities, and Theories

There’s a terrible conflation effort going on, to try to conflate and over-identify:

  • The field of “mushrooms in Christian history“.
  • Particular personalities (such as referring to the whole field and its questions as “the Allegro theory”).
  • Particular theories in the field (such as “the Holy Mushroom”).

The field, personalities, and particular theories, are conflated together, reductionistically, as if debunking Allegro, or debunking Irvin’s Holy Mushroom theory, is the same thing as “debunking the field of scholarship on mushrooms in Christian history”.

I always expect Hatsis to say “mushrooms”, and instead, he reaches for the bizarrely specific term “Amanita”.

I always expect Hatsis to discuss research in the field, and instead, he reaches for the bizarrely specific word “Allegro” or “the Holy Mushroom”.

Hatsis might be doing good work within a strange other alien field, the field of “Allegro-Amanita Studies“, but what is harmful, is that he then conflates that strange, less-important speciality field, Allegro-Amanita Studies, with the other field, that’s most important: the field of Western mushroom scholarship — identifying and interpreting Psilocybe references in Hellenistic & Christendom art & texts.

I would rather say “mushroom references”, but with all these people around who are HELL-BENT on conflating the whole field with their fantasized narrow “Allegro-Amanita Studies” field that they confabulated, I have to defensively pro-actively Shut Down that misreading, explicitly countersignalling by broadcasting “Psilocybe”, where they are intent on strawmanning as “Amanita”.

I’m not very anti-Amanita, but I have to sound like I am anti-Amanita, by aggressively pushing “Psilocybe”, exactly where the Allegro-orbiters would try to strawman-misrepresent the entire field reduced down to their little miniaturized thought-world of some imagined “Allegro-Amanita studies”.

Define the Field in Terms of the Topic, Not in Terms of Personalities and Their Particular Narrow Theories

http://csp.org
Council for Spiritual Practices

The Entheogen Chrestomathy (passage excerpts) has excerpts from 4 Robert Graves’ books.

Graves is weak, understated; not forceful, punchy, outspoken, and explicit, re: mushrooms in Christianity.

Graves tiptoes around the outer periphery of the field of “Western mushroom scholarship”, under the watchful guidance of Pope Wasson.

Allegro’s 1st Edition dust jacket fold text is punchy, is largely spot-on, and that front cover has the diagrammatic (thus powerful) symbol of the Plaincourault mushroom tree.

Irvin’s reissue preserves that original powerful cover diagram art.

These Allegro-centered Irvin/ Letcher/ Hastsis books sell quite well and get high ratings from reviews. There is significant interest in the topic or scholarly research-field of mushrooms in Christian history.

Don’t allow Hatsis & the other followers of Allegro to name the field “The Holy Mushroom theory” – cringe! what is one signing-up for, employing that overly charged Irvinism? That makes the mistake of labelling an entire field, as one particular theory in the field.

I’d like more information about Wasson dissuading Graves from writing more, about Western mushroom scholarship.

“Western mushroom scholarship” is a subfield within the field of “entheogen scholarship”. Notice it’s not “the Allegro theory”, “The Holy Mushroom theory”, or other such personality-centric labels.

The field name “Western mushroom scholarship” integrates Greek & Christian; Hellenism & Christendom.

Heading

The field of Western mushroom scholarship should be topic-centered, not personality-centric.

Wasson, Allegro, Irvin, Letcher, & Hatsis all try to make the field of Western mushroom scholarship personality-centric; positively or negatively orbiting around Allegro.

Irvin, Letcher, & Hatsis all place Wasson & Allegro at the center of “the field” (as they conceptualize it) and thus they make Allegro (or “the Wasson/Allegro debate”[sic]) also set the outer boundaries that delimit and circumscribe the field, and everyone’s thought.

Regarding the field and questions of Western mushroom scholarship, everyone who orbits their thinking around Wasson, Allegro, or Irvin (whether positively or negatively) is pushing and re-entrenching The Allegro Paradigm, as if rejecting that paradigm they’ve defined and selected, is the same as rejecting the field of Western mushroom scholarship.

Heading

There is no one good to represent the field of Western mushroom scholarship.
Brinckmann, Panofsky, Wasson, Letcher, Hatsis;
Rolfe, Ramsbottom, Brightman, Graves, Allegro, Heinrich, Irvin, Ruck

— not one of them represents what the field is, and needs to be:

Psilocybe in Greek & Christian art & texts; Hellenism & Christendom.

What’s Not Acceptable

Equating pop articles about “Allegro’s theory shows that Amanita magic mushrooms are the real origin of Christianity”, with professional-level scholarship within the field.

Required Evidence Exhibits You Must Be Aware Of, to Earn a Voice/ the Podium/ a Platform/ the Mic

Like in the form of a Course Syllabus, this rulebook define the kind of field this needs to be.
Professional credentials required; a bozo filter.

Gallery: What pictorial evidence you must be aware of, to have the right to be listened to.A standard body of images to discuss, like the “curated collection” idea.  You must be aware of these 200 images, before there’s any reason why anyone in this field should pay any attention to you.

What the commitments are, who the point-of-reference authors are (and are not).  

To counter this awful pattern of books like Letcher’s and then Hatsis’ recent book and his planned “Conspiracy” book which sounds like an awful book concept, an exercise in debunking Allegro and thereby reaffirming that Allegro is the be-all and end-off who is definitive of the entire subject.

CANCEL YOUR GOD-FORSAKEN BOOK, IT’S GOING TO BE HORRIBLE AND HARMFUL, AN EXERCISE IN REIFYING FOLLY. I AM ALREADY WRITING A SCATHING, PANNING, CONDEMNATORY BOOK REVIEW FOR THIS BOOK THAT WON’T EXIST FOR ANOTHER TWO YEARS, BASED PURELY ON ITS TITLE.

Prerequisites to contribute in this field

Read 3 of 4 issues of Mark Hoffman’s Entheos Journal.

Read some Ruck – ideally w/ my caveats in my review of his overview book mistitled as “Consciousness”.

Be aware of the long list of books about ahistoricity of religious founder figures. Don’t make statements about whether Jesus existed, if you aren’t even aware of these book titles — you’d just demonstrate your ignorance and lack of credibility. Any ignorant, unread fool can proclaim on the matter, while oblivious to the existence of these books. You have to earn your right to be listened to on this topic. Otherwise “you won’t be taken seriously” [define that phrase].

Who Speaks for this Field, and Who Doesn’t

Anyone who uses phrases such as “the Allegro theory” (equating & grossly mis-crediting Allegro with the topic of Western mushroom scholarship) has no credibility and is an outsider and cannot, does not, represent this field.

Anyone whose thinking places Amanita & Allegro in the center of this field is an imposter and should be treated as a rank member of the public, regardless of how much research they’ve done on other psychoactives history.

Wasson might be an authority on something — I don’t know what — but he has nothing to contribute, except confusion and ambiguous, evasive doubletalk, regarding mushrooms in Christianity.

Principles Guiding this Field

Relevance of World Religious Mythology

Relevance of Non-Mushroom Psychoactives

  • policy for % emphasis:
  • Samorini re: Strains of Ergot at Eleusis in Kykeon
  • Peripheral; out of scope; can be brought in but with uinderstanding they are outside the domain of explanation — like fantastical non-psychedelic mushrooms may figure into the art.
  • We hold that they did use cannabis products like Chris Bennett asserts; but, that’s not our focus. We are dedicated to Psilocybe and its specific effects and how those classic psychedelic effects are described by mythemes.
  • Assume that users (through the Early Modern era) had full control of dosage and redosing.
  • The great benefits of these simplifying, enabling, foundational assumptions outweigh the minor, incidental costs/inaccuracy.

Heading

John Allegro is irrelevant. The only articles this field needs about Allegro, are about how Allegro is irrelevant. Take down his portrait.

Take down the framed portrait of Pope Wasson.

For mushrooms in Greek & Christian religion, Wasson is irrelevant; is extremely compromised by his close relationship with the Pope; is purely harmful; and stole credit and limelight from Graves.

Robert Graves is the real brains behind the operation, when it comes to mushrooms in religion, including mushrooms in Greek religion.

The best starting point — put up his framed portrait — is Robert Graves.

Religion and Psychoactive Sacraments : An Entheogen Chrestomathy
Tom Roberts & Paula Jo Hruby
https://csp.org/docs/index
http://www.csp.org/chrestomathy/
https://archive.org/search.php?query=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.csp.org%2Fchrestomathy%2F
Search the Chrestomathy for Robert Graves to read some of Graves’ 83 pages on the topic.

Religion and psychoactive sacraments: A bibliographic guide
January 1, 1995
http://amzn.com/1889725005

search Robert Graves entheogen kykeon

Psychoactive Sacramentals: Essays on Entheogens and Religion
Thomas Roberts (Editor), 2001
The CSP Entheogen Project Series, 3
by Stanislav Grof (Author), Huston Smith (Author), Albert Hofmann (Author), Charles T. Tart (Author), Alexander T. Shulgin (Author), Mike Young (Author), & 4 more
http://amzn.com/1889725021

The Pharsalus Bas-Relief and the Eleusinian Mysteries
Samorini
https://www.samorini.it/doc1/sam/pharsal.htm
https://www.samorini.it/doc1/sam/sam-1998-ter-pharsalus.pdf

https://www.amazon.com.au/Entheogens-Myth-Human-Consciousness-Carl-ebook/dp/B00BSEQOPW “This book reviews the 20th Century history of the reception of the Entheogen theory of religion. Ruck shows how Wasson told Robert Graves to self-censor Graves’ 1950s discovery of mushrooms as the foundation of Greek myth and initiation religion. Ruck’s work, if extrapolated to the maximum, shows that religion comes strictly through visionary …” <– who wrote???

Book:
Entheogens, Myth, and Human Consciousness
Carl Ruck, Mark Hoffman
http://amzn.com/1579511414
January 8, 2013
My review:
Entheogens, Myth, and Human Consciousness (Ruck & Hoffman)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/22/entheogens-myth-and-human-consciousness/

Images from the Egodeath Yahoo Group

Site Map

Contents:

  • The Egodeath theory & Gnosis on a Post-It Note
  • Coffeehouse Guestbook Entry Summarizing the 2013 Breakthrough: {tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism
    • Religious Myth Deciphered
    • The Two Mental Worldmodels: {king steering in tree} -> {wine} -> {snake frozen in rock}
  • Post-It Note: {rod of Aesclepius} Decoded
  • 1988 Article Drafts and 1989 Artist’s Blank Book
  • August 12, 1988 Handwritten First Draft of the Theory of Ego Transcendence
  • Article Drafts and Per-Semester Writing Binders 1986-1989
  • Final Draft of Main Article, September 24, 2006
  • Pre-Mytheme-Decoding, Snake Frozen in Block Universe, ~1994
  • Dried Amanita
  • Ink Brush Michael the Archangel
  • etc.

The Egodeath theory & Gnosis on a Post-It Note

Coffeehouse Guestbook Entry Summarizing the 2013 Breakthrough: {tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism

IMG_6667.JPG — my mature-theory entry in a coffeehouse guest book, after my Nov 29 2013 {tree vs. snake} breakthrough.

Religious Myth Deciphered

The Two Mental Worldmodels: {king steering in tree} -> {wine} -> {snake frozen in rock}

Post-It Note: {rod of Aesclepius} Decoded

IMG_6586_2014_01_21.JPG – post-it about Aesclepius Staff of, for gym barista girl in Med school after Nov 2013 breakthrough.

1988 Article Drafts and 1989 Artist’s Blank Book

August 12, 1988 Handwritten First Draft of the Theory of Ego Transcendence

Minnosota 1st draft! Handwritten manuscript, August 12, 1988, Pentel P205 mechanical pencil on ruled binder sheets.

Discussed in the Egodeath Yahoo Group post of September 24, 2011, 2 months before my preliminary November 23, 2011 proto-breakthrough work toward “{tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism”:
Subject:
1988 first drafts of Egodeath article
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/19/egodeath-yahoo-group-digest-101/#message5144

“The first draft of what would become my main article was written August 12, 1988. It begins:

“Here are compiled and resolved the principles of Special Knowledge, inspired by all the major fields which have studied it, but rigorously thought through and resolved logically. With sufficient study, the reader will find that Transcendent Knowledge resolves Egoic thinking in much the same way that Relativity resolved Newtonian physics.”

Title: “The Theory of Ego Transcendence”, on the typed-up article.

Article Drafts and Per-Semester Writing Binders 1986-1989

Lower left: handwritten first draft, August 12, 1988. That date & the first paragraph are in the Egodeath Yahoo Group post:
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/19/egodeath-yahoo-group-digest-101/#message5144

Final Draft of Main Article, September 24, 2006

Main article, 2006

Pre-Mytheme-Decoding, Snake Frozen in Block Universe, ~1994

This was around 1994-1995 — amazingly, this was way long before I properly Decoded {snake} as worldline in block universe. You’d think I “decoded” that in 1995, but I was figuring it out more like 2002 (1995 seems decades away from 2002, because 1995, I still was purely working on spec’ing out the Core theory; the Cybernetic theory. Instead of the Mytheme theory, what I had in 1995 was Rock Lyrics decoding. I *was* reading Gnosis magazine issues, in 1995. Rock Lyrics & Gnosis mag in 1995 was laying a foundation for a later project, the Mytheme theory, which started 1998 in a different land/life-phase; got real traction on the Mytheme theory around 2002, mostly mature in 2006, fully mature in 2013. In 2020, I’m hard-pressed to do mytheme decoding better than in late 2013 to mid-2014.

Dried Amanita

See also gallery of Amanita photos.

Ink Brush Michael the Archangel

Michael Hoffman, ~1994

April 1987 – January 1988 Idea Development with P205 Pencil on Binder Filler Paper

wut

geez i’m sure my new phone can take crisper photos

Blank Book Like Used During the Initial Phase of Idea Development, October 1985-March 1987

Accurate 2010 reproduction of the form-factor of my Nov 1985-April 1987 blank books, but those would’ve been hastier, messier, no acronyms.

Idea Development Notes During Engineering Class, ~August 1986-March 1987

Spiritual self-help, no acronyms, dates it to apparently before mid-April 1987.

Engr/physics math w/ Transcendent Knowledge development notes

I didn’t note date on photo; presumably these binder paper sheets are from 1987.

~1994

d/k what the hell’s with the murkiness. Need to re-photograph.

1 month before the January 11, 1988 breakthrough. At this point, Nov/Dec 1987, I was figuring out that the book The Way of Zen was missing a solution to explain Satori: no-free-will.

ListeningToMySelfGoMad.jpg
TitlingTheArticle.jpg; formulating the title of my article as
“The Theory of Ego Transcendence — Introduction to a New Conceptual System of Ego Transcendence”, October 17, 1988

WritingsPerSemester.jpg. Thick binder sheets would be 1987. Computer printouts later.
SeveralGarbageBagsOfWriting.jpg — 1987

ReleaseEgo1986.jpg — 1986, conventional self-help style. Not yet April 1987 acronyms + mental construct processing [MCP] style.

photo — Michael Hoffman, the theorist of ego death, 10/10/2010
photo — Michael Hoffman, the theorist of ego death , ~ Oct 10 2010

photo — Michael Hoffman, the theorist of ego death 10:10 a.m. 10/10/2010

King Steering in a Tree — vindicated my theory, of King Pentheus “caught up in a tree” spying on Dionysus. compared to King Jesus “lifted up and hung from the tree”.
Copied to:
Alchemy Woodcuts, Western Esotericism Mytheme Images
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/11/alchemy-woodcuts-western-esotericism-mytheme-images/
IMG_3122.JPG
Copied to:
Alchemy Woodcuts, Western Esotericism Mytheme Images
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/11/alchemy-woodcuts-western-esotericism-mytheme-images/

IMG_6520_CanterburyCath1180.PNG. Lot’s wife turned to pillar of salt, or equiv.
Copied to:
Images of Mushrooms in Christian Art
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/13/images-of-mushrooms-in-christian-art/

xti_9518c-elijah.jpg
Copied to:
Images of Mushrooms in Christian Art
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/13/images-of-mushrooms-in-christian-art/

What Letcher-Hatsis, Ruck, Irvin, and Pop Onlookers Must Change, for Constructive/ Productive Western Mushroom Scholarship

Site Map

Contents:

Who Needs to Change What

What the individuals must to do rectify the situation for the field:

  • Ruck must stop employing his malformed concept “secret”. Stop using the word ‘secret’, FFS! PLEASE STOP, for the love of God, and to save the field of mushroom scholarship!
  • Irvin must stop uncritically affirming Allegro monolithically. Do like I do: list the pros and cons of any writer; what aspects they get right, and what they get wrong.
  • Outside the field, everyone must stop treating “Allegro” as synonymous with mushroom scholarship, or the theory that Christianity involves mushrooms.
  • Letcher-Hatsis must stop thinking that the Pop-spreading of “Allegro says”; and Irvin’s uncritical wholesale affirmation of Allegro; and Ruck’s obsession/fixation on “secret”, define the productive potential field of mushroom scholarship.
  • Letcher-Hatsis must stop conflating a particular hypothesis with the entire field; stop covertly flipping back and forth between the extremely narrow, particular premise/hypothesis of “spreading via secret Amanita cult” vs. the completely broad, general question, “the extent of use of various psychoactive mushrooms in Western culture”.

The Distinct Questions to Differentiate and Specifically Address

Section copied from “Criteria” article:

Careless entheogen scholars slip and slide among vague, shifting position on exactly what they are denying and affirming; constantly, silently changing their mind about what subject they are centrally debating about:

  • The Secret Amanita Christian Cult theory?
    • How knowledge & tradition spread?
  • Which mushrooms?
    • Just Amanita?
    • All mushrooms (including Cubensis, Liberty Caps, & Amanita)?
  • Mushrooms in which aspect of Christianity:
    • Mushrooms in Christian art?
    • Mushrooms in Christian practice?
    • Mushrooms in Christian culture?
    • Mushrooms in Western culture, including Ancient Near East & Mediterranean Antiquity; Hellenistic Mystery Religions & Greek mythology?
  • Which genre?
    • Strictly explicitly religious art?
    • Broad esotericism art within Christendom?
    • Strictly Biblical, or equivalent Hellenistic content as well?

The Minimalist school (“there’s never mushrooms, there’s never evidence”) is vague about:

  • On what basis each of those questions is to be explained away.
  • Why their sometimes-chosen scope of question is the key issue to deal with and center all discussion around (silently, as it suits them from moment to moment).
  • Why some types of evidence and readings of that evidence count, but others are to be ignored and discounted: texts & art; literal depictions, stylized depictions, and depictions of effects.
  • Which form-family of mushrooms to discuss: Amanita? Cubensis? Liberty Caps? This most-basic, elementary level of differentiation and discussion is completely missing from the Minimalist explainers-away; these fervent, shallow, and inarticulate wavers-of-arms.

/ end of section copied from “Criteria” article

  • Letcher-Hatsis must stop writing unthinking phrases like “I find the idea totally ridiculous” – that’s the problem with Letcher-Hatsis’ approach to writing about the field’s questions, right there: *WHAT* idea; *WHICH* IDEA? You HAVE to be specific and articulate! Or else you are failing as a scholar, and even failing as a thinker.

It is *not* “the”, single, one, idea, which Letcher-Hatsis flips between identifying as “spread of secret Amanita cult”, and “use of mushrooms in Western culture”.

Like good scholars in the field of mushroom scholarship, I reject the hypothesis “spread of secret Amanita cult”, and I assert “significant use of mushrooms in Western culture.”

According to Letcher-Hatsis, no such compound position is possible, because they are one and the same question; in their Pop-shaped, overly Pop-guided thinking, “spread secret Amanita cult” is the same identical position as “mushrooms in Western culture”.

That’s why Letcher-Hatsis consistently — and PROVABLY — demonstrates ZERO SELF-AWARENESS about his continual flipping back-and-forth, silently conflating the (incorrect) “spread secret Amanita cult” position with the (correct) “mushrooms in Western culture” position.

In his sloppy, undifferentiated, Pop-guided, Pop-level thinking, — Letcher-Hatsis argues this way consistently — he assumes and takes it as granted, that if you reject the “spread secret Amanita cult” hypothesis, that’s the same thing as rejecting “mushrooms in Western culture”.

They think and reason that, because the idea of “spread secret Amanita cult” is totally ridiculous, that’s the same thing as the idea of “mushrooms in Western culture” being totally ridiculous.

According to the malformed assumption that’s latched onto (and promoted) by Letcher-Hatsis, if you assert mushrooms in Western culture, that necessarily means that you assert “spread of secret Amanita cult” — in his inchoate thinking, these two positions are the same identical position — that’s why Letcher-Hatsis never discusses or acknowledges the distinction between the two question-scopes (“spread secret Amanita cult”, vs. “mushrooms in Western Culture”).

Thus (as proof and evidence supporting my seemingly unbelievable assertions about his total lack of self-awareness of conflating the two extreme opposite-scoped questions) you have Hatsis within his video disproving Amanita, and then titling the video “I disproved mushrooms.”

Video title:
Mushroom Trees Debunked
YouTube channel:
Psychedelic Historian
Nov. 12, 2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrfeNp1FSUY

The clear implication in this video is that he is unaware of Liberty Cap mushrooms, and he is only aware of Amanita!

Throughout the video, I was repeatedly startled because I expected him to say ‘mushrooms’ — but instead, out of the blue, for no clear reason, he instead reached all the way, going out of his way, for the specific word ‘Amanita’ — which is, of course, a different issue!

  • Issue 1: Does the image generally represent mushrooms (of any type)?
  • Issue 2: If so, which specific mushrooms: eg Liberty Caps; Cubensis; or Amanita?

Who the f*ck ever asserted, that the question of “Amanita” is the same question as “mushrooms” — other than bad, sloppy, Pop thinkers? — including Letcher-Hatsis.

Letcher-Hatisis is letting sloppy Pop-thinking guide, steer, shape, and constrain his would-be scholarly analysis.

Those are two opposite extreme scopes of “the” idea, but Letcher-Hatsis conflates the two totally differently scoped questions into this single monstrous construct of his own creation, “the” idea.

This way, Letcher-Hatisis can strawman-misrepresent the entire field of “Western mushroom scholarship”, and struttingly self-promote as if he has proved something significant and contributed something significant, when in fact, the only thing Letcher-Hatsis has contributed to the field of Western mushroom scholarship, is his own confused conflation of the narrow, incorrect hypothesis “spread secret Amanita cult”, and the broad, correct hypothesis, “significant mushrooms in Western culture”.

See Also

A new see-also article just published, same day:
Influence of early anthropological theorizing on ‘entheogen’ scholarship: John Allegro, The Sacred Mushroom
https://cyberdisciple.wordpress.com/2020/12/14/influence-of-early-anthropological-theorizing-on-entheogen-scholarship-john-allegro-the-sacred-mushroom/
— Great article, much-needed assessment. My comments on this article are at:
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/06/idea-development-page-5/#Article-About-Allegros-Undue-Influence

Scholars’ Failure to Debate Mushrooms in Christian Art
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/20/scholars-failure-to-debate-mushrooms-in-christian-art/

Proof that the Canterbury Psalter’s Leg-Hanging Mushroom Tree Is Psilocybe

Defining “Compelling Evidence” & “Criteria of Proof” for Mushrooms in Christian Art

Photos of Fantastical Mushrooms

Site Map

Contents:

Photos of Fantastical Mushrooms, to Identify Fantastical Mushrooms in Christian Art

When mystics are looking for Cubensis and Liberty Caps, and the prized-for-looks Amanita, here is also what they find, and what they draw in illuminated manuscripts.

My productive period decoding {non-branching} mythemes around 2010-2011 was while walking paths in a seasonal mushroom patch 1-square-block natural preserve, looking at the branching paths, branching trees, and annually changing collection of mushrooms, and photographing them.

I photographed groups of hundreds of manna-balls; shaggies, orange plastic curls, hundreds of little spears — maybe 20 different types of fungi, in a 1-block forest patch.

A common art pattern is to start by drawing a Cubensis cluster mushroom tree, with branching added and some non-branching added, and then for each cap, for every cap, vary the filling-in of the cap, to represent a particular, fantastical looking mushroom type, or a fictitious fanatical mushroom type.

Search Links

strange mushrooms affect art
https://www.pinterest.com/psupress/edible-wild-mushrooms-of-pennsylvania-and-the-mid-/

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=strange+mushrooms

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=mushrooms+poster

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=mushroom+poster

Photos

Mycena haematopus by Stefano Vianello
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/82261130676832978/?d=t&mt=login

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/194217802656344640/?d=t&mt=login
Peggy Schumann

Greek Egodeath Mythology Images

Site Map

Contents:

  • tbd

Book:
Greek Mythology: An Introduction
Fritz Graf
1987; 1993 English hardcover; 1996 English paperback
http://amzn.com/0801853958

My photo of my book at the time of my Nov 29 2013 breakthrough. This image, combined with the Cranach cropped image in Campbell’s hardcover illustrated The Power of Myth, while studying Western mushroom history, led to the full realization of {tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism.
The moment of fully decoding {tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism — Michael Hoffman, November 29, 2013, 7 :42 p.m. This fraction of a b/w photo of a painting, in conjunction with the cover of the Fritz Graf book’s b/w image of a Jason kylix with tree & snake.

Above is essentially a photograph of a Maximum Breakthrough in intellectual history, the Late-Modern era re-decoding of the most archaic formula:

{tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism

The books I had out at the time of my great November 29, 2013 breakthrough of {tree vs. snake} = possibilism vs. eternalism. Open is The Power of Myth, illustrated hardcover version, Joseph Campbell.
Some of my November 2011 postings cover the same material, but this was a fuller decoding of Mystery Religion peak content. Dec. 2, 2013; 3 days after my Friday, November 29, 2013 breakthrough.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/259519997263382481/

From Egodeath Yahoo Group, my post some time later recounting/recording, history. Contains book cite re: cover art.
Art on a mixed-wine mushroom-wine kylix “cup” (saucer).
Shows:

  • Jason spewed dead from the giant Heimarmene-snake.
  • Athena (with snake-fringes and death-face) and owl looks on.
  • The rock-sacrificed Ram’s golden fleece of ram of zeus sent by cloud goddess married to king A. The fleece hung in nonbranching ivy-strand quasi-tree. Evil king sent hero Jason to retrieve the dragon-guarded treasure, the ram that saved Prixis but when ram rose, of necessity, sister Helle looked down below the flying ram, she lost her balance and she fell and she drowned in the sea. Prixis sacrificed the ram to Zeus for saving him from [soap opera] being sacrificed to the cloud goddess.. to get rain.
    Jealous cloud goddess wanted her children w/ king A sacrificed by the reluctant king A, then cloud goddess sent Zeus’ ram to rescue the children she wanted sacrificed to provide rain? Fishy story. Research the facts of the matter.

Campbell’s Book with Eve Multi-branching Eden Tree

Book:
The Power of Myth
Joseph Campbell / Bill Moyers
http://amzn.com/0385247737
The Eve image on left half of left page
Image caption:
Eve tempted by the Serpent, Lucas Cranach, ca. 1530.

Hardcover, illustrated. Stock photo. I have hardcover.
https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/nuUAAOSwDkleXKw2/s-l300.jpg

Friday, November 29, 2013, 7:42 pm (the day after Thanksgiving): I discovered that tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism, upon seeing the right half of this painting in black & white, together with the cover of Fritz Graf’s book Greek Mythology: An Introduction, which shows the kylix/mushroom-wine saucer showing Jason spewed dead from the giant Heimarmene-snake, while Athena (with snake-fringes and death-face) and owl looks on, with ram golden fleece hung in nonbranching ivy-strand quasi-tree. This was one of my top 3 all-time breakthroughs.
img_6414.jpg photo of page of a large Joseph Campbell / Bill Moyers book “A. Eve tempted by the Serpent, Lucas Cranach, ca. 1530.”

The Cover Image of Fritz Graf’s book Greek Mythology: An Introduction

Shows the kylix/mushroom-wine saucer showing Jason spewed dead from the giant Heimarmene-snake, while Athena (with snake-fringes and death-face) and owl looks on, with ram golden fleece hung in nonbranching ivy-strand quasi-tree.

This was one of my top 3 all-time breakthroughs.

The Eve image on left half of left page, combined with Jason image, for completing/ recognizing/ decoding {tree vs. snake}, as a way to further condense my book cover image design around 2012 with
quadrants:

  • egoic left, transcendent right;
  • upper left quadrant image: king in tree?
    upper = world model?
    lower = control-agent model?
    2011: quadrants: from king steering in tree to snake frozen in rock.
    2013: simple contrast of 2: {tree vs. snake}. eliminate {king} and {rock}, it is sufficient to abbr instead of
    {king steering} in {tree} to
    {snake} frozen in {rock}
    or whatever my quadrants were, you can make-do with abbr into 2 items insetad of 4:
  • {tree} to
  • {snake}

math’ly you could do:

{tree} to
{rock}
ie change mental worldmodel from {tree} to {rock}. the contrast {tree vs. rock}. <– symm world-vs-world model compar’n.
gnosis = change your model of world from A to B

{king steering} to
{snake}
ie gnosis = change mental worldmodel from {king steering} to {snake}. <– symm agent-vs-agent compar’n
gnosis = change your model of ctrl-agent from A to B

{king steering}
{rock}
ie gnosis = change mental worldmodel from {king steering} to {rock}.

{tree vs. snake} Decoding – Lecture Video (2013-12-02)

Site Map

Contents:

  • todo

This proves that my recent caduceus decoding and explanation of the tauroctony in Nov/Dec 2020 was repeat of discoveries Nov 2013.

My Nov 2011 Egodeath Yahoo Group posts show these same types of solutions, earlier work on the same decoding.

I’m re-describing, re-discovering, re-announcing, re-decoding, re-explaining. I’m not just re-writing; I’m re-discovering and re-decoding.

This is a 55-minute lecture packed into 17 minutes. No time for fluff.

This is 100% gold; solid substance, of Mystery-Religion takeaway summary.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8qHZAfuY9KxclRzMzJPUjRwRVk/edit

I probably explained to a friend my decoding-breakthrough of {female}/{rap’d by the god}/{married to the true ruler partner}/{bridal chamber} ~2012 – wished I captured that great clear explanation. I’ll have to mockup that talk in an article.

Egodeath Yahoo Group – Digest 111: 2011-11-23

Site Map


Group: egodeath Message: 5627 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Re: misc.
Group: egodeath Message: 5628 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Ancients understood modern Physics block-universe worldlines
Group: egodeath Message: 5629 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Must adopt Heimarmene b/c coherence & power
Group: egodeath Message: 5630 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: tree, snake, mshr; tree-wrapped/-climbing serpent
Group: egodeath Message: 5631 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Correct vs. confused versions of ‘change’
Group: egodeath Message: 5632 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Re: tree, snake, mshr; tree-wrapped/-climbing serpent
Group: egodeath Message: 5633 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Re: tree, snake, mshr; tree-wrapped/-climbing serpent
Group: egodeath Message: 5634 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Re: tree, snake, mshr; tree-wrapped/-climbing serpent
Group: egodeath Message: 5635 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Re: Must adopt Heimarmene b/c coherence & power
Group: egodeath Message: 5636 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Make the female as the male, be two in one
Group: egodeath Message: 5637 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Re: Make the female as the male, be two in one
Group: egodeath Message: 5638 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: You are a couple: thought-source–>thought-receiver
Group: egodeath Message: 5643 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Triumph of Dionysus scene decoded
Group: egodeath Message: 5644 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Sun; metaphor for cybernetics, comm., ctrl, perception
Group: egodeath Message: 5645 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Fields Restarted by the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence
Group: egodeath Message: 5646 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Data–>Theory fdbk adjusts Theory to lock-on to data
Group: egodeath Message: 5647 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Social-political use & abuse of mystic revelation
Group: egodeath Message: 5648 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Ahistoricity is important because it’s Non-literalism
Group: egodeath Message: 5649 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
Group: egodeath Message: 5650 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: Wheat vs. Chaff: m-model of thot-src vs junk part of ego
Group: egodeath Message: 5651 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: Data–>Theory fdbk adjusts Theory to lock-on to data
Group: egodeath Message: 5652 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: Wheat vs. Chaff: m-model of thot-src vs junk part of ego
Group: egodeath Message: 5653 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: Data–>Theory fdbk adjusts Theory to lock-on to data
Group: egodeath Message: 5654 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: The name of my Theory and of the system of religion I created
Group: egodeath Message: 5655 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: How to think coherently: Engineering, not Science
Group: egodeath Message: 5656 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Killed ego = girl (Persephone), revised ego = woman (Demeter)
Group: egodeath Message: 5657 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: Extreme Radical Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion
Group: egodeath Message: 5658 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: When I independently figured out & learned Entheogen theory
Group: egodeath Message: 5659 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: Re: When I independently figured out & learned Entheogen theory
Group: egodeath Message: 5660 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: If prove ancients believed my Core theory, are we proved true?
Group: egodeath Message: 5661 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: Re: If prove ancients believed my Core theory, are we proved true?
Group: egodeath Message: 5662 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: Applying the Theory to myth improves the Theory
Group: egodeath Message: 5663 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: Re: Data–>Theory fdbk adjusts Theory to lock-on to data
Group: egodeath Message: 5664 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: +Core, -Metaphor(Ahistoricity, Entheogen History, Politics)
Group: egodeath Message: 5665 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: Understanding is a matter of degree, adeptness, fluency, skill
Group: egodeath Message: 5666 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: Important but periph. topics: Ahistoricity, Politics, Enth History
Group: egodeath Message: 5667 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: As above, so below; interp’d as torch held up & down
Group: egodeath Message: 5668 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: In what sense does Ego/Perseph. exist? Degrees of Being
Group: egodeath Message: 5669 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: In what sense does Ego/Perseph. exist? Degrees of Being
Group: egodeath Message: 5670 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: In what sense does Ego/Perseph. exist? Degrees of Being
Group: egodeath Message: 5671 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: Caduceus: mycopercep shows sep ctrl-lev relations/harmony
Group: egodeath Message: 5672 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Main religious myth systems I explain
Group: egodeath Message: 5673 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: Self-control seizure in Mithraism via Cyb/Heim/LCog/Metaph
Group: egodeath Message: 5674 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: Extreme Radical Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion
Group: egodeath Message: 5675 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: uncontrollable thought-source–>helpless thought-receiver
Group: egodeath Message: 5676 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: uncontrollable thought-source–>helpless thought-receiver
Group: egodeath Message: 5678 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: Social-political use & abuse of mystic revelation
Group: egodeath Message: 5679 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Rebis diagram: horiz & vert pairs, 2 meanings of ‘lower/higher’
Group: egodeath Message: 5680 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: Rebis diagram: horiz & vert pairs, 2 meanings of ‘lower/higher’
Group: egodeath Message: 5681 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: Self-control seizure in Mithraism via Cyb/Heim/LCog/Metaph



Group: egodeath Message: 5627 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Re: misc.
todo: revise the main artic, the core summary, the max-condensed 300-word non-metaph summary. Get rid of “easy to visualize”? Cut down to “is” per 1st order max-simple approx’n.

mistake i made long time since 86: contrasted e’c vs. t’t but didn’t model the window of revel’n, the “what is percieved and realized during initiation” that *causes* the final state of t’t mental model.
___________________________

todo: diagram the before/during/after, accounting for mental model of executor and programmer and program laid out along the worldline, with pseudo-branches of “possibility” envisioned all along the way.
e’c should mean what?
t’t should mean what?
very old concepts, from my 1st year of TKD (1986), now seeing some issues, possibs, ambiguities in these terms and how used.

Create diagrams of control. Direct & specific wording, non-metaphorical, quasi-technical, computer-metaphor-seeming, using my latest bonanza of metaphor-cracked.

How does a robot interpret/read the Tauroctony?

Wall poster diagram(s):
Diagram of personal control, mapped to diagram of Tauroctony and mapped to computer architecture.
egoic/t’t layers (ie local vs hidden ctrl centers, and the mental models of them) during the 3 phases: before the mshr initn-seq, during, & after.

It’s time for Core theory refactoring and function renaming; polish/expand my summary of that I posted this morning:
Define the mental model of the thoughtsource and thotreceiver before, during, and after initiation
Group: egodeath Message: 5628 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Ancients understood modern Physics block-universe worldlines
A week ago I was still thinking: but the primitive thinkers of antiquity couldn’t possibly have understood the 1900 advanced math & physics graphing concept of worldlines in a block universe. I could not have been more wrong, more biased, just like saying “civilized religion couldn’t have used mshr/dr’s”. The extreme opposite is closer to the truth: antiqy was the masters of ideas about blk univ worldlines!

Antiquity was the masters of ideas about blk univ worldlines.
Group: egodeath Message: 5629 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Must adopt Heimarmene b/c coherence & power
Mithraism some tauroctonys show:
one torch flame held up above cave ceiling, lighting-up (making us perceive) Sol, the uncontrollable injector of command-thoughts into the mind, as a control-thought-stream ray; and
the other torch held down below the bull, lighting-up (making us perceive) the hiemarmene-snake underneath us — the hidden, vine-shaped rail that we are steered and forced along like in a haunted house carnival ride, or the branch-path a squirrel follows from the trunck to the branch the squirrel ends up at, or like a snake winding up a tree.

Thus:
The higher, Pri1 referent that metaphors represent and mushrooms make us perceive, is personal noncontrol (commands are forced into the mind by Sol through rays of control), and
The lesser, Pri2 referent that metaphors represent and mushrooms make us perceive, is frozen worldvine-heimarmene (the control-commands we receive, and all our thoughts, are pre-programmed in the sense of pre laid out along our path through life.
Mushrooms are incidental, preliminary, once they have put us in the loosecog state and are lighting-up portions of the mind’s cave we couldn’t perceive in the OSC.

Apologetics for heimarmene

THE CRYSTALLINE [ie coherent] MODEL OF CTET

THE CRYSTALLINE PERFECT COHERENCE OF THE CRYSTALLINE BLOCK-UNIVERSE MODEL

The Theory and the initiate adopts heim b/c heim is perfect coherence, simplicity, comprehensibility, perfectly organized, 100% organized and specific. Perfect 100% explanatory coherence and power with no disadvantages (that it kills fw is to be counted as a tremendous advantage, not a disadv)

If your goal is complete conceptual coherence and a specific mmodel (100% tangibly comprehensibly specifiable, visualizable), then, heim co-entails nonctrl.


main central idea: cyb, receiver-and-executor of thoughts, vs. source of thoughts
secondary idea: heim, worldline, worldvine-path, snake-shaped worldvine, circuit board trace, insulated electrically conductive wire


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5630 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: tree, snake, mshr; tree-wrapped/-climbing serpent
This is the slam-dunk solution to one of the newest puzzles I encountered — actually two or three puzzles.

o A book on Christian Art of the Middle Ages asserted that the serpent is, as a rule, shown winding up the tree, of the knowledge of good and evil [the illusory aspect of moral agency]. It is? Why?

o Why is King Pentheus caught up in a tree (in a mythic situation comparable to the Cross)? Why is a tree so important in myth?


A snake winds up the tree because the shape of the path from the ground up to any one branch-tip forms a worldline snake shape: the one of the virtually possible forking paths that you are predestined to actually take; it’s the only real path. Not “a snake is like a branching tree” but “a snake is shaped like a single one of the branching paths of a tree”.

Thus proving the ancients understood computer science: tree data structures. Don’t overestimate the brilliance of late-Modern sci-tech-engr knowledge & our cog sci, and don’t underest antiq’y. Our tech uses elementary fundmental basic universal concepts and structures, in a certain configuration. Patt & Henn didn’t invent the robot; Vulcan and Daedalus invented Talos, and many esotericists designed automatons; auto-puppets; auto-marionettes.

Analyze the mytheme ‘tree’ in terms of cybernetics, fatedness, and mshr as target meanings.

Analyze the mytheme ‘tree’, using the magic Diamond Hammer of Interpretation, which asserts that: every mytheme is primarily isomorphic with cybernetics, fatedness, and mshr.

bonanza, master theme-system breakthrough. using the magic Diamond Hammer of Interpretation (every mytheme is primarily isomorphic with cyb, heim, & msh). Analyze: ‘tree’.

In what way is a tree like kubernetes, heimarmene, and mukes?

Using greek terms is a defamiliarization technique but also, shifts thinking from modern-style paradigm to foreign, self-consistent greek style you can lock-on to.

How is a tree like kubernetes? (cybernetics)
How is a tree like heimarmene? (fatedness)
How is a tree like mukes? (msh)

How does ‘tree’ express ideas about cybernetics?
How does ‘tree’ express ideas about fatedness?
How does ‘tree’ express ideas about mshr?

tree versus snake:

tree = egoic
snake = t’t
tree, snake, msh

heim is not primary meaning b/c ez to visualize.
heim is prelimary meaning b/c it is fully coherent and specific and contrary / complement/ opposite of egoic thinking.
reasons to affirm it: or at least fully *und* it. It isn’t nece to affirm it, but it’s nece to thoroughly und it. it’s a matter of und’g, not of “assenting” or “believing”. there’s no comprehensible alternative.
reasons to withhold assent to heim: none. “it’s offensive to fw”

tree, serpent wrapped around tree
breakthrough/insight: why the serpent wraps up the tree: the tree is “virtual decision branching” — to eat from the tree of life. King Pentheus is caught up at a particular branch-tip; hung from the branching tree.
willow tree — worldline-shaped, monocoursal.
regular tree (oak, birch): branching. Any one branch-tip to ground forms a worldline snake shape.

Tree of the knowledge of good and evil — know. g/e = awaken to illusory nature of moral culpability/power, but some ironic inversion is used, as if you move from baby to youthful orig-sin state by a quasi-mshr at start of journey, then from youthful orig-sin state to purified state by 2nd mshr initiation at end of youth. As if you (as Adam) start youth by an anti-entheogen that makes you deluded and believing in freewill moral agency-power.

also, feel ivy-wrapped in asc, and see “water” waves distortion, Jewish Hekalot water temple illusion.

Caught trapped in hypoth decision tree/possibility tree, tree of destiny:
tree caught up in tangled/trapped: the frozen hypothetical possibility-change branching. Only one branch is destined to actually happen. The other branches are destined to not happen. The king, steering the ship of state, looks forward into branching possibilities, as a decision-tree in a sense, but only one


A cybernetics game I invented in late 87: flip between putting pencil tip in circle a and b; every time settle, like lots, change to other circle. pretend stop, then resume. eventually, really stop. can’t know which will end up at.

At each point in worldline, surrounded by forward-aimed branches. Have to steer through the branching labyr (Matrix movies ship-channels/tunnels) but the choices are not actually open; they are closed doors that only appear open.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5631 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Correct vs. confused versions of ‘change’
The worldline-path suspended and embedded in changeless spacetime contains change when comparing t[n] to t[m] but not change at t[n]. The incoming instruction at t[n] doesn’t change at t[n]. The stored program is stored in or along the worldline-path embedded in changeless spacetime.

Spacetime contains change but doesn’t itself change, similar to a bucket that contains two balls that are different shades of red contains a comparative change between the two balls (the color changes from one shade to the other, in a comparison of the two balls) but the system — the bucket and two balls — doesn’t itself change. The block universe and the worldline of your life contains a kind of change, but doesn’t itself vary or change as a whole. The worldline at t never changes with respect to t. worldline[t] is constant with respect to itself.

The worldline contains changes when comparing t to t’, but not when comparing t to t itself.

Does the worldline change with respect to t? E’c thinking is characteristically confused about what this means. The value changes with respect to t. But the graph at any t doesn’t change the value that is at t. The change at t is the change in comparing t to t’. The change at t is not a change of the value at t; the value at t doesn’t change. The change is the value at t with respect to (or, in comparing against) the value at t’, not a change at t. It’s a difference between value at t and some other value that t hypothetically, counterfactually could have instead been.

Could construct other theories of change, manyworlds, an impenetrable alternatives. Those are not the point. The point is to understand the most elementary possible worldmodel — to assume it in order to comprehend the ramifs, and to admit that it is the only truly clear and distinct model; that any other model is much less clear and distinct. That it’s relatively easy to organize data neatly into the block univ explan fwk, but not into the other, relatly hazy and indistinct would-be expl fwks.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5632 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Re: tree, snake, mshr; tree-wrapped/-climbing serpent
The original post in this thread is where I had the insight; it’s a record of having an insight. I was writing about how to think to decode metaphor, interrogating a mytheme (eg ‘tree’) against priority sequence 1) cyb, 2) heim, 3) mushrooms. Then I wrote:
______________________
tree versus snake:

tree = egoic
snake = t’t
tree, snake, msh


tree, serpent wrapped around tree
______________________

That’s where exactly I had the breakthrough of: first, the new puzzle about why the snake in Eden-tree icons is always winding up the tree; and, moments later, the breakthrough for the question I’ve had for years about what’s so profound with the odd mytheme of “King Pentheus was caught and tangled in a tree, and died”. I’ve been working on the ‘tree’ mytheme lately, solved now, fundamental and elementary idea of decision fork tree considered with heimarmene-vine or snake in mind, matching any branch, but only one actual branch. Thus snake = branch.
Group: egodeath Message: 5633 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Re: tree, snake, mshr; tree-wrapped/-climbing serpent
A mushroom tree *has no branches*, even the veil stub arms emphasize hilite that life’s path has no real branches, no real open choices, the savior’s is a branchless decision tree.


It seems unnecessary but I just had to write this
Group: egodeath Message: 5634 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Re: tree, snake, mshr; tree-wrapped/-climbing serpent
Jonah’s gourd should b tree

God gave Jonah a tree for shade but a worm ate it and Jonah was mad but God said whats it matter to u?

Snake trumps tree.

Fatedness is real, alternatives are illusory.
Group: egodeath Message: 5635 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Re: Must adopt Heimarmene b/c coherence & power
It is mandatory that initiates thoroughly understand all the major ramifications and perspectives, aspects, of Heimarmene. You cannot be ignorant of these. In this sense, at least, Heimarmene is a necessary, inherent part of Transcendent Knowledge, my Core theory. You must embrace Heimarmene at least in the sense that you must experience and understand it thoroughly.

Afterwards, you can quibble and escape into brain-melting Copenhagenism and manyworlds and string theory. But you cannot call yourself intelligent and say you understand the ASC unless you master Heimarmene.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5636 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Make the female as the male, be two in one
Transcending belief and disbelief is a fairly popular idea.

John Lilly wasn’t merely into generally transcending reality-tunnel belief; he was *specifically* interested in belief, in the ASC, in “other entities” encountered: are they real? That is more profound and relevant than Timothy Leary and Robert Anton Wilson’s general reality tunnel idea.

Is there another entity in your mind you encounter in the ASC? Yes: (per Mithraism) you encounter Sol, the hidden injector of commands, through controlling rays, into your command-input receptacle, making you do things, making you will things, and you cannot control that hidden, source of thoughts, on whom you have to consciously depend once you are led and forced to ingest the mushroom that Sol gives you to reveal himself to you. God is male, because he inserts always himself in you, as a plug into you the socket; he gives commands, as the transpersonal you, and you receive and are made to execute commands, as the personal you.

You control the world and make people thing and do and will things.
You are helplessly forced to receive command-thoughts and execute them.

The Paradoxes of Delusion: Wittgenstein, Schreber, and the Schizophrenic Mind
Louis Sass
1994
http://amazon.com/dp/0801498996


‘egoic’ can mean the personal you (receiver and executor of instructions).

‘transcendent’ can mean the transpersonal you, who is not controllable by the personal you.


‘egoic’ can mean your mental model of self and control before initiation.

‘transcendent’ can mean your mental model of self and control after initiation.


Thus I need to disambiguate these overloaded term-pairs.

The Core theory needs cogently-scoped non-metaphorical terms for the male and female, commander and commanded: general and specific terms. General such terms are ‘the transpersonal you’ and ‘the personal you’. Specific such terms are ‘the thought source part of you’ and ‘the thought receiver’ part of you. Source and sink. Commander You and Commanded You. Lingham and Yoni. Sol and Luna. Wand and cup. Plug and socket. Thought-inserter and thought-receptacle. Male deities and female consorts. The conclusion of the New Testament: Make the two as one and the male as the female.


I am the source of my thoughts. I forcibly dictate the arising of my control-thoughts.
I am the receptacle of my thoughts. I cannot control the arising of my control-thoughts.

I am He and I am she. We are one, Sol and Luna. I am one person with two heads and I am awareness. We are three, Sol and Luna and the perception-eye of Mithras. I am, isomorphically, God, Christ, and Dove of the power of the Holy Spirit.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5637 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: Re: Make the female as the male, be two in one
*** MASTER REFERENT OF MYTH: ***
THOUGHT-SOURCE–>THOUGHT-RECEIVER


thought-source = transpersonal = male = lingham = wand
thought-receiver = personal = female = yoni = cup

Master referent: (the primary meaning; key to all mysteries; cracked the code)
thought-source–>thought-receiver

Metaphors:
transpersonal self–>personal self
male–>female
male deity–>female consort
lingham–>yoni
heimarmene-snake approaching krater or wound, forms a male->female image.
snake below Mithras’ bull–>krater
snake below Mithras’ bull–>bull’s wound
doubting Thomas’ finger–>Jesus’ wound in side
Roman soldier’s spear–>Jesus’ side wound.
Mithras’ knife–>bull wound.
Zeus’ eagle–>Prometheus’ wound/liver.
stem–>cap


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5638 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 23/11/2011
Subject: You are a couple: thought-source–>thought-receiver
*** MASTER REFERENT OF MYTH: ***
THOUGHT-SOURCE–>THOUGHT-RECEIVER


thought-source = transpersonal = male = lingham = wand
thought-receiver = personal = female = yoni = cup

Master referent: (the primary meaning; key to all mysteries; cracked the code)
thought-source–>thought-receiver

Metaphors:
transpersonal self–>personal self
male–>female
male deity–>female consort
lingham–>yoni
heimarmene-snake approaching krater or wound, forms a male->female image.
snake below Mithras’ bull–>krater
snake below Mithras’ bull–>bull’s wound
doubting Thomas’ finger–>Jesus’ wound in side
Roman soldier’s spear–>Jesus’ side wound.
Mithras’ knife–>bull wound.
Zeus’ eagle–>Prometheus’ wound/liver.
stem–>cap


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5643 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Triumph of Dionysus scene decoded
http://egodeath.com/images/egodeatharticle/HighRes/DionysusVictoryChariot_HiRes.jpg

All the human figures are turning to look behind them: this represents awareness being placed in a vantage point where the mind and awareness is made to perceive the uncontrollable thought-source and the helpless thought-receiver, which dynamic is conceptualized as “controller above you”, along with heimarmene, which is conceptualized as “controller below you” like an underlying rail, track, or filmstrip.

Ariadne at end of initiation is n*ked, helplessly passively dependently riding while Dionysus steers the chariot via reins to the mushroom-tigers.

Ariadne upon initiation completion is not attached to thus identified with the mushroom; however, she is winged, representing that awareness is made to perceive, during mushroom initiation, the dynamic of the uncontrollable thought-source and the helpless thought-receiver. Her hair is neatly bound, organized, controlled, now civilized.

Dionysus is attached to a mushroom and identified with the mushroom; he is the one who forces the initiate to take the mushrooms; he puts the mushroom on your preset path, the rail of life you are forcibly made to follow like Odysseus — represented by the snake-positioned heimarmene-panther underneath your chariot you seem to steer.

In the Tauroctony, and equivalent images, the heimarmene-snake (the rail of Fatedness of your worldline) is positioned underneath the god-steered chariot. Triptolemus’ chariot (in the story of Demeter & Persephone & Hades).

The girl in front of Dionysus is also Ariadne, as the the ecstatic psyche Maenad during the midst of initiation on 4 mushrooms or cups of mushroom wine: she has been made by Dionysus, through his heimarmene-path panther, to reach the krater of water-mixed mushroom-wine.

Ariadne as Maenad has no legs, her mind is carried along by the mushroom-tigers that are steered not by her but by Dionysus. She floats on mushrooms with disheveled, loosened, unbound hair, indicating loose cognitive binding.

Dionysus carries a spear: his spear of Destiny represents his power to puts thoughts into the lower mind — control-related thoughts, that kill your egoic self-concept. He pierces your liver so that:
o You, as ego-shaped self-concept, are destined to ego-die, from death by Destiny.
o You, as ego-shaped self-concept, are predetermined to ego-die, from death by Predeterminism.
o You, as ego-shaped self-concept, are fated to ego-die, from death by Fatedness.
o You, as ego-shaped self-concept, will inevitably ego-die, from death by Inevitability.

Ariadne holds a palm branch, symbol of triumph and victory.

The child riding on Dionysus’ lion likely means Ariadne prior to initiation, when the pre-initiate held the youthful self-concept (the ego-shaped self-concept as autonomous, independent controller of their mind), riding as king, with shepherd’s staff as a commander.

There is a heimarmene-vine of ivy or grapes running above the chariot, bracketing the scene with the heimarmene-panther underneath the chariot.

The beardless youthful wine-bearers have dead-panther skins and carry wine kegs, indicating men at initiation banquet personally experiencing and recalling experiencing the psychodrama that is depicted. The scene is designed to be appreciated during mushroom-wine banqueting.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5644 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Sun; metaphor for cybernetics, comm., ctrl, perception
Acharya S asserts that Christianity and suchlike religion is sun worship.

Actually, the sun is not the master referent (it’s not the target domain); it’s a metaphor (it’s merely in one of the “source domains”; ie. a source of metaphor that is used to point to a target final meaning). The idea from the target domain is encapsulated or packaged in superficial figurations from a source domain. The message content (in the target domain) is packaged in a delivery envelope constituted by a source domain.

A $100 bill (or a piece of gold) is the payload placed into a capsule which is then vacuum/pressure sucked to convey and transport and move and transmit the capsule/container, which contains its payload of valued meaning, to the destination location. The receiver of the package, container, or envelope, opens up the container and removes the payload, which is the target meaning.

Mythic metaphor describing mushroom-revealed mystic-state knowledge, is the most-valued instance of using metaphor. Transcendent Knowledge, metaphorically described and conveyed, is the master instance and historically most important instance of using metaphor as a delivery transportation container to contain and move a valued meaning.

After the world learns the Egodeath theory, a better, more relevant crop of books will sprout and be harvested: books about metaphor and analogy in cognition will need to be written that recognize that the primary, grand instance, the uber-instance of using metaphor, the king of metaphors, the original primary high use of metaphor, is the use of metaphor to express, visualize, grasp, and convey the Transcendent Knowledge that is revealed by mushrooms.

“I ate the mushrooms growing on cowpies, then my kingship was revealed to be merely that of a puppet constrained to walk along a path, and was sacrificed.”

‘sun’ is a metaphor referring finally to ‘uncontrollable thought-source’ as each person’s, or each mind’s, higher, transpersonal self, revealed and made perceived, in the mushroom state.


Acharya S asserts that religion (religious worship) refers to (or means) the sun; that the ultimate referent of religion (religious worship) is the sun.

But I assert that the ‘sun’ in religious myth and worship refers to (or means) the uncontrollable thought-source of the mind, as opposed to the helpless thought-receiver of the mind; and ultimately, it’s not that the helpless thought-receiver part of the mind worships the uncontrollable thought-source part of the mind, but rather, one finally “worships” the uniting of the two parts of the mind’s personal control system into a bi partite self-concept: I am a compound person; I am a couple, a coupling of two natures, of two persons: I am the uncontrollable thought-source of my mind, and I am the helpless thought-receiver of my mind.

I am my thought-source and I am my thought-receiver, two complementary distinct centers of personhood — and I am the awareness that perceives how my mind includes an uncontrollable thought-source coupled with a helpless thought-receiver.


Metaphor used for cybernetics, communication, control, perception

The personal control-system and the perceiving of it, is the target payload, the valued piece of gold, the target meaning, that is encapsulated in metaphor or in analogy, and is then grasped vividly by the mind and is conveyed, communicated, to other minds, wherein, upon mushroom initiation, the container is opened, the metaphor is interpreted, and the valued piece of gold is unwrapped and received.

The uber, master, preeminent instance of the use of metaphor, is for communication about control and about perception of control, a communication that uses metaphor to transmit and convey and amplify the observed dynamics of control.

The sun gives the moon the light that appears to come from the moon but really comes from the sun. The moon merely passively reflects the light that originates from the sun.

Just so, my control-power that appears to emanate from my sense of self as control-agent, my apparent ability to control my thoughts and control my will, actually is not effectively under that control; I am unable to control in such practical way, my own thoughts and control-thoughts and movements of my will.

The control power that appears to come from that kind of “me” is merely passively conducted through me; control-power and the source of thoughts is given to that kind of “me” from outside its realm of power. The lower self is helplessly given its thoughts by the relatively uncontrollable, hidden, higher self.

The lower self cannot, in an ultimate practical sense, control the higher self, which is the source of thoughts; thus I say “I cannot control my thought-source”, even if my thought-source is technically defined as “a part of me”. The thought-source is not the local, practically controlling part of “me”. Me, as local, lower-level controller, wielding control in some practical sense, is incapable of controlling the source of thoughts, even if the latter is defined as “some part of me”.

Thus I am, in effect, two persons in one: an uncontrollable thought-source, and a helpless thought-receiver, as is seen or perceived by my other self, my third locus of identification, which is my awareness, particularly my awareness or perception-ability when it is separated-out from mental construct processing.


During loose cognition, and somewhat ever after:

I experience myself as being pure awareness: the Dove, the Holy Spirit of ecstasy, the vantage point from which I am able to see the insertion of thoughts into the thought-receiver.

I experience myself as being the lower-level, local control-agent, but now purified of delusion: I experience myself as Christ, having sacrificed my youthful, deluded self-concept; I formerly identified only with a self-concept that had the form like Jesus.

I experience myself as being God, the uncontrollable source of my thoughts.


I was, in self-concept, of the form of Jesus. Now I am, in self-concept, of the form of God, Christ, and Holy Spirit.

My self-concept used to be in the uni partite form of Jesus. Now my self-concept is in the tri partite form of God, Christ, and Holy Spirit; or Sol, Luna, and eye of Mithras.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5645 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Fields Restarted by the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence
With this payload of meaning having been delivered and unsealed from the envelope of metaphor, by the data-feedback-realigned Core Egodeath theory:

o Theology can begin

o Philosophy can begin

o Psychology can begin

o Cognitive Science can begin, with new relevance;

o Quantum Physics can revisit the Copenhagen Hegemony without the non-Science concern of freewill-defending bias this time

o Analytic Philosophy can do something worthwhile for once

o Entheogenists can get a clue from what all the mushroom-wine banqueters knew circa 200.

o Metaphor and analogy

o Myth: salvage bits of value from the wreckage of previous theories I caused, and move in a forward direction

o Dead religions can now be appreciated, harvested for value: this Theory will help tune-in the weak signal buried in noise, to reconstruct dead religions and bring old gods and the spirit of ancient initiates back to life

o Ayahuasca religion

o Schizophrenia (there *is* a hidden entity transmitting command-thoughts into my head, forcing me to will and do things as a helpless puppet. Also: I control everyone’s thoughts — I am the one who makes everything happen.)

o Historical investigation of Christian origins

o Academic study of Western Esotericism, just started, can get off to an extremely accelerated start

o Bring secret societies out into the light

o Classics; Philology will let at last alive white European males truly read and understand the cultural fruits of their dead white European male ancestors

o For Christ’s sake, send Prohibition to Hell and set the prisoners free


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5646 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Data–>Theory fdbk adjusts Theory to lock-on to data
The Data-to-Theory feedback path, in conjunction with further theory-bound observation, forms a theory-reconfiguring feedback loop that adjusts the Theory to lock-on to data and be better organized for the purpose of efficiently explaining and perceiving the data.

Observation of data is theory-bound. The scientific method is usually expressed in too-crude form: you make a predictive hypothesis, conduct an experiment, and observe whether the predicted outcome occurs or not. If not, make a different prediction. When the prediction is confirmed by the outcome matching it, the theory has been confirmed.

Then you communicate that theory to other observers (scientists) who repeat the experiment and collectively tally their results, producing scientific consensus. That’s the popular, crass “Scientific Method as Predictionism” model, or way of putting it, that I so disparage.

“Prediction” is far too crude a model of science, yet all the poor books still push the crude vague ideology of Predictionism: the scientific method is Prediction then Confirmation or Refutation, then Collective re-Testing, achieving Scientific Consensus after Collective Confirmation.


My better, more flexible model than the crude model of the scientific method as “prediction and confirmation”, with dynamics added, instead producing “theory-bound data-observation reconfiguring the theory to enable more coherent and distinct data-observation”:

1. You create a partly right theory, and test it against the data, but are unable to perceive the data clearly. The data pushes back in a complex vector, shaping the theory.

2. The adjusted theory is better able to perceive the data, and the adjusted theory pushes against the data, and the data pushes back in another complex vector, shaping the theory further.

3. Finally the fully adjusted theory is able to perceive the data perfectly, the data doesn’t push back with any vector, the theory is not altered, and the theory is now shaped in perfect accordance with the data.


There’s a difference between the quality of your Theory or Mental Model in step 2 and 3:

In step 2, your model [eg my main article of 2005-2006] has barely enough match, is green, has minimal sweep/scope of confirmation, with the minimum possible indexings: a robust sapling, a glorious young tree.

Step 3 is a cornucopia, with increasing rate of lock-on feedback to quickly reshape the theory, perceive and gather data more effectively, and based on what’s now perceiveed more clearly, further adjust the Theory-lens.

Step 2’s mental model was solid, great, commendable. But step 3’s resulting theory is masterful, luxuriant, copious, overflowing, plethora, is more concise, more organized, more dense, more capable. The more mature, well-formed, refactored, fine-tuned Theory after step 3 has greater explanatory power, greater conceptual coherence, fuller mapping to previous theories.


In 2005, I was busy writing the Theory-specification including metaphor, for the first time. 2011 with only a few more months of work compared to the end of 2007, … I evaluated what happened that enabled my recent feedback-buildup to yesterday, and the answer amounts to “all the ideas in the postings I wrote, Sep-Nov 2011”.

The idea of Priority Sequence, being first Cybernetics, Heimarmene, Entheogens, then Metaphor.

Quitting paying any attention or giving away and legitimation to “what people think”. Giving the finger full-on, to Establishment thinking; becoming radicalized and “militant”, becoming a rabid, frenzied, berserking theorist; I went berserk on the received view, even taking down my fellow would-be cohorts for their being complicit with the Establishment. You have to violently rip and tear the received views and biases out of your thinking!

Tear out the hypnotizing worm! (The Matrix)
Rip off the tranquilizing control-puck from your android torso! (Star Wars)
Pluck the implanted controller-pill out! (The Candidate)
Stick the plucker-stick up through your nose into your brain and pull out the tracker! (Total Recall)

Leverage the force of hard-core doctrinal purity. Be ready to dictate to the data what it must say and be. Be extremist, simplistic, minimalist, doctrinaire, put all attention and commitment on defining the simplest possible 1st-order approximation — screw the fickle, mentally enfeebling politically correct efforts to please everyone. Anyone who doesn’t like some aspect of the Theory, go jump off a high place.

If the data doesn’t agree with the Theory, then too bad for the data — the Theory is correct.


I am in the headspace to shove those ideas to fullness and purity, to take the metaphor-extended Theory from the 2005 first effort first version, green, babe, hatchling, to sophisticated/masterful.

Theory develops by adjustment in light of data partially perceived. A phase-locked loop feedback. In loosecog, you perceive aspects of the target understanding, which enables you to perceive the object dynamics in question, which shapes your mental model (theory), through which you perceive in a theory-bound way (not a static theory though — a theory-under-adjustment). The result is dynamic theory adjustment based on observation feedback, with increasingly capable observation.


Doing the early 20th Century Modern Physics experiments in the laboratory helped me have the confidence, not alienation, to be an independent philosopher of scientific discovery and an independent philosophical interpreter of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. When you cannot perceive every aspect of an object, it is insane to conclude with Bohr that the object must not have the aspects that we are incapable of observing.

The sane approach, per Albert Einstein, Heisenberg, David Bohm, and James Cushing, is to use the clues that are avaiable to construct a conceptually coherent model of what is evidently going on underneath the covers of what we *can* see. That model, being tangible and visualizable and comprehensible (unlike Copenhagenism) then provides maximal ability to do further experiments and observations, making progress in expanding the mental model and Theory.

Science must not be derailed by the separate, distinct issue of Ontology. We must look to Engineering instead, seeing as Science has lost its mind and its nerve and has prostituted itself in subservience to propping up the egoic project of freewill reification; when we need to figure shit out, Science gets off on throwing up its arms, while Engineering says “step aside: let me make sense of things and construct a sensible model of what’s going on under the covers.

Go do your Ontology stroking your beards, reveling in the prospect of joyous incomprehensibility, but don’t confuse that with real Science, which is about figuring shit out by hook or crook to make sense of the world, leveraging Feyerabend’s story of real science, which is “whatever method gets the job done, whatever it takes, case-by-case”.


What Philosophy of Science book discusses feedback between theory and data: the theory shapes the observation of the data, and the observed data shapes the theory, forming a feedback loop that alters the theory and the observing of data, until the theory and data match.

That’s how real science really works. hypothesis/prediction–>experiment to confirm/disconfirm (or way better, to *partially* confirm in particular ways: the confirmation isn’t a Yes or No; it’s a *complex vector* serving to push back to reshape the theory, not dumbly answer Y or N. A dynamic, elaborate data pushback vector.

The data to be explained (the explanandum) is: things experienced in loosecog, and mythemes.
Put simply:
Explain entheogen tripping, and explain mythemes.
Approach the data (explanandum) with initial rough ill-formed theory “mythemes are something to do with Cybernetics, Heimarmene, and Entheogens”. Tune and adjust some of the hypotheses in line with the explanandum:

Maybe snake = heimarmene.
Maybe the ancient banqueting tradition = entheogens.
Maybe “being alone and wrestling with the unnamed man all night to get a blessing from God” = control-cybernetics.
Maybe king = cybernetics.

Is there evidence throughout Western Esotericism and Western religion to support such conjectures? Yes, to the extent that metaphor is so interpreted, which requires judgment on “reading” metaphor, judgment to measure the degree of confirmation.

During 2001-2005, I got some possible confirmation of the 3 pillars (Cybernetics, Heimarmene, Entheogens) being expressed in the 4th pillar (Metaphor), in Western Esotericism and Western Religion. Entheogens were fairly easy and concrete to confirm the presence of.

Then, a few weeks ago (such as Sep 2011), I thoughts about books that have bits of my pillar-topics in them and yet fall miles short — that led me to invent the idea of organized weighting, in mythic Esotericism interpretation: the Pri1 referent and emphasis is required to be Cybernetics; Pri 2 = Heimarmene, and Pri3 = Entheogens, particularly mushrooms.

That Priority Sequence is versus Carl Ruck et al, who implicitly theorizes that the Pri1 target of myth is entheogens, and there is no Pri2 required, to understand myth.

Acharya S asserts, in throwback 1880s fashion, that the Pri1 reference topic is (literally) the sun, and there is no Pri2 target topic, to understand the religious myth around Christianity. Look at my posts 2001-2005 and ask in what way they were not yet a complete breakthrough to the degree I now have.

Why, or in what sense per Paul Thagard’s cognitive science-based computer modelling of scientific discovery, did I manage a mountain of total breakthrough around November 23, 2011, while in comparison, there was less complete breakthrough around November 14, 2001, 2005 with my main Theory-specification article, and by the end of December, 2007, when I tore myself away to hiatus til Sep. 2011?

It’s a matter of degree of cross-indexing, “deepening” the associations, and refining the internal infrastructure of the Theory, and gaining fluency and facility and adeptness at “reading” myth. I had to apply pressure for a few months in 2011 to turn the relatively charcoalish diamond of 2005 into a pure diamond. I had to do some passes at refining the Theory, making various *kinds* of improvements.

I finally had to yesterday start working on a model of theory-deepening or “breakthrough”, because I keep re-learning is that a breakthrough comes not at one moment, one day, but is preshocks, big earthquake, then aftershocks. The weeks and days leading up to yesterday, November 23, 2011, felt like a jackpot, joined by an increased rush of gold coins, followed by further bursts of increasing the flow every day, over a couple weeks.

I feel today that I’m past the peak of this unexpected motherlode jackpot, though I expect to find plenty more confirmation, not that any is needed. Now myth is before me like a library to read for general strengthening of the Theory and enjoyment — just the same way that reading yet another mysticism or religion book often feels worthwhile, for a somewhat different tone and perspective.

In 2007, I reached 70% toward 100% breakthrough. What was the 30% still missing?
o Priority Sequence (Pri1:Cyb Pri2:Heim Pri3:Mshr)
o Mushroom focus (very streamlined and thought-clarifying compared to hazy, uncertain, doubt-inducing “entheogens”)
o In 2005, I relied and was dependent on piecemeal evidence, needed Diamond Hammer of Interpretation to transcend bits of evidence — as I wrote recently: Quit acting as if the entheogen theory stands or falls with individual mushroom findings in art; certainly there are lots, it’s way too late to act as if we can dismiss the whole by rejecting every instance.

Andy Letcher in his helpful and harmful, badly argued, uninformed book (do your homework!), barely even acknowledges any of the by-then well-known instances of mushrooms in Christian art; his careless waving-aside of them starts to sound like that move JZ Smith critiques as obstinate apologetics: Protestant Jesus-guild members write “Because no one instance of pagan mythic religion is *exactly* the same as Christianity, we are justified in facilely dismissing the assertion “Christianity is like pagan religion; Christianity is pagan Mystery cult in Jewish drag.”

Letcher acts as if it’s unimportant whether his arguments actually have any persuasive power, or whether he presents a coherent argument; the only thing that’s important is to, one way or another, including kettle logic (inconsistent argumentation structure) to dismiss any bits of evidence he admits exist, to discredit in any way, in favor of any other (inconsistent) goal he invents on the spot to represent his own (inconsistent, shifting) position. His aim isn’t to construct a consistent position, except the general, ludicrous and ill-defined position, vaguely amounting to the position that religious mushroom use has no history.


o With the major topic of Entheogens, too, for a breakthrough, I had to recently quit piecemeal data-consideration; leverage the whole hypothesis system with vigor of consistency of assumption and interpretation/observation. I had to end the mere *piecemeal*-oriented focus to get it in our heads that “We get it, yes, mushrooms are all throughout myth.”

It’s not as if the Entheogen Theory of Religion any more these days hangs on the interpretation of a single item of data, like we could use the Plaincourault fresco as proxy for all the hundreds of explicit mushrooms throughout Christian and religious art.

o For yesterday’s breakthrough, there was a similar situation regarding the Heimarmene hypothesis/interpretation. *If* we interpret and “read” all snakes in all world myth as representing Fatedness of your worldline of your life, then certainly the idea of Heim is everywhere in religion. Indeed the snake is everywhere: why would it be, unless Heimarmene really is important and the snake really represents it?!

Snakebite and shedding skin are *not* represented; they are specifically — deliberately — *not* represented. That omission strategically only leaves the *shape* of the snake as the point, the reason, why the snake is chosen by religion as the main symbol depicting religious wisdom.

Then I combined ‘thread’, and the turning point was the argument I posted around Nov. 21, 2011 that snake = heimarmene based on:
Fates = finite thread = worldline
thread is isomorphic with snake
thread in Daedalus’ Labyrinth and Daedalus’ ant-threaded seashell.
serpent = wisdom

That finally led to my insight yesterday or so (~Nov. 22, 2011) of “serpent vs tree… oh, I see!, serpent in tree as a compare/contrast teaching-instrument, ; the serpent teaches about thinking about treeness (decision-tree openness or illusoriness) in the course of our life as control-and-decision-making agents.

My grasp of metaphor broke through to a greater depth of facility and skill in that I got that much better at reading mythemes, metaphors, analogies — for example, a big mytheme-recognition recently (one of many, coming too fast to type) was “the revealed knowledge in initiation is like a snake in a basket with a lid that can be removed to reveal the hidden snake”. Thus “initiation = revealing the hidden snake”

Also my recently forged Hammer of Interpretation rejects irrelevant noise: it told me that “shed skin and poison” are false derivations of why serpent = wisdom.

Also a big jump in my reading-ability was a deepening of associations, going a bit beyond what I wrote years ago. Why ivy is closely related to mushrooms/entheogens: things make sense if ivy’s *shape* is important and the mushroom reveals insight about the *shape* of a snake and *shape* of ivy vine.

How is ‘vine’ related to psychoactive ‘mushroom’? Either it’s a vine we never heard of (a long shot, pure conjecture), or, vine = mushroom because the mushroom reveals vine-shaped Fatedness of the worldline of a person’s life (a close association with great conceptual coherence, if we adopt my Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence).

70% reading-ability –> 100% reading-ability — involved many, many insights in the past week, 2 weeks, 2 months. The missing 30% was – of course — by definition, the ideas in my recent postings. So many of my recent postings are “the explanation” of why I had a breakthrough, a deepening, a great increase in the number of associations and the ability to read myth with greater facility than in 2005 or 2007.

I was working on so many different, interrelated topics through 2007, I didn’t only work on how to read religious myth. I made record progress 2001-2007, and was severely constrained in word-count in my main article.

I was greedily staking a claim across all religious myth — yet there were various major points still to be prioritized and somehow(!) squeezed in; which words could I have omitted to buy some more space to write explicitly the particular spin of the following idea, very important in myth?

male–>female = uncontrollable thought-source–>helpless thought-receiver

source domain (metaphor) = target domain (non-metaphor)
metaphor = non-metaphor

A key idea was one that came to me in a forest walk on the path, thinking about whether Antiquity could have been able to comprehend the idea of worldline and heimarmene in a block-universe. Of course they could: the worldline idea is merely, simply like walking on a path. Actually I had that “path to Eleusis = worldline” idea for some time, from back when I read about Eleusis; see posting dates.

Well there’s an example of “getting an idea, yet not getting it all the way yet” — a common experience for me.

Yes, say in 2005, I had the idea that “path to Eleusis = worldline = snake”, but that’s slightly different than the recent 2011 idea that “That the concept of a worldline in a changeless spacetime block was easy for Antiquity to understand, is proven by the analogy of “procession along sacred ancient path to the Mysteries of Demeter at Eleusis = brass snake = vein in marble block = presetness of our lives and stream of conscious experiencing = worldline = heimarmene.”

Iterative, “deepening” Theory design is like the visual lock-on process when ferreting out a hidden autostereogram image: you glimpse some bits of data, create a theory of what else is there, try it, let the data push back, revise the theory, look more, see more, that perception of data pushes back more, revising your theory more, until you gain coherent lock-on, and then form a perfect theory (image) in your mind.

In 2005, I deduced the image yet didn’t truly directly perceive it. I saw the correct reading of Esotericism and religion correctly, but still it felt indirectly, piecemeal, haltingly, unnaturally.

11/23/11, I saw it in its direct fullness, richness, directly, thoroughly, via the more rigorously tuned, clarified, amplified, Diamond Hammer of Interpretation.

This was like correctly figuring out the autostereogram image by still only glimpsing pieces, so having a full image in mind yet not able to actually directly perceive and simply “read off” that image; your mental model/theory then is still not strong enough, good enough, to truly tune in, lock on, to the point of reading-off — it’s like singing along holding a hymnal but really just winging it, vs. actually reading-off from the hymnal.

Like looking while near-blind, and correctly knowing what’s there, but barely seeing it directly. Or accurately determining which song is playing on hissy FM reception and singing along, but really going from memory rather than truly hearing the song that’s playing.

Now I can sing along with the dead religions, even though the hymnal is too blurry to truly read.

I couldn’t actually *hear* it before, when I wrote my complete Theory-spec in 2005, which achieved closure and (at least implicit) comprehensiveness despite its severely constrained length (28 pages to dominate the entire set of fields, to take ownership of the entire field of religion, myth, altered-state mysticism, revelation, enlightenment, and satori, showing the way all the way for Cognitive Science of altered-state phenomenology as called for in Benny Shanon’s 2002 Antipodes of the Mind).

In 2005, I stated what I deduced the meaning to be — labored strenuous word-by-word reading or translating one word at a time. Like me reading French. I can eventually produce a translation, like working a jigsaw puzzle, out of order, with much hypothesis and tentativeness: correct, but anything but fluent; halting, struggle, unsureness but “I’m pretty much sure that’s what it is saying to the native speakers”.

In 2011, I directly perceived and read-off the meaning — fluent “transparent” direct reading of the text. Like me reading English. I do on-the-fly translation, not even felt as translation but “simply reading”.

My recent Priority Sequence idea was important — has roots in top-level outline of main article 2005, but then, I didn’t firmly list the *sequence* of priorities, such as judging Cybernetics to be more Important than Heimarmene, which was more important than Entheogens, which was more important than Metaphor.


I recently (see posting dates) thought of the *Priority Sequence* idea and the ancient *simplicity* (or “obviousness”) of the seemingly esoteric *heimarmene-snake* idea while I was walking in the forest looking at the changing mushrooms that are always there at the base of the decision-branching trees while controlling my legs to walk myself meandering along the fixed serpentine path that already existed winding itself around the executive decision trees such as are used by the king as pilot who steers the ship of state.

I was complaining about Manly Hall’s Secret Teachings of All Ages, which emphasizes most what matters least, but should emphasize most what matters most (that’s the Priority Sequence idea; walking myself with my weakened leg and my powerful leg along that winding path, I identified “Cybernetics, Heimarmene, Entheogens, Metaphor” as the correct priority sequence.


Degrees of comprehension:

The final paragraph of my main article/theory-specification does talk about the sacred marriage such as Dionysus and Ariadne, and Christ and his Elect (those who were chosen for regeneration before the foundation of the world), but a few important points are only implicitly present (the cost was a million dollars per word) — omitted partly because of intense self-imposed word-count limitations, and partly because more time was needed to do more extensive cross-indexing of the ideas and metaphors.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5647 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Social-political use & abuse of mystic revelation
Understanding the Politics of Applied Mystic Enlightenment/Revelation

Politics is very important because that’s the entire purpose of the New Testament (a sound purpose that’s always relevant): to use the same-old same-old mystic revelation that every two-bit cult offered as cheaply and ubiquitously as mushroom wine. Every POS Alchemy, brand of Gnosticism, and suchlike detritus and flotsam taught the exact same BFD revelation of mystic truth.

The only distinguishing, motivating purpose of bothering to invent the new religion, Christianity, was political: instead of using the old, standard, generic, routine, universal Transcendent Knowledge (that every two-bit scheme conveys) to prop up Domination Hierarchy, the purpose of the Christian expression of the same old Transcendent Knowledge was to direct that old universal Transcendent Knowledge toward propping up a just, humane, *egalitarian* socialpolitical arrangement of society instead of abusing the old routine standard universal revealed Transcendent Knowledge toward excusing and fakely pseudo-justifying the bunk, inhumane, unjust, irreligious, immoral *domination-hierarchy* socialpolitical arrangement of society.

Similarly in Athens’ democracy, there was great concern to control how the Transcendent Knowledge that was revealed in the Mysteries, was utilized in public — to protect the Mysteries’ revelation-knowledge from being abused by aristocrats who want to destroy and wipe out democracy, steal power from the citizens, and set up a domination hierarchy that is supposedly “justified” by the Transcendent Knowledge that’s revealed by the Mystery Cult initiations.

Yes, Transcendent Knowledge is supremely valuable — sure, fine, whatever. But *don’t* think that there is anything special and rare about it such that Christianity brings some kind of revealed Transcendent Knowledge that the other zillion run-of-the-mill brands and marketing packaging don’t *also* provide.

Christianity doesn’t provide *anything*, in terms of mysticism of (actually existing type of) salvation, that all other schemes (in their valid configuration/form) provide. Christianity provides the exact identically same revelation and regeneration and salvation and purification and athanatos that every other scheme of religion or Esoteric Wisdom provides — not one bit more.

As far as mystic revelation content is concerned, Christianity provides the exact same sh*t as every other two-bit scheme of religion, spirituality, or esotericism provides, in their valid forms. Christianity, esoterically, has *nothing* that other schemes of esotericism don’t also have. Esoterically, Christianity doesn’t provide anything more than other brands.

The only thing Christianity offers in contrast to other brands of religion or esotericism is the effort to direct the universal Transcendent Knowledge in support of egalitarian structuring of society, against the effort of other religions to abuse Transcendent Knowledge in pseudo-support of domination-hierarchy, to pretend that religious revelation advocates hierarchy and sheer power-based domination as a social arrangement.

The logic of Roman Empire, domination-hierarchy, and Mithraism: “I kicked your ass, therefore God has revealed that I am appointed by Him to rule over you. God made me master and you my slave. God made you my slave. Worship him, obey me; as you worship, revere, honor, and submissively bow down to God, faithful consistency dictates that you worship, revere, honor, and submissively bow down to me.”

The dog in Mithraic tauroctonys represents obedience and submission (reflecting dominance), along with faithful alliance and fidelity.

Early Christianity (whenever that was) is precisely the assertion that another logic, another train of reasoning, is valid and better: as one man bows in submission to the uncontrollable thought-source, so does each man bow down to the, or his, uncontrollable thought-source; and everything is predetermined; and such Transcendent Knowledge is either silent about the issue of how we should structure power-relations in society, or, Transcendent Knowledge dictates that we are all equals in the face of transcendent power; we are all heimarmene-worms and ego-killed kings, and to be consistent with that revealed Transcendent Knowledge, to reflect it and follow it as a template, we must set up a society with power-relations structured in an egalitarian configuration.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5648 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Ahistoricity is important because it’s Non-literalism
In the case of the truth about Christianity, to advocate Nonliteralism is necessarily to advocate Ahistoricity. It is self-contradiction to advocate Nonliteralism of religious figurations and themes, while also advocating Historicity regarding Jesus, Paul, Church Fathers, and Christianity’s Existence in Antiquity.

My current, latest thinking and feeling on the subject of whether Christianity existed in Classical Antiquity: From the time of Augustus Caesar to the 476 “fall of the Roman Empire” or to the rise of Islam that shut down the Mediterranean trade routes, Christianity as such didn’t exist; it only existed in precursor, piecemeal, proto-Christian form, such as Gnosticism.

In particular, per Edwin Johnson, the New Testament writings didn’t exist in anything recognizably like their present form (it’s a matter of degree) until close to Luther’s era. Christianity had a long, slow, late fade-in, so that Christianity, in New Testament form, was written by Luther & co, in 825 aka 1525. The details? Who knows.

The details are pretty unfathomable at this point, requiring much broad, time-consuming research. But this general idea of the very late, very slow fade-in of Christianity, such that Christianity only existed in a bare ghostly form through 476, and only existed in recognizable, written, NT form in 825 or 1525, is much closer to the truth than the theory that NT Christianity existed (in any meaningful, recognizable sense) in 325.

The issue is not the accuracy of the details, but rather, the truth of the general idea: that recognizable, written NT Christianity was brought together after 476 — not in 150 or 325. Recognizable, written NT Christianity was brought together not in 150, 325, or 476, but closer to 825 or 1525.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5649 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: The Hammer of Interpretation
Hoffman’s Diamond Hammer of Interpretation:

Any valid system of transcendent knowledge involves Cybernetics as its ultimate concern, Heimarmene as its main support of that concern, Entheogens as its means of access, and Analogy as its means of expression.

Any valid system of transcendent knowledge involves:

o Cybernetics as its ultimate concern (because religion is about *you*, what you experience yourself to be, a control-wielding agent moving yourself though space and time, deciding which branch of the decision-tree to take; the source of control-power in the mind, and helpless receiving of all thoughts),

o Heimarmene as its main support of the ultimate concern (way of organizing the mental model of control and time),

o Entheogens as its means of access (mushrooms make you perceive the uncontrollable source of thoughts and concomitant personal helpless subjection to your control-thoughts you are given), and

o Analogy as its means of expression (Metaphor-systems, a language of alluding to and vividly describing and conveying/communicating and structuring the above).


Hellenistic style would probably label it as “the Golden Hammer of Interpretation”, rather than ‘Diamond’, but ‘Diamond’ expresses the power of conceptual coherence and completely organized thought.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5650 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: Wheat vs. Chaff: m-model of thot-src vs junk part of ego
My Theory considered as a “prediction” was strongly confirmed upon finding that Persephone has a winnowing basket in Hades to separate the wheat from chaff, meaning mentally separating the truth about egoic control power from our initial, animalistic incoherent misconception of egoic control power.


The post-initiation mother is Demeter.

The pre-initiation daughter is Persephone, representing the youthful egoic deluded self-concept. Persephone is forcibly made Queen of the Underworld.

Demeter was forced to sacrifice Persephone by Hades; Hades forcibly abducted Persephone away from Demeter, to Hades.

Hades is King/ruler of the Underworld of the cast-off ghosts of the ego-dead.


Demeter, Persephone, and Hades are metaphorically described (to help make them tangible and comprehensible) aspects of the initiate regarding the self-concept regarding mushroom-revealed perception of mental dynamics of self-command cybernetics power, including revealing fatedness.

In Antiquity, you take mushrooms, perceive the impotence of self-control cybernetics and perceive fatedness, and mentally grasp that perception more vividly by metaphorical descriptions such as ‘Persephone’, ‘Hades’, ‘abduction’, and ‘Demeter’.

The altered state makes you perceive your uncontrollable thought-source and your helpless thought-receiver, and this perceiving eliminates aspects of deluded egoic control thinking, identifying and removing an incoherent virtual agency from your mind and relegating that virtual agency to a category of “things that seemed to exist but don’t really exist”.

The altered state makes you perceive your uncontrollable thought-source [‘Hades’] and your helpless thought-receiver [‘Demeter’], and this perceiving eliminates [‘abducts’, ‘sacrifices’] aspects of deluded egoic control thinking [‘Persephone’, ‘ghost’], identifying and removing an incoherent virtual agency from your mind [‘exorcism’] and relegating that virtual agency to a category of “things that seemed to exist but don’t really exist” [‘Hades’, ‘underworld’].

Self-steering power, self-control cybernetics is metaphorized as ‘chariot and charioteer’.

Fatedness is metaphorized as ‘snake’, ‘thread’, ‘labyrinth’, ‘ivy’, ‘vine’, ‘ivy vine’, ‘grape vine’, ‘path’ (such as the path for the procession to Eleusis), and is often positioned under the vehicle, such as ‘snake under bull’, ‘panther under Dionysus’ chariot’, ‘snake under chariot’, or ‘snake-drawn chariot’ of the first-generation initiate of Demeter, Triptolemus.

Fatedness is also metaphorized as the basilisk (rooster+snake)-drawn chariot of Saturn, near the sphere of the fixed stars, which sphere is represented as a snake, with the sphere of Saturn and fixed stars equated with fatedness.


Triptolemus is the most important first-generation initiate of Demeter. Triptolemus steers and controls his snake-drawn chariot, spreading knowledge of “agriculture” — how to make hidden wheat sprout, which is a metaphorical description referring to knowledge of how to reveal the workings of control in the mind and thus sacrifice the delusion portion of egoic control-thinking.

In case the term ‘sacrifice’ is too charged, vague, indirect, and metaphorical: that ‘sacrificing’ of the deluded aspect of egoic mental model is to identify and eliminate/repudiate it, like, for example, Physics eliminated the ‘phlogiston’ concept as unnecessary and useless and an interference to successful explanatory efficacy.


Whether the Scientific method is mischaracterized as Hypothesis/Prediction/Confirmation or accurately characterized as a theory-data feedback loop, my serendipitous happening upon a strange picture of Persephone in Hades serves as theory-confirmation of my Theory (no longer a hypothesis) of Hellenistic religious myth as firstly about Cybernetics, supported by Heimarmene, accessed via Entheogens, visualized via Metaphor.

When reviewing the story of Persephone yesterday (Nov. 24, 2011) to see which god abducted her, I saw a curious picture of Persephone at her study desk in Hades’ underworld, lifting the lid of the desk. My first inclination was the terrible habit of throwing up my arms saying “How should *I* know? It’s just some stupid random Greek stuff. <shrug>” Fortunately there was a caption, although a bunch of meaningless, unhelpful jargon:

Persephone opening the “Liknon Mystikon”

WTF is the impenetrable decipherable alienating term “Liknon Mystikon”? Will this research effort be at all worth the payoff, to pointlessly find that she’s opening her school desk to retrieve a pencil? Again, I had a terrible habit of wimping out, collapsing in intimidation.

But I gathered my wits, stopped, broke out the sentence terms, and researched the unknown terms, working the equation though I feared (this is why I have the bad habit of wimping out and wilting in the face of the unfamiliar) having to learn Greek and Latin and dead religions and spend a month in antiquarian studies, only to find the scene is random, unworthwhile content that is of no use to anyone.

“A bunch of random decoration? I don’t have time for deciphering that.” I gathered my wits, reminded myself of the requirement to be resourceful and have a can-do attitude toward working through the math, deciphering, and interpreting the ramifications.

The deciphering turned out to be trivial and easy, and the payoff turned out to be a jackpot directly supporting what I had posted only a couple days before — and I wasn’t even particularly looking for such confirmation; it was serendipitous. The alien terms I was intimidated by in the equation/sentence to be deciphered were not ‘pinax’ or ‘Locri’ — so don’t be intimidated by those.

The only alien unknowns to research are ‘Liknon Mystikon’. A search immediately produced the jackpot result: A liknon is a winnowing fan to separate grain from chaff.

A winnowing fan separates the grains from the worthless chaff, like separating a lie from truth. The chaff, the lie, is the imagined egoic power of control over the source of one’s thoughts, and the ability to control and change your destiny.

Upon perceiving this delusion, the purely deluded aspect of egoic thinking vanishes, going to Hades, the underworld land of shadows, ghosts, where Persephone (the deluded self-concept) was abducted by Hades (King/ruler of the Underworld) and made Queen of Hades — Queen of the people who only seemed to exist, until initiation; Queen of Ego Delusion, Queen of Dead Egos.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5651 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: Data–>Theory fdbk adjusts Theory to lock-on to data
The Scientific Method is “Theory-Data Feedback Loop”, not “Hypothesis/Prediction/Confirmation”

The Scientific Method continues to be crudely characterized, in passing, as Predictionism, never with a justification for this rigid and arbitrary emphasis. I never see proper discussions of the Scientific method presenting an argument in favor of this “Science = prediction” characterization. That characterization is treated as if it’s the standard agreed-upon, well-justified definition of the Scientific method, yet no proper discussion actually asserts that view!

The Predictionism view is a conclusion-summary, with no connection to the real discussions, reasoning, about how “the Scientific method” actually works. It’s a free-floating characterization unconnected to the actual argumentation. Thus there’s a disconnect between such “summaries” and what the Philosophers of Science actually think.

No Philosopher of Science, in a serious critical discussion of the Scientific method, defends anything like that crass “summary” of Science as Prediction — yet that summary-characterization continues as a bad meme to propagate itself. The meme needs to be exterminated once and for all.

The actual Scientific Method is a dynamic ongoing interaction between theory and data, with the theory testing and probing the data in various ways, getting dynamic feedback from the data that changes various aspects of the theory, which then is able to better probe and observe the data and collect the data, so that the data then pushes back and feeds back to altering the theory, until there is a match between theory and now fully as possible perceived data.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5652 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: Wheat vs. Chaff: m-model of thot-src vs junk part of ego
Decoded: Demeter holding up a grain to Triptolemus: Demeter holds up a grain and chaff showing them to the initial initiate Triptolemus. You are Triptolemus, the initiate. Demeter is showing you during mushroom initiation a grain and a chaff.

That mytheme is a metaphor and analogy from the Source Domain of “agriculture”, pointing to the Target Domain of self-control cybernetics and self-concept as control agent, cybersteering control-power agency.

That mytheme describes and depicts by analogy: mushroom perception makes you perceive that part of your egoic self-concept is valid and real, and part of it is illusory and unreal.

Wheat grain does not mean wheat grain: it means the truth about egoic control agency.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5653 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: Data–>Theory fdbk adjusts Theory to lock-on to data
When deciphering a language, eventually you can write and speak new statements in the language. Thus a metaphor points to the target meaning, and once you possess the target meaning, you are able to generate new metaphors, becoming a mythmaker, able to speak the language of myth.

The Egodeath theory is both a Core theory of the self and the transformation of self-concept, and, it is the deciphering of a language of metaphors.

This pairing of interests is not new:

o Generating an independent Theory/model of the world; constructing a Core theory of the self and the transformation of self-concept.

o Encoding and decoding, encryption and decryption; ciphering and deciphering; communication and linguistics. The deciphering of a language of metaphors about the self and the transformation of self-concept, and learning to generate new statements or symbol expressions in the deciphered language, translating between the source (metaphorical) and target (non-metaphorical) languages, becoming able to construct meaningful, valid statements within the existing metaphor-domain, and, becoming able to construct new metaphor-schemes — new expressions or embodiments of Perennial Transcendent Knowledge.

Esotericists (Adepts, Magii, Magus) in the early Modern period (and later: Boehme, Crowley) similarly figured out how the self-concept is corrected and transformed on mushrooms, and some of them also did related work on encryption and deciphering, of hieroglyphs, of symbols, of metaphors, particularly in this uber-domain, this master domain, Perennial Transcendent Knowledge.

This unchanging Transcendent Knowledge has is explicitly summarized and effectively condensed for the first time in known history in the form of my Egodeath theory, hand-drafted August 1988, uploaded as Core summary to Principia Cybernetica at start of 1997, and uploaded as main theory-specification 2005-2006.

My Theory, the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence, explicitly and scientifically explains Transcendent Knowledge; this theory-expression doesn’t rely on metaphors, but stands apart from them and explains them, and utilizes them to increase the grasp of the non-metaphorical concepts of the Core theory.

The Theory also demonstrates application of this metaphor-handling capability and metaphor understanding, by demonstrating the creation of new metaphor schemes that express Transcendent Knowledge, such as in terms of Cognitive Science, Cybernetics, Robotics, Telepresence, Computer Science — following the poetic lead of Neil “the Professor” Peart’s 1975 song No One at the Bridge (nautical metaphors) and especially his songs The Body Electric (1001001 is “I” in binary encoding) and Vital Signs.

The metaphor-domain of Cognitive Science is valuable because it is closer to the target domain than other previous source domains are, such as Alchemy, Persephone, and Jesus. The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence is an independent new late-Modern era discovery of Perennial Transcendent Knowledge from within a cultural context such as the computer labs at Stanford University in Silicon Valley.

CTET as a religion: name of the religion: Cybernetic Transcendence or CybTrans (a literal description of the religion), like my original domain name, Cybtrans.com. A more poetic name? I refer to it as TK, meaning my particular Theory and expression. ‘Egodeath’ is another effective label, which isn’t the title of a religion, so much as a statement of what religion is.

Metaphor-theme of the religion (so direct, it’s barely a metaphor): Cybernetics & Cognitive Science, or the Cognitive Phenomenology of Personal Cybernetics. My theory — what the Perennial Philosophy really is — is Kubernetes Gnosis; Gnosis of Kubernetes; Transcendent Knowledge of Cybernetics; Gnosis of Cybernetics; CyberGnosis, which is *the* Gnosis, unveiled and directly named.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5654 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: The name of my Theory and of the system of religion I created
Below, my favored term is listed first in each list.

The formal name of my theory is
The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence
The Cyberfatedelic Theory (explicit and short and designed to list the 3 important referents of myth & religion in priority sequence: 1) Cybernetics; 2) Heimarmene; 3) Entheogens)

The informal names of my theory:
The Egodeath Theory
Transcendent Knowledge (TK)
The Entheogen Theory of Religion and Egodeath

Possible useful informal short name of my theory as the name of a brand of religion:
Egodeath (pithy and short without being an acronym; sound roots in ancient and 1960s tradition)
CyberGnosis (explicitly explanatory, combines late-Modern style with Christian roots in Hellenistic Classical Antiquity)
CybTrans
Cybernetic Transcendence
Kubergnosis
The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence
Cognitive Science
Perennial Transcendent Knowledge
Cybtrans.com
TK
Transcendent Knowledge
CTET
Cybernetics & Cognitive Science
Cognitive Phenomenology of Personal Cybernetics
Perennial Philosophy
Kubernetes Gnosis
Gnosis of Kubernetes
Transcendent Knowledge of Cybernetics
Gnosis of Cybernetics
Gnosis


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5655 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: How to think coherently: Engineering, not Science
It is important and mandatory that people learn and cross-index ideas about Heimarmene in all major aspects.

http://www.egodeath.com/QMHiddenVariablesDeterminism.htm

Bell admitted to Huw Price that hidden variables determinism is the only tangible and coherent model but must be rejected by Science in order to preserve free will. Thus our falsely so-called “Science” has admitted that Science starting with Bohr = prostitute, degenerated, a travesty of rationality, = pseudo-Science.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5656 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Killed ego = girl (Persephone), revised ego = woman (Demeter)
Why egodeath is the death of a girl

Here’s how you are the woman Demeter: you are the helpless thought-receiver, and you were overpowered by your male transpersonal portion, who injected egodeath thoughts into you, killing your daughter/girl childself; that is..! … egodeath is a girl.

The lower mind (before & after initiation) is female because helpless thought-receiver.

The egoic delusion that is eliminated during initiation is female because it is the youthful self-concept that the lower mind used to have; to retain continuity, back-project the same gender from “my practical control-power is now recognized as female psyche because it helplessly receives thoughts that are injected by a separate locus of control”, back onto the previous version of the psyche; therefore, the previous self-concept is described also as female; a daughter.

Thinking about loosecog and time travel helps get into the Demeter headspace.

How egodeath is like a son dying
How egodeath is like a daughter dying
How egodeath is like a father losing a son [God, Jesus]
How egodeath is like a father losing a daughter
How egodeath is like a mother losing a son
How egodeath is like a mother losing a daughter [Demeter, Persephone]


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5657 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/11/2011
Subject: Re: Extreme Radical Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion
The Extreme Radical Maximal Cyberfatedelic Theory of Religion, including Nonliteralism & Politics

Any valid system of transcendent knowledge involves entheogens. But further, going beyond the Extreme Radical Maximal *Entheogen* Theory of Religion, is The Maximal Cybernetics/Heimarmene/Entheogen/Metaphor Theory of Religion and Esoteric Knowledge, condensed as “The Maximal Cyberfatedelic Theory of Religion” — plus the important topics of Politics and Nonliteralism/Ahistoricity (topics which I fold into the words ‘interpretation’, ‘metaphor’, and ‘theory’).

The Maximal Cyberfatedelic Theory of Religion

or shortenable because already absolutistic:

The Cyberfatedelic Theory of Religion
or
The Cyberfatedelic Interpretation of Religion

In ‘Cyberfatedelic’,
1.Cybernetics is listed first because it is Pri1
2. Heimarmene is listed second because Pri2
3. Psychedelics/Psychotomimetics/Schizogenics/Entheogens/Mushrooms is listed 3rd because Pri3
4. Theory or Interpretation is listed 4th because Metaphor is Pri4
…5? Political Application (Use and Abuse) of Religion, and Nonliteralism/Ahistoricity eg of Jesus, Paul, Church Fathers, and Christianity in Antiquity, none of which existed except in a weak sense.
…6? Nonliteralism/Ahistoricity eg of Jesus, Paul, Church Fathers, and Christianity in Antiquity, none of which existed except in a weak sense.

Metaphor, Politics, and Nonliteralism are closely related, in Christianity. It’s possible to fold Politics and Nonliteralism (Ahistoricity) into the bucket “Metaphor”. I *have* often written and remarked that surprisingly, Ahistoricity — huge as it *seems*, and as much work as I’ve contributed in that field, is quite minor in my Theory.

Now that Michael Rinella provides leads that I can use to relate Entheogens and Politics in Athens’ democracy, I can apply much similar treatment of Christian and Hellenic religion:
o Fold Politics into Metaphor for Christianity
o Fold Politics into Metaphor for Hellenism
o Fold Nonliteralism into Metaphor for Christianity
o Fold Nonliteralism into Metaphor for Hellenism

My Core theory with the later metaphor extension added inherently has to discuss Metaphor at length. But it doesn’t take many words to adequately treat Ahistoricity or Politics in my Theory appropriately. The lack of needing to expound at length on my research on Politics and Ahistoricism, for the purpose of presenting the valuable summary of my Theory, is reflected in the extremely short coverage — though dead-on and profoundly suggestive — of those topics in my main Theory-specification article.

In a single brief section of that article, I both dismiss Jesus and Paul as ahistorical (I need to extend that to Church Fathers and Christianity in Antiquity), and mention in a general way “the Roman sociopolitical arrangement … a polemical counter-narrative about … sociopolitical concerns … rebuttal and alternative to Roman imperial theology”, though I don’t there provide the specific words “domination hierarchy” and “egalitarian”.

The latter is why Sally nagged me about leaving out the meaning of the cross in its Roman Imperial context, which would add “domination hierarchy … egalitarian”.


Which is more important, for Transcendent Knowledge?
o Understanding the Politics of Applied Mystic Enlightenment/Revelation
o Understanding the Ahistoricity/Nonliteralism of Jesus/Paul/Church Fathers/Christian Antiquity

Politics of applied Transcendent Knowledge is important against domination hierarchy and in support of egalitarian freedom.

Ahistoricity is important, a mandatory slate-clearing prerequisite to enable grasping and understanding Transcendent Knowledge. Gaining Transcendent Knowledge requires that we cast out, exorcise, the deluding demon of Historicity and Literalism. The Historicity delusion and confusion works exactly as Literalism; so, define why Literalism must be cast out, to gain salvation.


The Cyberfatedelic Interpretation of Religion, including Nonliteralism/Ahistoricity and Political Philosophy of Transcendent Knowledge (social-politically applied religion).


My own main driving interest is not Ahistorcity or
I might fold Ahistoricity (Nonliteralism) and Politics aspects of the Theory,

I’ve said “I extended to add history and metaphor.” But that included Politics and Ahistoricity. Thus it is elegant to say:

1985-1997, I created the Core theory:
o Cybernetics (Pillar 1)
o Heimarmene (Pillar 2)
o Loosecog/Entheogens (Pillar 3)

1998-2007, I extended the theory to cover also:
o Metaphor (Pillar 4)
o Ahistoricity/total Nonliteralism of Jesus and Paul (by 2011, also Church Fathers & Christianity in Antiquity)
o History of entheogens throughout all religion (I defined the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion)
o Politics of applying mushroom-state revelation (Christianity rebuttal to Roman Empire Political Theology; Athens’ democracy vs. aristocrats)

Given that it’s not necessary for my Theory-expression to go into great detail in Ahistoricity or Politics, I am inclined to expand the defined scope of my Metaphor bucket to officially include Ahistoricity and Politics, rather than messily breaking out as footnotes, separate buckets about Ahistoricity and Politics. Those two topics are key, important topics — but not warranted as broken out to level 1 for a *general* Theory of religion.

My Theory is a *general* theory of religion, and therefore the special topics of Ahistoricity and Politics — although extremely important for the world’s most important religion, Christianity — can and should be folded into Metaphor, similar to how the distinct topics (broken out in main article) of Loosecog and Entheogens, I have chosen to combine into a single bucket. Thus I can retain 4 Pillars of Fundamental Dogmatic Truth:

1. Cybernetics, including Control and Communication (such as of the Theory)
2. Heimarmene, including Worldlines and Block Universe
3. Loosecog, including Entheogens and Schizophrenia
4. Metaphor, including Ahistoricity/Nonliteralism and Politics, and Communication-encoding


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5658 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: When I independently figured out & learned Entheogen theory
I deduced the entheogen theory independently, and then confirmed it in Allegro & Heinrich, and then in the other authors. When I finally learned, late, about books about the Entheogen theory, around 2000, I got off to a good start, with Heinrich’s book:

Strange Fruit
Alchemy and Religion: The Hidden Truth
Alchemy, Religion and Magical Foods: A Speculative History
Magic Mushrooms in Religion and Alchemy

I figured out Truth about religion and ego transcendence on my own, nonmetaphorically, in 1988/1993/1997, and then in 1998-2001-2007 & 2011 I looked to decode world religion to confirm the Truth I had already found on my own.

I looked in the New Testament sometimes around 1986-1989 (my notes assert that eating the scroll in Revelation is mushrooms, which I deduced completely on my own, not having heard of Wasson and Allegro then), but started serious work on world religious myth and metaphor in 1998.

I independently discovered the hypothesis that the scrolls eaten in Revelation were mushrooms, as indicated in my notebooks from that time, around 1988 (1986-1989). I didn’t hear of Wasson, Allegro, Ruck, or Heinrich, or the Entheogen theory of religion, until around 2000 (my postings at Mindspace or Jesus Mysteries or Gnostic Yahoo Group with Coraxo would show when I first heard of the Entheogen theory of religion, as opposed to deducing it on my own starting around 1988.

Possibly the first I ever read about entheogens was in 1988, with Charles Tart’s call for state-specific or multistate Science. Journal of Psychedelic Drugs probably had little ancient coverage.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5659 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: Re: When I independently figured out & learned Entheogen theory
When I first did library research, in 1988, there was a dominant biased presupposition held almost universally, which we are still shaking off: the unexamined presupposition that psychedelics were a new discovery and were used never or only in rare and abnormal cases in religion history.

The truth per my Extreme Radical Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion is that psychedelics — more than deliriants, opium, or cannabis — such as, most typically, psilocybin mushrooms, were the main, normal, standard means of accessing religious experiencing in all eras, regions, and religions throughout religious history — which is closer to the truth than the biased official view that still, unbelievably at this late date, holds, but that official view is fast losing its credibility and hypnotic effect.

A new book came out from Cambridge on Mystery Religions, and it continues to tout the old outdated official view, but the advancement is indicated by the fact that the book sees fit to at least acknowledge the entheogen theory, albeit in order to hurl that theory instantly into the trash can in a manner like the heavily biased and uneven book by Andy Letcher.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5660 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: If prove ancients believed my Core theory, are we proved true?
What if Antique religion is false? For example:

o What if we, in a practical and familiar sense, *can* control the source of our thoughts? What if we really are metaphysically autonomous and independent, like gods?

o What if Heimarmene isn’t true? What if our future in a profound sense is up to us, is created freely by us? What if Copenhagenism and manyworlds is true? What if freewill is the case?

o What if Antique religion was nothing but confused psychotomimetic mushroom-induced hallucination and schizophrenic delusions of reference and control?

Then my Theory must explain the untruth as an untruth, and explain and identify the system that ancients deludedly believed.


My programme, approach, and purpose was:
1. Figure out Truth (1985-1997).
2. Justify my Truth by getting confirmation from religions (1998-2007 & 2011).


My 1998 project of using the NT to confirm my Core theory, required cracking the code of ancient religion; that amounted to utilizing my Core theory as a Hypothesis, and using ancient religious myth as the language to be deciphered or the code to be cracked.

If my Core theory succeeds at cracking the code of ancient religion, as measured by the great ability of my Core theory to make sense out of ancient religious myth, then ancient religion “confirms” my Core theory, in that ancient religion *agrees with* my Core theory.

But just because, say, Jesus & Demeter’s hierophants agree with my Core theory, does not prove my Core theory is correct — it only proves that Jesus (& Demeter’s hierophants) and I agree and believe the same; but logically, we might both be completely wrong.

Which of these questions is my research of 1998-2007 & 2011 trying to answer or confirm:
o Is my Core theory true?
o What is ancient’s Core theory underneath their overgrowth jungle of metaphor?
o Is the ancients’ Core theory true?
o Do the ancients have the same Core theory as I do?

How I thought about it in 1998:

“I’m certain my Core theory is correct. And I readily assume that Jesus must have understood the same thing. Therefore, I expect to be and should be able to confirm by reading the New Testament with a suitable coherent interpretation, that Jesus believed and taught the content of my Theory. That is, I am Michael the Archangel; what I am revealing is what Jesus said would be revealed by Michael at the end of time.

“If Jesus can be shown to believe the content of my Theory, then I consider my Theory to have been proved correct by the highest authority of religion, or one of the highest authorities, Jesus — and I am thus true to the prediction or doctrine of Michael the Archangel revealing all things at the end of time, which will amount to the public end of egoic delusion, that period of the Modern era with linear time, giving Transcendent Knowledge to everyone.”


I was unaware of Pagan Hellenistic religion when I constructed my Core theory 1985-1997. Before 1998, my only significant exposure to Christianity was that I read fundamentalist Dave Hunt’s books around 1995, and only owned the Bible in King James and NIV translations, and barely dabbled in reading those.

1998-2001 I studied religious myth for the first time. I started initially learning and figuring out Pagan religion along with reading the NT interpretively, around 1998.

I quickly felt that it is impossible to understand the NT without understanding Hellenistic religion and the cultural context of the NT, which is the Roman Empire, including Jewish religion as a subset of the Roman Empire. The Jewish religion is not the sole cultural context of Christian origins. The Roman Empire is more a foreground than a background of Christian origins.

With my non-metaphorical Core theory in hand, it took me 3 years to go from knowing nothing about religious myth and little about Christianity, to grasping the essential breakthrough idea that religious myth is, as a rule, metaphorical description for altered-state cognitive phenomena and about insights into noncontrol and fatedness, and that entheogens are typically, often, or commonly involved.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5661 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: Re: If prove ancients believed my Core theory, are we proved true?
Interesting set of answers:

1. Is my Core theory true? Don’t know.

2. What is ancient’s core theory underneath their overgrowth jungle of metaphor? The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.

3. Is the ancients’ core theory true? Don’t know.

4. Do the ancients have the same core theory as I do?


Proposition A is The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.
Proposition B is Ancient Religious Myth.

Then the questions are expressed as:
1. Is A true?
2. What is B?
3. Is B true?
4. Is A = B?

The interesting set of answers is:
1. Is A true? d/k
2. What is B? = A
3. Is B true? d/k
4. Is A = B? Y

But 2 and 4 are somehow redundant. As a matter of historical fact during my Theory development, I approached the questions involving B as follows:
1. Is A true?
2. Is A confirmed by B; that is, is A = B, where B is presupposed as true?

But question 2 implicitly (in addition to the uncritical presupposing) makes a really stunning or presumptuous assumption, that the theorist is *capable* of *evaluating* (or “reading”, “deciphering”) B. Now that, in 2001-2005-2011, I have made a *huge* breakthrough to decode and decipher ancient religion for the first time in the late-Modern era — a huge breakthrough that was merely casually assumed as if a given, in 1998 … a minor incidental footnote in fine print:

“By the way, note that evaluating “A ?= B” will require that you take a moment to decipher and crack the code of the Ancient Mysteries and make totally clear and coherent the esoteric reading of the New Testament, which scholars have all but given up on for the past many decades, or even the past few centuries such as during the Modern era in general. This will be relatively easy if your Core theory indeed matches the ancient’s encrypted or encoded core theory.”

Fortunately, during 2001-2005, I got sufficient tentative confirmation that my Core theory indeed matches the ancients’ encoded core theory. And by yesterday, November 23, 2011, I got more than tentative confirmation: I proved that my Core theory matches the ancient’ encoded core theory; so that, in effect, my Core theory was the first successful decryption algorithm to crack the cipher of Hellenistic religion including the NT and OT, and Eastern and world religion such as Zen and Tantric Buddhism.

Now having proved that my Core theory is the decryption key for all world religion, and having proved that my Core theory is approved and “confirmed” by world religion, which is to say that the decoded and extract core referent target meaning that’s expressed by the metaphor-jungle that world religion is packaged and communicated in, it strikes me that that “confirmation” of my Core theory by virtue of my Core-theory-decrypted world religion core *matching* my Core theory, doesn’t prove that my Core theory is correct, and neither does the authority of my late-Modern invention, my Core theory, *prove* that world religion is (in its esoteric metaphor-target payload) correct.

My Theory confirms the truth of world religion.
and
World religion confirms the truth of my theory.

or equivalently

My Theory is true iff world religion is true.

A iff B.

That is, my explicit Theory is true iff world religion is esoterically true.

There is also this kind of circularity: my Core theory implicitly amounts to the assertion that world religion when read through the interpretation-filter that’s provided by this Core theory, will be revealed — if both theories are correct and therefore match — as expressing the same core theory.

Detractors or skeptics or critics could argue that ancient religion doesn’t actually wrap the same core theory as my Core theory, but only appears to me to do so because I’m projecting my Core theory onto antiquity. Specifically, I detect the “signature” priority sequence of world religion as 1: Cybernetics, 2: Heimarmene, 3: Entheogens, not because that’s the priority sequence that’s actually held by world religion, but only because I’m selectively observing the data.

Critics assert that world religion is actually literal sun worship, for example, and only by ignoring the overwhelming and incontrovertible evidence for that proven 1880 theory, do I come away with the false impression, so it merely appears to me because of my intensive lossy filtering-away of the massive contradictory data, it only *looks* to me, through my heavy distorting filter, *as if* world religion expresses the target meaning, and has the priority sequence of, 1: Cybernetics, 2: Heimarmene, 3: Entheogens.


My thinking in 1998:

Is my Core theory true, as proved by the fact that Jesus [or by 2001, “world religion”] agrees with it?

That strategy of proof contains at least two kinds of big problems!

For one thing, assuming that you have a correct understanding of world religion including New Testament Christianity, the only thing that that world religion can prove is that there’s agreement or a match between my Core theory and the esoteric core theory expressed by world religion.

For another thing, how can you know that you have a correct understanding of world religion? Another angle on that question is, .. a major showstopper problem!, is that — to put it generally — all scholars are completely baffled by the meaning of Christianity, NT Christianity, ancient religion, Hellenistic religion, and world religion — in short, all modern scholars are completely unable to understand religion. Religion is a total mystery and massive, completely unsolved problem for Modern scholars!

So how can you naively, so naively, presume, Michael Hoffman of 1998: “Ok, I now have my Core theory. Now I need to merely determine that Jesus asserts my Core theory.” Or equivalently: “To prove and corroborate my Core theory, I merely need to take a moment to show that ancient religion and world religion and Christianity and the Mystery Religions (esotericism) agree with and express my Core theory.”

The problem with that infinitely naive, innocent question, is that Religion is a total mystery and massive, completely unsolved problem for Modern scholars!

But it just so happens that there is a saving, “decryption key” effect: the Core theory amounts to a hypothesis of what decryption key is able to make sense and devise vastly greater explanatory coherence and account for a vastly broader scope of data, and map to the previous attempted, dismally failed theories — innumerable failed attempts to untie the Gordian knot (as finally my Hoffman’s Diamond Hammer of Interpretation did, my sword of Alexander the Great) — to explain why those theories failed.

A iff B — is circular so *logically* nothing is “proved proved” with unassailable certainty. But practically, this is how “knowledge” works: A and B cross-corroborate each other, increasing the likelihood of truth (mutually, for both A and B), based on:

o The argument from conceptual coherence
o The argument from breadth of explanatory power
o The argument from consensus agreement with other investigators/testers/observers/ASC explorers
o The argument from ability to map to previous theories
o The ability to make full sense of metaphor-encoded world religion by using my core Theory as a decryption key or observing-filter
o The extensive connection of my Core theory to the key priority-sequence topics of 1: Cybernetics; 2: Determinism; 3. Loosecog; 4: Metaphor, as those topics appear in many fields, including Religion, Psychology, Philosophy, Physics, Music, Philosophy of Science, Entheogens, Myth, and Cognitive Science.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5662 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: Applying the Theory to myth improves the Theory
The Core theory needs a term to efficiently differentiate between the portion of the self-concept “who” dies as purely worthless illusion, versus the retained egoic-shaped mental functioning, sans delusion, after initiation: the chaff, and the wheat.

I discovered that applying the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence develops that Theory, at the same time as cracking-open the Mysteries of world religion.

Applying an explanatory framework develops the explanatory framework.

Not only is the metaphor extension of my Theory improved by applying the Theory as explanatory framework to explain religious mythic metaphor; even the Core theory’s infrastructure is improved and refactored and more thoroughly internally cross-indexed by pressing against, or acting against, or dancing with, the Myth to be explained.

Hellenistic mythic metaphor, in order to be considered to be well-decoded by the Theory, mandates that the decoding Theory must have cleanly bounded concepts that map cleanly to the source (mythic metaphor) domain. This is an example of how Metaphor improves non-metaphor Theory, in the feedback loop:

observing-Theory –> partially observed-data –> modified observing-Theory –> better-observed-data

Or equivalently, in the case deciphering and decryption and interpretation of world religious myth:

attempted interpretation –> encrypted data partly with bits of coherence read –> revised interpretation –> mostly-coherent-read data –> successful interpretation –> fully coherently read/extracted data, and, the ability to write and encrypt into the deciphered language; read/write ability; like ability to myth-make

Thus Holyoak & Thagard in Mental Leaps write that the source–>target (metaphor–>referent) relationship is actually two-way: metaphor<–>referent, so that the mind can efficiently traverse horizontally and vertically as:

metaphor 1 in the metaphor domain <– referent 1 in non-metaphor domain
|
V
metaphor 2 in the metaphor domain –> referent 2 in non-metaphor domain

Thus

metaphor<–>referent
religious mythic metaphor<–>Egodeath Core theory

Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought
Keith Holyoak, Paul Thagard
1995
http://amazon.com/dp/0262581442
MIT Press

For example:

1. Starting in the top right, referent/target/nonmetaphor domain, moving left to the metaphor domain:
Personal control (a concept in the referent domain) is like a woman (a figure in the metaphor domain), and when this is revealed, your former self-concept as autonomous control-agent is eliminated; personal control is revealed by mushroom-induced loosecog as a helpless thought-receiver with thoughts forcibly inserted by an alien locus of control.

2. Then traversing down within the source/metaphor domain, we can say that:
A woman was formerly a girl who was a different person, and the woman sacrificed her daughter, or her daughter was abducted by a male, forceful penetrator/inserter of thoughts.

3. Therefore, coming back into the referent/target/non-metaphor domain of cybernetic-psychedelic cognitive science, we can *learn* from/following the metaphor-domain’s internal logic, that:
We would benefit from defining bounded/delimited concepts that map to the woman and the previous girl.

It’s as if the application domain we’re applying software to is guiding our decision in refactoring the code base to make it more flexible and usable and maintainable, more capable, better, more sophisticated, more highly developed. In that analogy, the source/metaphor domain is “some application domain”, and the target/nonmetaphor/referent domain is like “software code base to be refactored”.

Applying the Theory (model, explanatory framework, model, or decryption-scheme) to a puzzling myth-scheme, or to encrypted data, or to an undeciphered language, or to some datum to be explained, develops the Theory; is good for the soul of the Theory; is character-building for the Theory; strengthens the Theory.


Theory must be tuned and adjusted so that it has neatly labeled concepts underlying the metaphors:
o Persephone
o Chaff
o Wheat
o Demeter as portion of egoic thinking retained after initiation
o Sol vs. Luna, in Mithraism
o Mithras’ bull before, during, and after initiation

It would be unrealistic to expect the Core theory to develop (during 1985-1988-1993-1996), neatly labeled concepts that optimally match these various mythemes and metaphor-system components. The Core theory reached logical closure and completeness around 1989 or 1993, but another kind of closure was still needed, regarding mapping to metaphor — per Paul Thagard’s Pri3 criteria for a good theory: mapping well to previous theories.

I knew right away, in January 1988, that it would take some time to map the new mental model to existing theories and schemes.

There’s also blurry overlap between the Pri1 criterion “has better breadth of explanatory power” and the Pri3 criterion “maps better to previous theories”. This depends on whether you consider the Tauroctony a competing theory, or the data (explanandum) to be explained.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5663 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: Re: Data–>Theory fdbk adjusts Theory to lock-on to data
Regarding Antique and pre-Modern religion and wisdom-traditions; the religious view held by Antiquity —

o In some sense, ancient religion can be considered to be a competing theory against the late-Modern CTET/Egodeath theory.

o In another sense, ancient religion can be considered the explanandum — the data to be explained.


Are these the data to be explained? Or are these “competing, previous theories”?

o The story of Dionysus and King Pentheus

o The New Testament, and mythemes in the Old Testament such as wise heimarmene serpent as teacher winding up an educational model of a decision-tree with illusory virtual pseudo-possibilities branches, making the mind perceive control and decision processing by giving the Amanita

o Demeter and her youthful egoic deluded self-concept Persephone, Queen of the Underworld, who Demeter was forced to sacrifice by Hades (King of the Underworld of the cast-off ghosts of the ego-dead) and the snake-drawn chariot that Triptolemus steers, spreading knowledge of “agriculture” — how to make hidden wheat sprout; ie how to reveal the workings of control in the mind and thus sacrifice the delusion portion of egoic control-thinking.

o Mithraism, Tauroctony diagrams of heimarmene and the coupled division of mental control into uncontrollable thought-giver (Sol; transpersonal self) and helpless thought-receiver (Luna; personal self);

The cave of the mind is lit-up above by the torch held up making perceptible the uncontrollable thought-source in the coital process of forcefully injecting thoughts into passive helpless thought-receiver and forced executor;

The basement underneath the cave of the mind below is lit up by the torch held down to uncover to make perceptible the guiding track of snake-shaped heimarmene laid out permanently embedded in the worldline of each person suspended in the spacetime block.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5664 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: +Core, -Metaphor(Ahistoricity, Entheogen History, Politics)
Elevating the 3 Core Pillars (Cybernetics, Fatedness, Loosecog); Demoting Ahistoricity, Entheogen History, Politics as subtopics of a mere Metaphor appendix.

The 3 Pillars contain links to Metaphor and its demoted, peripheral subtopics of Ahistoricity, Entheogen History, and Politics. But the latter are chained down and kept in their lowly place, and enabled paradoxically to be taken to the full extreme, by being so briefly treated and demoted. If I treat Ahistoricity, Entheogen History, and Politics as a really big deal, then they will continue to be controverted.

By demoting them, I demonstrate how elementary and what mere confusions these errors really are:

o The error of assuming literalism and historicity in the New Testament;

o The error of thinking that entheogens are merely incidental in religion;

o The error of thinking that Christianity became popular because it’s about supernaturalist spirituality — when it was in fact popular as a political tract against domination hierarchy (the esoteric content was the least valuable, least precious, least distinctive, *least novel* aspect of early Christianity).

Metaphor (including Ahistoricity, Entheogen History, Politics) is helpful in strengthening the 3 Core pillars. Applying the Core, over the wall, to Metaphor, and then adjusting the Core (on the first side of the wall) to better apply to Metaphor, makes the Core stronger while keeping the Core pure.

By removing Metaphor far away from the 3 Core Pillars, or by not mixing-up Metaphor with the 3 Core pillars in the first place, produces a clean Separation of Concerns: the Core principles (must-have), versus the historical happenstance and peripherals (History of Entheogens, History of Metaphors, Ahistoricity, and History of Politics). As far as Level 1 buckets are concerned, rip Core Engine (Engineering) and History (Metaphor) apart.

Demote and Amplify:
Shrink the importance of the topic of Entheogen History, while amplifying the intensity of my assertions in that field.
Shrink the importance of the topic of Christian Ahistoricity, while amplifying the intensity of my assertions in that field.
Shrink the importance of the topic of Christian Politics, while amplifying the intensity of my assertions in that field.

Metaphor, in practice, is very important, and so warrants Level 1 bucket — but only 1 bucket, and only as an appendix, cleanly sealed-off from the Core Pillars. Metaphor is not a Pillar of Transcendent Knowledge; Metaphor is incidental, variable, not necessary. Esoteric Perennial Transcendent Knowledge is distinct from metaphorical packaging, and demands a late-Modern, Engineering type of non-metaphorical Philosophy expression, which uses minimal metaphor that is custom-tailored to be as direct and explicit as possible.

The Core theory (my theory; the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence) has four pillars, but only two are the ultimate content that is revealed. What is *revealed* by Pillar 3 (loosecog, mushroom-induced metaperception, mental model transformation) and *expressed* by Pillar 4 (metaphorical description, nonliteralism, Politics mythemes) is the first two: Pillar 1 (self-control cybernetics noncontrol and forced control), and Pillar 2: presetness and unchanging preexistence of all our thoughts, experiences, and control-will.

The 3 Core Pillars of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence form the perfectly coherent and all-powerful Diamond Hammer of Interpretation that constitutes 100% conceptual coherence, 100% explanatory power, and 100% mapping to all genuine, valid, authentic expressions of transcendence.

Lately I’ve been writing the pattern

Metaphor–>Cybernetics, Fatedness, Loosecog
which proves that Metaphor itself is not part of the target, referent, non-metaphorical, Core domain.

Metaphor points to the meaning, but is not itself the meaning. Metaphor is “a finger pointing at the moon”. Perhaps this is one reason Zen wishes to short-circuit and kill the intellectualization: do away with the confusions and endless bickerings about Metaphor, in order to cut straight to the point, like an Engineer. The point of Metaphor is the 3 Core Pillars — not Metaphor itself. Metaphor is merely the tin can containing the piece of gold. Don’t mix up the envelope with the message being transmitted.


The pillars of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence:

1. Cybernetics; self-control cybernetics noncontrol in conjunction with uncontrollable forced control. The Control portion of Cybernetics (steersman agent; Communication and Control in Man and Machine).

2. Heimarmene; Fatedness, destinedness; predestination, timeless changeless holistic vertical block-universe determinism; presetness and unchanging preexistence of all our thoughts, experiences, and control-will.

3. Metaperception; loose cognition, loose mental functioning binding; loose binding of mental construct association matrixes, induced by mushroom-induced metaperception.

== Appendix: Applied Theory; History: ==
4. Metaphor; Analogy; expression and vivid tangible communicative embodiment by metaphorical description. Metaphor fits under the Communication portion of Cybernetics (steersman agent; *Communication and* Control in Man and Machine). This can also subsume the important — but not Level 1-scoped — topics of Politics and Ahistoricity/Nonliteralism.


In the main Theory-specification article, Politics and Ahistoricity are in the “Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion” category — which is not a main category according to my new idea of Priority Sequence!

You could say that my main article was written and structured to please the concerns of 2005, whereas now that I have left Earth and Time behind, and am seeing through more universal perspective, and I strive for a purist distinction between Metaphor and Core theory, and I am writing to reveal the Mysteries for everyone in Antiquity, I am thinking in terms of an Expert System rather than writing a nice article, I wish to have a strict cordoning-off to quarantine Metaphor and History separately from What Is Revealed.

I want to appreciate the Core theory as a Scientific theory, and my great Priority Sequence idea says that Metaphor is dead last in importance.

1. The most important knowledge revealed (such as to a late-Modern atheist Engineer) is about Cybernetics. Not about Metaphor. Not about Politics. Not about Ahistoricity. Not about the Entheogen Theory of Religion. The latter were later for me, after I engineered the Core theory.

2. The second most important knowledge revealed (such as to a late-Modern atheist Engineer) is about Heimarmene. Not about Metaphor. Not about Politics. Not about Ahistoricity. Not about the Entheogen Theory of Religion. The latter were later for me, after I engineered the Core theory.

3. The third most important factor constituting the technology that is the Egodeath theory (such as for a late-Modern atheist Engineer or Cognitive Scientist) is about Loosecog. Not about Metaphor. Not about Politics. Not about Ahistoricity. Not about the Entheogen Theory of Religion. The latter were later for me, after I engineered the Core theory.

By segregating the Metaphor bucket away from the Core buckets, in how I arrange the Level 1 & 2 outline break-out, this can help push apart Core non-metaphorical explanation and Metaphor explanation, that can help maximize the two.


The main Theory-specification article was custom-outlined for the Salvia Divinorum magazine rather than according to my recent concept, of the Priority Sequence and 4 Fundamental Pillars.

The Breakout of Topics/Buckets Used for Main Article:
o The Entheogen Theory of Religion
o The Dissociative Cognitive State
o The Block Universe and Frozen Worldlines
o Self-Control and the Hidden Source of Thoughts

Pillars in Priority-Sequence:
1. Cybernetics (Control, Communication:Teaching/Learning)
2. Heimarmene (Fatedness, Worldlines, Block Universe)
3. Loosecog (Entheogens, Mental Construct Processing)
==========================
4. Metaphor (Analogy, Nonliteralism, Ahistoricity, Politics, Communication:Encoding)

Flagging the Main Article Sections in terms of 4 Pillars:
o The Entheogen Theory of Religion [3: Loosecog (Entheogens); 4: Metaphor (History, Ahistoricity, Politics)]
o The Dissociative Cognitive State [3: Loosecog; 4: Metaphor]
o The Block Universe and Frozen Worldlines [2: Heimarmene; 4: Metaphor]
o Self-Control and the Hidden Source of Thoughts [1: Cybernetics; 4: Metaphor]

This mapping-analysis raises the question of whether structuring the Theory per the Pillars adequately expresses the Entheogen Theory of Religion. Given the Pillars, which bucket of those 4 does The Entheogen Theory of Religion fit into? The implication here discovered is that my main article overemphasizes the Entheogen Theory of Religion, at the expense of which of the Pillars?

Where does The Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion fit, below?
1. Cybernetics
…… Control
…… Communication
…… Teaching/Learning
2. Heimarmene
…… Fatedness
…… Worldlines
…… Block Universe
3. Loosecog
…… Entheogens
…… Mental Construct Processing
== Appendix: ====================
4. Metaphor
…… Analogy
…… Nonliteralism
…… Ahistoricity
…… History
…… Politics
…… Communication:Encoding
…… The Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion

Another reason the main Theory-specification article was broken out into the main categories it used, different than my new Priority Sequence, is space-limitations. I wanted to have Metaphor as a separate section, but realized I could fold Metaphor into the other sections, which inevitably weakens the separation between the nonmetaphorical Core and the Metaphorical extension.

The Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion reeks of today’s world and biases and preconceptions and literalistic confusions. It only *seems* super-important now, because Prohibition and forgetting plants has been so complete in these darkest ages of the Kali Yuga. My job is to routinize the 4 Pillars and their subtopics.

o Ahistoricity? Routinize it; put it in its modest place.

o Entheogen theory? Quit fence-sitting, quit being timid about it: I so routinely take it to the max, that I end up demoting it: Yes, *all* valid religion is mushroom-based; deal with it; assume it; be done with it; demote that fact and focus on more important things, quit being stuck in that doorway. Same with Ahistoricity.

You can focus and fixate all night on the history of entheogen use (like Carl Ruck), and on Ahistoricity (like Earl Doherty), and on Politics (like Richard Horsley) and you still won’t get a clue about the real, main Gnosis that is revealed and expressed in the Core theory.

The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence is merely *built on*:
o My Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion.
o My theory of and research contributions in Ahistoricity (nonexistence) of Christianity in Antiquity, Church Fathers, Jesus, and Paul.
o My breakthrough custom version of Crossan/Borg/Horsley/Wright et al, the Political purpose of creating Christianity by leveraging the routinized mushroom religion of Antiquity.

But just because my Theory is *built on* my customized building-blocks of Maximal/Radical Entheogen Theory, Politics, and Ahistoricity, and just because those topics are currently of interest to some people now or my readers who live in Antiquity, does not mean that these building-block topics that seem oh-so-important are actually warranted as Level 1 Pillars in an explanation of what Transcendent Knowledge is and how it has been communicated in Metaphor.

Today’s audience wants a big focus on Ahistoricity and the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion. And early Christians, like Plato, want a big focus on the Politics of how the revealed Mysteries knowledge is applied to prop up egalitarian or hierarchy systems of society.

But in keeping with the future perspective, and being true to the Engineering origins of the Theory, which remember were successful at the greatest breakthrough ever, of Transcendent Knowledge as brand new independent dispensation *from* the heart of late-Modern engineering — *not* a tradition-styled inheritance passed from one metaphor-based teacher to a student, through time.

I conquer, vanquish, and do away with these over-charged topics of Ahistoricity/Politics/Entheogen History, by refusing to grant them the high-ranked couches at my mushroom-wine banquet.

I send these harmful, confusing, distracting topics — that were entirely unnecessary for me in engineering the Core theory (it actually *helped* me that I was wholly ignorant of those confusing topics) — to the children’s table so that we grown-ups can think clearly and cut straight to the central topics that actually matter, that actually hold up the structure of the Core theory.

By the same logic that says Politics and Ahistoricity are important but not the true drivers of the Core theory, the primary location for the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion could be in “Metaphor”. Another argument for that same conclusion is provided by the history of my construction of the total Theory: I created the Core theory first, with almost no idea of anything like the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion, then developed the latter as part of the History/Metaphor R&D:

1985-1997: I created the Core theory “in the Engineering Department” without any Humanities/Classics input except indirectly through a few early meta-theory books by Ken Wilber and a single Zen book by Alan Watts:
1. Cybernetics
2. Heimarmene
3. Loosecog

1998-2007 & 2011: I changed my focus from Engineering to the Humanities/Classics department to get confirmation of the finished Core theory, which had already reached completeness and closure:
4. Metaphor, History, Ahistoricity, The Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion.


I don’t want to give too much weight and credit to the bad old Metaphor-dependent expressions. There’s been too much poetry, too much art, not enough plain-spoken, straightforward, no-nonsense discussion of what religious experiencing and revelation is. Those emphases, our current notions about what’s important, have misled us. I engineered the Core theory without being hypnotized by those soft, peripheral topics.

I succeeded because I didn’t read books, but observed my own self-control struggles and analyzed control-across-time, applying an Engineering and Phenomenological Cognitive Science and Self-Help sensibility.

There’s no *need*, with my Theory, to dirty the Core explanation with Politics and History and Nonliteralism, at the Level 1 break-out, though Metaphor, subsuming Politics and History and Ahistoricity/Nonliteralism, does warrant breakout as a Level 1 topic that’s the lowest priority and is segregated and quarantined as the last, least-important topic: poetry and literalist confusion and anti-entheogen bias must be demoted in order to let the true main points rise up to their full height and stand on their own.

I can dismiss and dispatch Ahistoricity, Politics, and History of Entheogens in a few paragraphs subsumed under Metaphor, separated from the Core Pillars that *truly* constitute the actual universal (interplanetary; all sentient beings) referent content of Transcendent Knowledge. My audience is androids, AIs, and intergalactic sentient beings, letting the revealed knowledge itself dictate the structure of the truly Core theory, with Earth’s particular messed-up history of incomprehension as a mere appendix.

Metaphor is not the Core Knowledge, and does not belong in the 3 Core Pillars.

o Maximal Entheogen theory of religion: Here is mere incidental Historical happenstance.
o Politics: here is mere *applied* use and abuse of the Core knowledge.
o Ahistoricity/Nonliteralism: Here are the screwed-up confused notions people had in the ordinary-state culture: we must negate those as a preliminary and prolegomenon, to clear the way for coherent comprehension instead.


There are 3 Core Pillars and 1 Appendix Pillar, Metaphor, subsuming the incidental, non-core topics of Politics, Ahistoricity/Nonliteralism, and the History of Entheogens.

It is a radical move characteristic of my thinking, to discover right thinking about Ahistoricity, Politics, and Entheogen History, and then turn around and demote those as mere subtopics of the grudgingly important but least important, appendix topic of “Metaphor”.

There are not 3 Pillars of the Core theory. There are only 3 Pillars of the Core theory: Cybernetics, Fatedness, and Loosecog.

There is a separate “Pillar” (Metaphor) that is merely mandatory for the sole reason that we must stop Literalism, to clear the way for correct thinking, and to consider how Earth happens to have expressed the Core Pillars and gotten confused into Literalism and has fought over how to abuse the Core knowledge to pretend to prop up historical structures of society: domination hierarchy versus egalitarianism.


Ahistoricity isn’t as important as the core pillars. Ahistoricity merely *seems* important at the moment, prior to propagation of the Egodeath theory, as if Ahistoricity should be a sibling of the 4 Pillars.

Similarly, early Christians would clamor to promote Politics (exciting! relevant! motivating!) as an unsurpassedly important topic, the entire motivation for bothering to create yet another costume (the Hellenistic Mysteries in Jewish, anti-Roman drag) for the same old routine Esoteric Transcendent Knowledge (yawn) of salvation, purification, forgiveness of sins, imperishability (whatever; been there, done that, the Empire of domination-hierarchy still sucks, after the mushroom mixed-wine wears off).


Phase 2 of my work figured out such metaphor.

Phase 3 of my work is communicating the theory in conjunction with metaphorically packaged/structured/expressed “previous theories”. The Communication aspects of my Core theory and the Metaphor extension (including Ahistoricity/Nonliteralness and Politics) fit under both into Cybernetics bucket (because Cybernetics is Communication as well as Control) and in the Metaphor bucket (because Metaphor is used to grasp, make vivid, and convey the wrapped ideas).


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5665 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: Understanding is a matter of degree, adeptness, fluency, skill
Adequate understanding of the Egodeath theory requires rigor and detail, thoroughgoing association-mappings, thoroughness, closure, comprehensiveness, thorough cross-indexing.

In 2006 I had the idea of the Sacred Marriage, but didn’t fully grok the idea of *why* the personal mind is female, in terms of passive thought-reception. I built up my recent wave of breakthrough after the Esotericism Book Expo and then getting the 2 books on Esotericism I’ve been wanting for years — I needed time to look at that type of illustration more, just to make more connections, firmer connections, deeper association links, tighter connections.

In 3rd Grade, I could read, write, think, and talk, but now I can read, write, think, and talk better. I had the idea but a little more weakly, didn’t get the fullness of the idea. I discovered and wrote about the idea but didn’t grok the extent of, had to think more, write more, more intensely, just plain review the ideas more.

My Theory Specification has Sacred Marriage but not a very explicit explanation of why the personal control-mind is female and the transpersonal mind-controller is male.


As an example of awesome but not perfect Theory, I found a garbled point “Sol is awareness” — no, Sol is the uncontrollable thought-source, Luna is the helpless thought-receiver, now divinized by sacrificing the deluded portion (aspects) of egoic thinking. Awareness or psychedelic metaperception is represented as a sun ray between Mithras looking behind his thinking and Sol looking at Mithras; ‘awareness’ and ‘perceiving’ include Sol’s eyes, the sun ray between Sol and Mithras, and Mithras’ eyes.


The degree or percentage of grasping a domain: You might seem to perfectly well grasp some things, but fluency is a matter of degree. My main article had closer to a bare minimum (due to severe space limitations and due to newness of deciphering myth) — I was still fresh, green, still more an outsider than it would appear, still had only a fractional grasp — the article is flattering, bringing out the best of my not-as-complete understanding.

My assertions were bold and correct and almost completely insightful, but my *feeling* was still tentative, unlike my recent victory of gaining a sense of surefootedness and confident thought-leadership.

I have strengthened my intensity of sureness, by weaving more, becoming more masterful, becoming fluent, having been brought into the ranks of the Adept, as well as having the distinguishing contribution of an explicit, non-metaphorical, ultra-clear explanatory model, with a clarity of organization and a cogency never before provided in known history.


Ken Wilber in The Atman Project and No Boundary describes “the self” as having to develop thoroughly within a given psychospiritual developmental level in order to differentiate itself from that level, transcend that level, de-identify with that level, avoid repressing and dysfunctionally/regressively dissociating from that level, and then operate-on that formerly identified-with level.

A thorough Egodeath theory needs to have a thoroughly adequate and capable grasp of the language of Esotericism and religious metaphorical analogy. The transcendent mental model must become adept within the domain of all the primary areas of the Egodeath theory: Cybernetics, Fatedness, Loosecog, and Metaphor.

The criteria for reaching the level of Adept at Transcendent Knowledge are, you must know:
1. All about Cybernetics and its metaphors
2. All about Fatedness and its metaphors
3. All about Loosecog and its metaphors
4. The cross-indexing of all these.

Theory and metaphor of Cybernetics, Heimarmene, Loosecog (including Entheogens). Practically, you must know the arbitrary Historical Application of Transcendent Knowledge: Metaphor (including Politics and Ahistoricity/Nonliteralness).


Did I recognize and grok ‘ivy’ as heimarmene-vine in 2007? I almost entirely did, yet still, not as much as now: I feel I crossed a threshold, moving from an outsider looking in, to an insider, yesterday (November 23, 2011). In 2007 I mostly understood ‘ivy’ and ‘vine’ as meaning heimarmene.

I posted the proposed recognition in February 2005, completely correctly. But now I deepened my *sense* of understanding it, and I rediscovered it, with an increased degree of intensive grasp of the ramifications of the association-mappings.

I grasped the basic idea in 2005, but not as many of the connections of the idea. I figured it out — but I didn’t grok it, the profound ramifications of it. This is yet another example of how a breakthrough is experienced as pre-shock, main earthquake, then aftershocks. It’s strange how I have a breakthrough and gain deep understanding, and then later, I experience that breakthrough and understanding as if new, again, but deeper still.


Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought
Keith Holyoak, Paul Thagard

“In the web of culture, analogies should be powerful connecting strands, not devouring spiders.”

That metaphor is comparable to the basic idea of Christianity and Athenian democracy:

“The metaphor-leveraging enlightenment about fatedness in conjunction with personal noncontrol of our thoughts, that’s revealed by mushrooms, should be used to support a just and kind egalitarian society, not to justify a violently oppressive domination-hierarchy such as the Roman Empire, the propaganda for which makes great claims but the reality of which falls well short of those claims. Metaphor and enlightenment should be used in service of egalitarian societal structure, not to justify domination-hierarchy.”


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5666 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: Important but periph. topics: Ahistoricity, Politics, Enth History
Important but peripheral topics: Ahistoricity, Politics, Entheogen History

Mapped: My intellectual history sequence; main article’s main section arrangement; 3 Core Pillars + Appendix

Here are correlated:
o The sequence in which I developed the main Theory topics
o The main topics in the outline of my main Theory-specification article
o The main topics arranged as 3 Pillars and 1 Appendix

Where to place the following important yet peripheral topics in the top levels of the outline/structure of the Theory?
o Metaphor
o Ahistoricity (of Christianity in Antiquity, Church Fathers, Paul, and Jesus)
o Politics (applied mycorevelation, to justify/excuse domination hierarchy or egalitarianism)
o Entheogen History (extreme radical maximal entheogen theory of religion)


There is a clean mapping between my main article (Theory-specification article for Salvia Divinorum magazine), and the Priority Sequence I identified in 2011. The main article is in reverse order of my Priority Sequence, with Metaphor mostly redistributed into the 3 Core Pillar topics, and Entheogen History emphasized in place of Metaphor.

Main Article:
4) Entheogen History (including Ahistoricity, Politics, & mention of Metaphor)
3) Loosecog (including relevant Metaphor)
2) Fatedness (including relevant Metaphor)
1) Cybernetics (including relevant Metaphor)

Priority Sequence:
1) Cybernetics
2) Fatedness
3) Loosecog
4) Metaphor (including Ahistoricity, Politics, & Entheogen History)

Argument in favor of reverse presentation as used in the main article:
First, cover Metaphor (nonliteralism and ahistoricity and the purpose of early Christianity), to clear away confusion that blocks understanding. Familiar topics.
Then, apply Loosecog, as the doorway to go through to see what’s revealed. How mental model transformation works. Somewhat familiar topic.
Next, the clear, simple model of Fatedness, as framework for organizing ideas about control and time. Horizontal-time, domino-chain Determinism is popular in some 15 fields but this changeless, holistic, preexisting-future, “vertical Determinism” is unfamiliar in the OSC-based Modern era.
Finally, Cybernetics: noncontrol is the main, ultimate point, now that the preliminaries are out of the way or made available as thinking tools.

Argument in favor of labelling the first section as Entheogen History rather than Metaphor, in the article for Salvia Divinorum magazine. Here’s why I used the structuring
Entheogen History (Ahistoricity, Politics, Metaphor)
rather than the structuring
Metaphor (Entheogen History, Ahistoricity, Politics)


The subject of Wasson, Allegro, and Plaincourault was somewhat distorted by that article being commissioned by a particular journal (The Journal of Higher Criticism) with particular requirements for style, audience interest, and scope.

Similarly, the subject of the Egodeath theory was somewhat distorted by the article being commissioned by a particular magazine (Salvia Divinorum) with particular requirements for style, audience interest, and scope. Thus the article doesn’t represent the true, native, inherent shape, structure, and outline, and balance of emphasis of the Theory-in-itself.


The particular article was proposed by and written for the editor of Salvia Divinorum magazine, and therefore needed to lead with an emphasis on Entheogen History, followed by Loosecog as the second major section.

In that context, for that audience, the first main section needed to focus on Entheogens with Metaphor as a subtopic of that, rather than the inverse. However, as exemplified in Carl Ruck’s corpus, we’ve seen the limitations of treating the entheogenic plants themselves as the main focus of what’s revealed.

o The plants are only important because of the loosecog they cause.
o Loosecog is only important because of the Fatedness it reveals.
o Fatedness is only important because of the Noncontrol it reveals.
o Politics is only important after the revelation core is revealed, as a mere application of the core technology after that technology is created and grasped.
o Ahistoricity is only important as preliminary clearing-away of confusion that blocks conceptual coherence and clear understanding.
o Metaphor is only important as a vivid communication of the actual knowledge content.

Thus the hierarchy of importance and subsuming topics is like:

Cybernetics (the only truly import. revel’n: nature of self-ctrl agency)
… Fatedness (only important b/c reveals cybernetic noncontrol)
…… Loosecog (only important because of Fatedness it reveals)
……… Entheogens, Enth Hist (plants only import. b/c cause lcog)
………… Ahistoricity (only import. as prelim confusing-clearing)
………… Politics (only import. after core revealed, as appl’n of tech)
………… Metaphor (only import. as vivid comm’n of knowl content)

Cybernetics
… Fatedness
…… Loosecog
……… Entheogens, Entheogen History
………… Ahistoricity
………… Politics
………… Metaphor

That’s the reverse of the main article’s outline, which is:

Entheogen History (incl. Ahist’y & Politics, mention Metaphor)
Loosecog
Fatedness
Cybernetics

______________________________

The sequence in which I developed the main Theory topics:

Cybernetics: Spring 1985 (roots to homework mgmt 1976)
Loosecog: October 27, 1985
Fatedness: January 11, 1988
Metaphor: 1998, milestone November 14, 2001
… Ahistoricity [check posting dates]
… Politics (applied revelation)
… Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion
______________________________

The main topics in the outline of my main Theory-specification article:

The Entheogen Theory of Religion [Entheogen History]
… Politics & Ahistoricity (combined as 1 level-2 section)
… brief mention of Metaphor
The Dissociative Cognitive State [Loosecog]
… including Metaphor
The Block Universe and Frozen Worldlines [Fatedness]
… including Metaphor
Self-Control and the Hidden Source of Thoughts [Cyb’ics]
… including Metaphor
______________________________

The main topics arranged as 3 Pillars and 1 Appendix:

1. Cybernetics
…… Control
…… Communication
…… Teaching/Learning
2. Fatedness
…… Fatedness
…… Worldlines
…… Block Universe
3. Loosecog
…… Entheogens
…… Mental Construct Processing
== Appendix: ====================
4. Metaphor
…… Ahistoricity
…… Politics of applied enlightenment
…… Communication:Encoding
…… The Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5667 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: As above, so below; interp’d as torch held up & down
Noncontrol and Fatedness co-imply each other, although they are distinct, as I thought, and as Mithraism shows (“scientifically confirming my hypothesis prediction”).

The 3-level tauroctony depicts forced thoughts (Sol) and thought-noncontrol (Luna) as what’s torch-illuminated above the cave ceiling, and depicts Fatedness (snake) as what’s torch-illuminated below the cave floor — showing that Mithraism considers the revealed topics of noncontrol and fatedness as two distinct, yet co-illuminated factors or conceptual principles.

Mithraism diagrams personal control cognition in tauroctony diagrams, with separate levels for heimarmene and for the coupled division of mental control into uncontrollable thought-giver (Sol; transpersonal self) and helpless thought-receiver (Luna; personal self);


The cave of the mind is lit-up above by the torch held up making perceptible the uncontrollable thought-source in the coital process of forcefully injecting thoughts into passive helpless thought-receiver and forced executor;

The basement underneath the cave of the mind below is lit up by the torch held down to uncover to make perceptible the guiding track of snake-shaped heimarmene laid out permanently embedded in the worldline of each person suspended in the spacetime block.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5668 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 26/11/2011
Subject: In what sense does Ego/Perseph. exist? Degrees of Being
In what sense does false ego exist? Degree of Being of ego?

In what sense does Ego (the deluded egoic self-concept or mental model) — labelled as ‘Persephone’ — exist, before/during/after initiation?

How does the mental model regarding the ego-delusion change during initiation? Does the degree of existence of ego change during initiation? Does the false ego exist more before initiation than after?

Where did the abstruse, pointless philosophizing about Degrees of Being come from? What’s the real purpose of Semantics and Analytic Philosophy?

After initiation, does Demeter have access to Persephone? In what sense? To what extent? In what positive and negative sense? That is, after initiation, in what sense does Demeter have access to Persephone, and in what sense does Demeter not have access to Persephone?

The term ‘Persephone’ by definition means “the delusory, nonexistent, false-ego aspect of personal thinking”. Any truth statement about ‘Persephone’ applies to “the false ego” as well, by definition.

Demeter has more being than Persephone. Demeter is wheat, Persephone is chaff.


Bracketing-aside the crass literalistic issue of whether Jesus existed as a single identifiable historical individual, we come to the actual nature and spirit of the early debates about Jesus’ body and form, where ‘Jesus’ by definition means the same thing as ‘Persephone’: that is, “the false ego”.

Jesus exists less than Christ and God. Jesus is chosen and identified as destined for destruction, accursed, producing purification, cancelling of sin, and imperishable life. (All in a specific defined or definable sense, and not in another sense.)

Do you agree that Jesus needed to be baptized? This is not a question that is posed within a literalist context; it is a question within the domain of concepts about egodeath and the false ego as mental self-concept about personal control agency. That’s what early Christianity argued about, more than whether Jesus existed literally.

Do you agree that Jesus was sinless? If he was sinless (before he became Christ) then he is an alien creature. Was Jesus a creature, created? Same. For Jesus to be a figurative template model that each person follows, Jesus must be like normal people.

These questions have nothing to do with some presumed historical individual; they are questions about mental structures during mushroom initiation, when ego is seen to be illusory in some aspects, as a personal control agent, in the light of perceiving fatedness and noncontrol of the thoughts that the mind is forced to receive by the hidden uncontrollable transpersonal source of thoughts.


To have sin is to mistake the unreal egoic self as real — to be possessed by a demon. Persephone is demonic thinking. Is demonic thinking real? How real and how unreal is demonic, egoic thinking? Is demonic illusion-based thinking a real process, a real function? How so, and how much? What degree of Being does demonic illusion have?

Is the virtual ego real? Is the person who appears in the mirror real? (As distinct from the person who stands in front of the mirror.) In what sense does Harry Potter exist? (Asks the author of the book Jesus Potter, Harry Christ.) Have we fallen in love with our reflection? How real is your mental image of yourself before and after enlightenment through mushroom-initiation?

Once my mind recognizes mental error, is that mental error still available for use? Can the mind, or “the self” per Ken Wilber, then transcend and operate on the mental error, of ego?


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.


Books:

Denying Existence: The Logic, Epistemology and Pragmatics of Negative Existentials and Fictional Discourse
Arindam Chakrabarti
2010
http://amazon.com/dp/9048147883
“Philosophical problems regarding the logical status of empty (singular) terms such as `Pegasus’, `Batman’, `The impossible staircase departs in Escher’s painting `Ascending-Descending’+ etc., and regarding sentences which deny the existence of singled-out fictional entities. It will be fascinating for literary theorists with a flair for logic, to students of metaphysics and philosophy of language, and for historians of philosophy interested in the fate of the Russell-Meinong debate. For teachers of these aspects of analytic philosophy this will provide a textbook which goes beyond the Western tradition (without plunging into any mystical Eastern `Emptiness’, which is what some previous comparative philosophers did).”

[find my book title like:]
On the Existence of Fictional Objects

Fiction and Metaphysics
Amie Thomasson
1999
http://amazon.com/dp/0521065216
Cambridge Studies in Philosophy
Group: egodeath Message: 5669 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: In what sense does Ego/Perseph. exist? Degrees of Being
God = Hades = uncontrollable thought-source
Christ = Demeter = helpless thought-receiver after initiation
Jesus = Persephone = false ego perceived as illusory during initiation = original self-concept as control-agent before initiation

The = symbol means “is in some ways isomorphic with”. Definition of those ways must be separately spelled-out using precise, transcendent use of semantics. Transcendent skill at semantics is an end-product of initiations, especially in the Egodeath theory which explicitly provides such language.

Persephone is abducted to Hades’ underworld.
Jesus or Christ descends to Hell or Purgatory to lift up and redeem the souls of the Prophets, Saints, and his Elect given to him by God the Creator before the foundation of the world (compatible with double-predestination).


Related to versions of predestination: Some theologians like systematic, consistent asymmetry:

o When we do evil (ie be egoic in our self-concept) our moral action is to be attributed to us as sinners.
o When we do good (ie be transcendent in our self-concept, perceiving that our thoughts are given to us uncontrollably) our moral action is to be attribute to God, not to us.

This inconsistency or asymmetry reflects that our conception of moral agency changes from freewill delusion to no-free-will enlightenment, during initiation/purification/regeneration. We are changed from a freewill thinker to a no-free-will thinker through initiation.


Before I was initiated, I was a morally culpable agent and I set myself up as ruler independent from God, and considered myself the controller of my thoughts, and the giver of my thoughts; I gave myself my own thoughts; I created my own thoughts, as a control-agent. “I control my thoughts.”

After I was initiated, I thought of myself as not a moral agent, and consider God the ruler and giver of my thoughts.


To be fair, and precise, one could say that ego is not “false”, but rather, is *vague*, a sort of first-order approximation — just like advocates of determinism have a self-concept that’s not so much false, as too-vague. The function of initiation is to perceive key infrastructure, and get clearer about determinism, and aspects of noncontrol, and aspects of control. To say “Persephone = false self-concept”, can be accused of being too vague, too crude, not granular enough to be fully meaningful.

It is good and fair to consider initiation as *problematizing* egoic self-concept and our sense of freedom and control-power — initiation as infra-personal Philosophy: “What goes on in the egoic, personal mind? How is illusion utilized in the mind, to get control-things done? What perspectives are possible?”


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5670 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: In what sense does Ego/Perseph. exist? Degrees of Being
A consistent conception of Jesus as sinless is that the child Jesus understood Egodeath theory prior to being initiated. During mushroom-wine Passover-themed banquet initiations, Jesus had a deepening, actual experiencing, of no-free-will, Fatedness, and noncontrol of his thoughts given by God the uncontrollable thought-source. He went from a youthful state of intellectual, ordinary-state based belief in no-free-will, to an adult, initiated state of *experiencing* this perspective.

So Jesus didn’t *need* mushroom baptism in the Holy Spirit of loosecog perspective, to gain basic understanding of personal control-agency, but he did need that initiation-series in order to test and deepen the associations, which he already intellectually understood.

A person could be sinless nowadays by reading the Egodeath theory several times, and then as an already sinless and washed-clean, purified person before initiation, the person could then go on to experience a series of water-diluted wine initiations, which would deepen their sinlessness.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5671 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: Caduceus: mycopercep shows sep ctrl-lev relations/harmony
Two Snakes: When there are two balanced snakes in a symbol, 1 is Male (= uncontrollable thought-source), 1 is Female (helpless thought-receiver). The pair constitutes and depicts the structure of personal control in the mind. There is often a depiction of ‘perceiving’, indicating loosecog as given by mushrooms. The caduceus for example is a symbol of perceiving the two distinct locuses of control that operate in the mind.

The snakes aren’t identical. One is male, one female. They are complementary, not identical.

Two snakes, one on top with wings and crown, one on bottom with no wings, no crown, forming a cup: the upper snake is male, lower female.

Upper snake = sun, staff, spear, phall = uncontrollable thought-source

Lower snake = moon, cup, wound, womb = helpless thought-receiver


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5672 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Main religious myth systems I explain
My main focus is listed first. I should post a summary of my mapping of Egodeath theory to each metaphor-system, similar to the annotated approach in Carl Ruck’s Greek Myths book.

Christianity, God, Christ, Jesus, Dove, demons, Virgin Mary, purgatory
Imperial Ruler Cult, Caesar, Jupiter, Eagle, Victory
Mithraism, Sol, Luna, bull, snake, torchbearers
Demeter, Persephone, Hades, Eleusis, Triptolemus
Dionysus, King Pentheus, Maenads, Ariadne
Daedalus, labyrinth, Minotaur, Theseus, Ariadne
Neoplatonism/Ptolemaic astral ascent mysticism (lower planets, Saturn and fixed stars, the heavens above the fixed stars)
Platonism: cave, ascent, Good, shadows
Western Esotericism: snake, alchemy
Perseus, Medusa, Gorgon

As an infrastructure design principle, the non-metaphor based Core theory ideally should contain concepts that cleanly map to each metaphor-system. It might be impossible to have a single static set of concepts that cleanly maps to all metaphor-systems, due to conflicting ways of grouping concepts in various metaphor-systems.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5673 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: Self-control seizure in Mithraism via Cyb/Heim/LCog/Metaph
Invincible Mithras is the Unconquerable god, the Invincible god, the Unconquered god. That’s because Mithras there represents ego-killing, ego-disproving, ego-overpowering power; the lower, personal, helpless thought-source portion of the mind’s control system (control-thinking) cannot control the higher, transpersonal, uncontrollable source of thoughts, which Mithras controls or Sol controls.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5674 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: Extreme Radical Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion
The Extreme Radical Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion is too vague, too mild, and not ambitious enough. It’s too vague about what is revealed by entheogens; it commits the very error Ruck makes: it focuses on the plants themselves, whereas the ancients were more ultimately concerned about, or at least as concerned about, what visionary plants reveal: noncontrol of thinking, and heimarmene.

The Extreme Radical Maximal Cyberfatedelic Theory of All Culture and Topics
The Cyberfatedelic Theory of All Religion and Culture
The Cyberfatedelic Theory of Religion
The Cyberfatedelic Theory of Culture

The Cyberfatedelic Theory of All Religion and Culture holds that an elementary prerequisite to any topic is that everyone must be able to apply the Egodeath theory to it — not as a constraint on thought, but as an always-available point of reference to open up thought. For example, any discussion of freewill interpretations of Physics need to begin with everyone being routinely familiar with Fatedness as pictured in the elementary theory of Egodeath.

The Cyberfatedelic theory is utterly elementary and basic, the obvious starting point and point of reference. There’s no valid reason for anyone to not be familiar with it, like 8th grade math is routinely expected and assumed to be at everyone’s command as a matter of course.


Throwback, unambitious positions are listed first:

The Minimal Entheogen Theory of Religion — There’s no authentic religion based on visionary plants. Mircae Eliade’s day, you could say this — now, it’s politically incorrect and scholars know that they would be laughed out of court for saying this; it would make them look completely out of touch, living under a rock.

The Moderate Entheogen Theory of Religion — There’s some entheogen use in authentic religion.

The Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion — Religion must include entheogens to be valid; entheogens are the reference criterion for authenticity of religion.

The Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture — Authentic religion and culture necessarily is based on entheogen use.

The Maximal Cyberfatedelic Theory of Religion — Authentic religion is based on entheogen use to perceive personal noncontrol of thoughts, in conjunction with fatedness (an experienced life is a worldline in a
changeless block universe).

The Maximal Cyberfatedelic Theory of Religion and Culture — Authentic religion and culture is based on entheogen use to perceive fatedness and personal noncontrol of thoughts.


Maximal, moderate, and minimal entheogen theory
http://egodeath.com/ViewsOnEntheogensInReligiousHistory.htm


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5675 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: uncontrollable thought-source–>helpless thought-receiver
Paul Thagard’s 3rd criterion for a superior theory is that it explains and maps to the terms of the previous theories, explaining why they seemed right but are not as right, while providing broader scope of explanatory power and greater conceptual coherence. By that measure, the Egodeath theory or Cyberfatedelic theory is a superior theory than the “sun worship” theory and the “fertility/s*x worship” theory, because the Egodeath theory provides a better explanation of why there is the appearance of sun worship and s*x worship, very commonly throughout world religious history.

uncontrollable thought-source–>helpless thought-receiver
lingham–>yoni
male–>female
man–>woman
sun–>moon
object–>reflection
king–>queen
plug–>socket
source–>sink
puppetmaster–>puppet
master–>slave
amphora–>cup
spear–>wound
phall–>womb
object–>shadow
alive–>ghost
wand–>cup
driver-gear–>driven-gear
engine–>driveshaft
fountain–>cave
lord–>subject
controller–>controlled
dominant–>submissive
upper–>lower

The sun-worship fallacy
The fertility-cult/s*x worship fallacy
These were not the ultimate target. These are not religious topics. But experiencing and perceiving your own thoughts being overpowered by a higher power, is and feels religious, terrifying, awesome, destabilizing. The sun is the source of light. The moon reflects light. The uncontrollable thought-source, made perceived by mushrooms, produces thoughts and those thoughts then appear to originate (especially in the OSC) from the helpless thought-receiver, but mushrooms’ loosecog makes the mind perceive that the thoughts don’t actually originate from the lower, local, normally visible portion of control-functioning in the mind. Thus sun–>moon and phall–>womb are excellent analogies, well-selected, to represent ….


Egodeath is also shown to be a superior theory to the “literal snake worship” theory of religion, based on the Egodeath theory’s recognition of ‘snake’ as representing mushroom-induced perceiving of the fated worldline of mental constructs in changeless spacetime. The snake-worship theory has only weak conjectures about why anyone would worship snakes. The new Mystery Cults book from Princeton


right-hand–>left-hand
God said “But Jonah, the people of Nineveh are children, they don’t know their left hand from their right, and you expect I should strike them down?” Consider “knowing your left hand from your right” as perceiving in loosecog that your personal control system consists of an uncontrollable thought-source and helpless thought-receiver.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5676 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: uncontrollable thought-source–>helpless thought-receiver
Thus “sun–>moon” and “phall–>womb” are excellent analogies, well-selected, to represent the two components of control, two separate locuses of control in the mind, constituting enlightened personal control thinking and a more accurate model of personal control thinking than the pre-initiation egoic mental model:

uncontrollable thought-source–>helpless thought-receiver


The new Mystery Cults book from Princeton by Hugh Bowden: the end of the book covers snake handling in current Christianity, but this is literalism and emotionalism, not ancient snake-shape understanding.

Mystery Cults of the Ancient World
Hugh Bowden
2010
http://amazon.com/dp/0691146381
http://google.com/search?q=%22Mystery+Cults+of+the+Ancient+World%22+Bowden
Princeton
Bonus: acknowledges the entheogen theory, in the standard official doctrinaire diminishing way. Thousands of scholars make this move in all the books: nowadays to publish in this field, you *must* show that you are aware of the entheogen theory, and you *must* treat it as briefly as possible, in a diminishing way. This has become the standard routine treatment, or non-treatment, or mis-treatment, of the day, in the Prohibition-complicit official academic press. It would be interesting to collect a few hundred of these toe-the-line statements; “Pay no attention to the mushroom behind the curtain!”


The Marriage of the Sun and Moon: A Quest for Unity in Consciousness
Andrew Weil
1980
http://www.erowid.org/library/books/marriage_of.shtml
The final chapter is titled same as the book.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5678 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: Social-political use & abuse of mystic revelation
Christianity doesn’t provide *anything* that other schemes (in their valid configuration/form) don’t also provide, in terms of mysticism, purification, regeneration, revelation, conversion, new life, and salvation (of the actually existing type).
Group: egodeath Message: 5679 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Rebis diagram: horiz & vert pairs, 2 meanings of ‘lower/higher’
The Rebis diagram is a control-components/transformation image.

The Rebis diagram contains two distinct systems of two items: a horizontal contrast and a vertical contrast. This reveals a kind of figure-of-3, like 3 circles with two on the top, one on the bottom. The Rebis diagram exposes the ambiguity — or better, that there are two distinct meanings — of the terms ‘higher’ and ‘lower’, and ‘egoic’ and ‘transcendent’.

Multiple mappings are legitimate, as long as they are defined. Thus a fully adequate Egodeath theory must be double the size; double the mappings.

When you say ‘higher’, do you mean the more sophisticated model of control (bi partite) (as within the context of contrasting the before- and after-initiation models), or do you mean the uncontrollable thought-source within the context of the more sophisticated model of control?
When you say ‘lower’, do you mean the less sophisticated model of personal control (pseudo-autonomous; pseudo- uni partite), or do you mean the helpless thought-source within the context of the more sophisticated model of control?

The initiate ends up with a mental model that has the following concepts:
o The autonomous control model before initiation (before loosecog perception and the resulting mental-model transformation)
o The uncontrollable thought-source
o The helpless thought-receiver
o Loosecog perception of the uncontrollable thought-source forcing thoughts into the helpless thought-receiver.

The Rebis diagram centrally depicts a person with two heads (male and female) standing on a winged dragon-serpent that’s on a winged sphere underneath with geometry symbols, and the rebis man-woman holds geometry instruments.

All seven planets are shown, alluding to Ptolemaic/Neoplatonic astral ascent mysticism. The sphere of the fixed stars is suggested by the star shapes of the planet symbols, and is near the bounding egg shape. The sphere of the fixed stars = Fatedness/heimarmene. Mercury = Hermes = messenger carrying the caduceus two-snake message from the gods, is shown in the Rebis diagram as above the man-woman, between and above the sun and moon.

Mars = male symbol, Venus = female symbol, are shown in stars by the king; that male/female pair alludes to uncontrollable thought-source and helpless thought-receiver. To the right of the andro-gyne are the symbols for Jupiter and Saturn. Saturn is associated with ego-sacrifice at the Fatedness/heimarmene level (fixed stars) in standard Ptolemaic astral ascent mysticism. Mapping the two main concepts of what’s revealed in loosecog: perceiving noncontrol maps to the Mars/Venus pair, and perceiving Fatedness/heimarmene maps to the Jupiter/Saturn pair.

androgyne = andro-gyne = male-female = man-woman

hermaphrodite = herme(s)-aphrodite

Sun is prominent, near man’s head (sometimes crowned, thus king).

Moon is prominent, near queen-head.

King = ruler = locus of control in the mind = hidden uncontrollable thought-source.

Queen = ruler = locus of control in the mind = visible helpless thought-receiver.

Dragon = serpent = egoic control thinking, repudiated as illusory during initiation and purification and refinement of thinking.

Wings on sphere = mushroom loosecog perceiving of control dynamics in the mind.

Winged Dragon = mushroom loosecog perceiving of control dynamics in the mind, such that egoic control-agency self-concept is seen as delusion, a delusion that however is useful and props up the enlightened, Rebis mind. Egoic serpent thinking is replaced by Rebis, two-ruler, sacred marriage thinking.


“Separate and coagulate” refers to both the loosecog state and to differentiating and unifying the two locuses of control that are always operative in the personal control functioning of the mind, but are not consciously explicitly mentally modelled or understood until after the series of mushroom initiations.

Enter the loosecog state, perform mental model transformation of autonomous control into bifurcated personal/transpersonal control, then return to tightcog state, possessing the old, uni partite and the new, bi partite models of personal control agency.

1. Before initiation: Start with the mental model self-concept as single autonomous control-agent (the dragon that’s later stood on).

2. During initiation: Enter loosecog, making mind perceive that personal control consists of uncontrollable thought-source inserting thoughts into helpless thought-receiver. Then see that those two locuses of control are united (coagulated).

3. End of initiation: Finally, the mind contains two distinct mental models of control: the “egoic, single autonomous locus of control” model below, and the “two distinct unified locuses of control” model above (the Rebis). The mind still remembers and utilizes the “single autonomous locus of control” mental model of personal control power, but the mind after initiation also includes a more detailed, sophisticated mental model of personal control as “bi partite, two distinct unified locuses of control-agency”.


The Rebis man-woman holds geometry instruments, indicating comprehension and rational understanding of the underlying principles of the world. The geometry-understood world, or Earth (symbolized and identified as “dot in circle”) is winged, indicating rational knowledge that’s perceived in the altered state (mushroom-induced loosecog). The geometry symbols of circle, 3, 4, jointed compass, and right-angle square, represent Rationality, Reason, Logic, Intelligence, Measurement, Mapping, Surveying, Analysis, Perceptiveness, Assessment.

A somewhat equivalent symbol from the domain of Engineering would be the Boolean truth table for logical AND, combined with a latching relay circuit (the foundation of digital computers). The Egodeath theory is encoded by the Rebis and can be encoded in representations from Engineering, including the Arabic mathematical symbols 1 and 0.

The truth table uses the binary number system:
0000, 0001, 0010, 0011, 0100…

A * B = A AND B
0 * 0 = 0
0 * 1 = 0
1 * 0 = 0
1 * 1 = 1

A + B = A OR B
0 + 0 = 0
0 + 1 = 1
1 + 0 = 1
1 + 1 = 1


1 = uncontrollable thought-source = male
0 = helpless thought-receiver = female

Also, expressing the vertical contrast of andro-gyne above, dragon below:
1 = bi partite model of personal control = hermaphrodite (andro-gyne) in Rebis diagram
0 = uni partite model of personal control = dragon in Rebis diagram

In models of contrasting aspects of personal control agency, “higher” and “lower” can refer to either:
o The enlightened model of control: the uncontrollable thought-source and helpless thought-receiver (the horizontal pair, andro-gyne)
o The deluded, uni partite model of control.

Reading A:
‘Higher’ can refer to the uncontrollable thought-source, in the bi partite model of personal control.
Reading B:
‘Higher’ can refer to the bipartite model of control, as opposed to the lower, uni partite model of control.

Consider the image of Michael the Archangel spearing the dragon/serpent/basilisk: this can be legitimately read as either:
Reading A:
Michael = uncontrollable thought-source
serpent = helpless thought-receiver
or
Reading B:
Michael = bi partite control
serpent = uni partite control

The general theme of “two things”, or “the person has two natures” can mean either:
A. Personal control agency is uncontrollable thought-source and helpless thought-receiver.
or
B. Personal control agency is initially modelled per the egoic model, and then is modelled per the transcendent model.

The final, single, whole, integrated, post-initiation person has 4 distinct natures: in the order in which our 4 natures are revealed during the initiation sequence:
1. Pseudo-autonomous control agency (the dragon)
2. Loosecog perception/pure awareness (the star above and center, Mercury/Hermes)
3. The helpless thought-receiver (female head, moon; also Venus because female)
4. The uncontrollable thought-source (male head, sun; also Mars because male)

1. First, before initiation, you experience yourself as autonomous personal control agent, controller of your thinking and will.
2. During traditional mushroom initiation, you enter the state of loosecog perception.
3. You experience yourself as helpless puppet at the mercy of a hidden uncontrollable source of your thoughts that are forced upon you threateningly, until you identify and sacrifice, repudiate, your claim to have power over your thinking.
4. You experience yourself as identified with the transpersonal uncontrollable source of thoughts.
5. As expressed in the Rebis diagram, in the end, you end up identified with each of the above, now distinguished and integrated in your final mental model of personal control agency.

I map no-free-will or heimarmene to Saturn, and therefore map pseudo freewill (at an advanced, Titan stage of initiation in Ptolemaic/Neoplatonist astral ascent mysticism) to Jupiter.

“Egoic vs. transcendent” can mean either:
A. The helpless thought receiver is egoic control, and the uncontrollable thought-source is transcendent control of the mind’s thoughts.
or
B. The pre-initiation model of control is egoic thinking, and the post-initiation model of control is transcendent thinking.

“I have egoic and transcendent thinking.” That can mean either:
A. My mental model of control comprises two parts: the uncontrollable thought-source and the helpless thought-receiver.
or
B. My mind possesses and utilizes the pre-initiation mental model, which is egoic thinking, as well as the post-initiation mental model of personal control, which is transcendent thinking.


Sometimes the Rebis is shown holding a mushroom-wine cup that contains 3 cybercontrol snakes. One important meaning of ‘3 snakes’ is:
One of the upper snakes = uncontrollable thought-source
Other upper snake = helpless thought-receiver
Lower snake = pseudo-autonomous personal control agency; animalistic crude, primitive, youthful/childish uni partite model of personal control.

The two upper snakes there represent together the bi partite intelligent, sophisticated, adult, mature, bi partite model of personal control.


In a similar woodcut diagram, a star and crowned bird is shown above a king standing on a sun and queen on moon. The star and bird are loosecog perception of how personal control thinking works in the mind. The three (crowned bird, king queen; = star, sun, moon) are depicted as interlinked though distinct.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5680 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: Rebis diagram: horiz & vert pairs, 2 meanings of ‘lower/higher’
Rebis images:
http://google.com/search?q=rebis&tbm=isch


Mapping the Rebis diagram to the tauroctony diagram of Mithraism, by using the non-metaphorical Cyberfatedelic theory of religion:

Given that the Rebis cleanly maps to the Tauroctony, this definitely indicates that an adequate structuring and presentation of the Cyberfatedelic theory must define equivalent, non-metaphorically expressed concepts that cleanly map to the associated elements in the Rebis and Tauroctony.

In this sense, metaphor-schemes teach (and inform and give information to) the non-metaphorical explanatory theory/framework. Theory learns from data; theory is shaped (organized, in-formed) by data. Theory is informed by data.

bull = dragon = Theory element A
Mithras = andro-gyne, sometimes shown as king-queen ruler = Theory element B
Sol = sun & male head = Theory element C
Luna = moon & female head = Theory element D
“looking”-ray = star/Mercury/Hermes = Theory element E

Thus by using the Theory to identify the mappings between metaphor-systems, we determine which mappings are standard and frequently utilized in metaphor-systems, and then adjust the Theory layout or architecture, or refactor the object-oriented design and Separation of Concerns in the Theory, to ensure that the Theory contains primary, named elements that map cleanly to many of the metaphor-systems that are the data or phenomena to be explained.

Thus the design-work for the Theory constructor to do amounts to filling-in the following component-map, toward constructing a diagram of the Theory, in this case, the Cyberfatedelic Theory of Ego Transcendence. It amounts to an assignment.

____________________________

Assignment:

Given the following symbol equivalence mappings between the Rebis diagram and the Tauroctony, provide concept labels and definitions for a non-metaphor based explanatory theory or framework that emphasizes Personal Self-Control Cybernetics Agency, Fatedness/Heimarmene/Determinism, and Loose Cognition from Mushrooms.


bull = dragon:
Theory element A is well-labelled as ‘__’, which term is defined as __.

Mithras = andro-gyne or king-queen ruler:
Theory element B is well-labelled as ‘__’, which term is defined as __.

Sol = sun & male head:
Theory element C is well-labelled as ‘__’, which term is defined as __.

Luna = moon & female head:
Theory element D is well-labelled as ‘__’, which term is defined as __.

“looking”-ray = star/Mercury/Hermes:
Theory element E is well-labelled as ‘__’, which term is defined as __.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 5681 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/11/2011
Subject: Re: Self-control seizure in Mithraism via Cyb/Heim/LCog/Metaph
Rock birth, birth from a rock: the mushroom loosecog state makes the mind perceive the changeless spacetime block universe, and a person’s entire life as a frozen worldline embedded in the spacetime block like a vein in a block of marble. The transcendent self-concept is born then. Born from seeing the block universe. Born from a rock. Rock birth.


Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Hoffman. All Rights Reserved.

Egodeath Yahoo Group – Digest 125: 2013-12-03

Site Map


Group: egodeath Message: 6351 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 03/12/2013
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6352 From: Vincent McHugh Date: 17/12/2013
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6353 From: Vincent McHugh Date: 17/12/2013
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6360 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/07/2014
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
Group: egodeath Message: 6361 From: andrewfplunkett Date: 13/07/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6362 From: Scott Finch Date: 13/07/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6363 From: Kurt Date: 18/07/2014
Subject: [Obituary] Stephen Gaskin (1935-2014)
Group: egodeath Message: 6368 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/12/2014
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
Group: egodeath Message: 6408 From: egodeath Date: 14/12/2014
Subject: Test post
Group: egodeath Message: 6409 From: opuslola@… Date: 14/12/2014
Subject: Re: Test post
Group: egodeath Message: 6410 From: egodeath Date: 14/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6411 From: egodeath Date: 14/12/2014
Subject: Re: Test post
Group: egodeath Message: 6413 From: egodeath Date: 14/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6414 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6415 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6416 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6417 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6418 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Best glass oil rig design
Group: egodeath Message: 6419 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: To upload
Group: egodeath Message: 6420 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: To upload
Group: egodeath Message: 6421 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: To upload
Group: egodeath Message: 6422 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6423 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6424 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6427 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6428 From: egodeath Date: 16/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6429 From: egodeath Date: 16/12/2014
Subject: Re: Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 6430 From: egodeath Date: 16/12/2014
Subject: Re: Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 6431 From: egodeath Date: 16/12/2014
Subject: Re: Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 6432 From: egodeath Date: 17/12/2014
Subject: Re: Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 6433 From: egodeath Date: 17/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6434 From: egodeath Date: 17/12/2014
Subject: Re: Paul’s road conversion = Balaam’s donkey conversion
Group: egodeath Message: 6435 From: egodeath Date: 18/12/2014
Subject: Bk: Cosmology and Fate (Lewis)
Group: egodeath Message: 6436 From: egodeath Date: 18/12/2014
Subject: Predestination and Free Will (Barry Clay)
Group: egodeath Message: 6437 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Bk: Around the Tree: Branching Future (Correia)
Group: egodeath Message: 6440 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Bk: Around the Tree: Branching Future (Correia)
Group: egodeath Message: 6441 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Bk: Around the Tree: Branching Future (Correia)
Group: egodeath Message: 6442 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Bk: Around the Tree: Branching Future (Correia)
Group: egodeath Message: 6443 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Bk: Around the Tree: Branching Future (Correia)
Group: egodeath Message: 6444 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Others’ summaries of the Egodeath theory
Group: egodeath Message: 6445 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Others’ summaries of the Egodeath theory
Group: egodeath Message: 6446 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Others’ summaries of the Egodeath theory
Group: egodeath Message: 6447 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Others’ summaries of the Egodeath theory
Group: egodeath Message: 6448 From: egodeath Date: 20/12/2014
Subject: Re: Others’ summaries of the Egodeath theory
Group: egodeath Message: 6449 From: egodeath Date: 21/12/2014
Subject: Re: Others’ summaries of the Egodeath theory
Group: egodeath Message: 6450 From: egodeath Date: 21/12/2014
Subject: Prohibition-compliant meditation
Group: egodeath Message: 6451 From: egodeath Date: 21/12/2014
Subject: Kenneth Humphreys on apologists for Jesus’ historicity
Group: egodeath Message: 6452 From: egodeath Date: 21/12/2014
Subject: Entheogenshow.com podcast
Group: egodeath Message: 6453 From: egodeath Date: 21/12/2014
Subject: List of my claims to priority of discovery
Group: egodeath Message: 6454 From: egodeath Date: 21/12/2014
Subject: Re: List of my claims to priority of discovery



Group: egodeath Message: 6351 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 03/12/2013
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture

quick & dirty blurry compressed version of video lecture about the chalkboard diagrams (also see the static photo, which is clearer):

https://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Ffile%2Fd%2F0B8qHZAfuY9KxclRzMzJPUjRwRVk%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Ddrive_web&h=zAQEn4CY7 

Group: egodeath Message: 6352 From: Vincent McHugh Date: 17/12/2013
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Received your latest transmissions of Dec 1,2,3
Sending out thoughts of love, support and safety with you on your path of this important work.
A few thought that mesh with your own;
Entheogenic produced temporary suspension of ego conditioning allows access to transcendent states but does not guarantee it. It is necessary to have a “prepared heart” in order to benefit from these experiences. 
The most difficult is to embrace your own annihilation, and to endure the intensity of the boundless transcendent state. Leary said, “The random spinning of the mind must be centered on prayer”.
 A necessary background in metaphor and myth is needed to assimilate these experiences into a coherent worldview. Some background in psychology, which essentially is a mythmaking discipline, is needed as well.
 In the ancient world the mysteries were concealed from the young and those that did not have sufficient preparation for the experience.
 Today this prohibition is echoed in the legal system that recognizes its dangers but makes no provision for its benefits. The state of the transcended ego is a reversion to our primary state (our true birthright) that has been concealed by our cultural and linguistic conditioning.
 This is what McKenna means when he say’s “culture is not your friend” These states are not specific to any culture or religion but are a reality that we wrap in the cultural contexts we have available to us to enable us to speak of what is otherwise unspeakable.
In other words, to quote Alfred Korzibsky “The map is not the territory”   


On Tuesday, December 3, 2013 2:13 PM, “egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com” <egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 
quick & dirty blurry compressed version of video lecture about the chalkboard diagrams (also see the static photo, which is clearer):
#ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 — #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mkp { border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mkp hr { border:1px solid #d8d8d8;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mkp #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799hd { color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mkp #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ads { margin-bottom:10px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mkp .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ad { padding:0 0;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mkp .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ad p { margin:0;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mkp .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ad a { color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-sponsor #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-lc { font-family:Arial;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-sponsor #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-lc #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799hd { margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-sponsor #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-lc .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ad { margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799actions { font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799activity { background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799activity span { font-weight:700;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799activity span:first-child { text-transform:uppercase;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799activity span a { color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799activity span span { color:#ff7900;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799activity span .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799underline { text-decoration:underline;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799attach { clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799attach div a { text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799attach img { border:none;padding-right:5px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799attach label { display:block;margin-bottom:5px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799attach label a { text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 blockquote { margin:0 0 0 4px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799bold { font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799bold a { text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 dd.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799last p a { font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 dd.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799last p span { margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 dd.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799last p span.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799yshortcuts { margin-right:0;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 div.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799attach-table div div a { text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 div.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799attach-table { width:400px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 div.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799file-title a, #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 div.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799file-title a:active, #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 div.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799file-title a:hover, #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 div.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799file-title a:visited { text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 div.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799photo-title a, #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 div.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799photo-title a:active, #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 div.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799photo-title a:hover, #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 div.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799photo-title a:visited { text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 div#ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mlmsg #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-msg p a span.ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799yshortcuts { font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799green { color:#628c2a;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799MsoNormal { margin:0 0 0 0;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 o { font-size:0;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799photos div { float:left;width:72px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799photos div div { border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799photos div label { color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799reco-category { font-size:77%;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799reco-desc { font-size:77%;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 .ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799replbq { margin:4px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-actbar div a:first-child { margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mlmsg { font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mlmsg table { font-size:inherit;font:100%;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mlmsg select, #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 input, #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 textarea { font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mlmsg pre, #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 code { font:115% monospace;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mlmsg * { line-height:1.22em;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-mlmsg #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799logo { padding-bottom:10px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-msg p a { font-family:Verdana;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-msg p#ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799attach-count span { color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-reco #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799reco-head { color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-reco { margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-sponsor #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ov li a { font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-sponsor #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ov li { font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-sponsor #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ov ul { margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-text { font-family:Georgia;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-text p { margin:0 0 1em 0;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-text tt { font-size:120%;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799 #ygrps-yiv-1465634961yiv6493342799ygrp-vital ul li:last-child { border-right:none !important;} #ygrps-yiv-1465634961


Group: egodeath Message: 6353 From: Vincent McHugh Date: 17/12/2013
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Received your latest transmissions of Dec 1,2,3
Sending out thoughts of love, support and safety with you on your path of this important work.
Entheogenic produced temporary suspension of ego conditioning allows access to transcendent states but does not guarantee it. It is necessary to have a “prepared heart” in order to benefit from these experiences. The most difficult is to embrace your own annihilation, to endure the intensity of the boundless transcendent state. Leary said, “the random spinning of the mind must be centered on prayer”. A necessary background in metaphor and myth is needed to assimilate these experiences into a coherent worldview. Some background in psychology, which essentially is a mythmaking discipline, is needed as well. In the ancient world the mysteries were concealed from the young and those that did not have sufficient preparation for the experience. Today this prohibition is echoed in the legal system that recognizes its dangers but unfortunatly makes no provision for its benefits. The state of the transcended ego is a reversion to our primary state (our true birthright) that has been concealed from us by our cultural and linguistic conditioning. This is what McKenna means when he say’s “culture is not your friend”. These states are not specific to any culture or religion but are a reality that we wrap in the cultural contexts we have available to us to enable us to speak of what is otherwise unspeakable. In other words, to quote Alfred Korzibsky “The map is not the territory” 


On Tuesday, December 3, 2013 2:13 PM, “egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com” <egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 
quick & dirty blurry compressed version of video lecture about the chalkboard diagrams (also see the static photo, which is clearer):
#ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 — #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mkp { border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mkp hr { border:1px solid #d8d8d8;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mkp #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682hd { color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mkp #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ads { margin-bottom:10px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mkp .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ad { padding:0 0;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mkp .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ad p { margin:0;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mkp .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ad a { color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-sponsor #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-lc { font-family:Arial;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-sponsor #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-lc #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682hd { margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-sponsor #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-lc .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ad { margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682actions { font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682activity { background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682activity span { font-weight:700;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682activity span:first-child { text-transform:uppercase;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682activity span a { color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682activity span span { color:#ff7900;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682activity span .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682underline { text-decoration:underline;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682attach { clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682attach div a { text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682attach img { border:none;padding-right:5px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682attach label { display:block;margin-bottom:5px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682attach label a { text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 blockquote { margin:0 0 0 4px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682bold { font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682bold a { text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 dd.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682last p a { font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 dd.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682last p span { margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 dd.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682last p span.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682yshortcuts { margin-right:0;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 div.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682attach-table div div a { text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 div.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682attach-table { width:400px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 div.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682file-title a, #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 div.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682file-title a:active, #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 div.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682file-title a:hover, #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 div.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682file-title a:visited { text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 div.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682photo-title a, #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 div.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682photo-title a:active, #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 div.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682photo-title a:hover, #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 div.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682photo-title a:visited { text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 div#ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mlmsg #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-msg p a span.ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682yshortcuts { font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682green { color:#628c2a;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682MsoNormal { margin:0 0 0 0;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 o { font-size:0;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682photos div { float:left;width:72px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682photos div div { border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682photos div label { color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682reco-category { font-size:77%;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682reco-desc { font-size:77%;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 .ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682replbq { margin:4px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-actbar div a:first-child { margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mlmsg { font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mlmsg table { font-size:inherit;font:100%;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mlmsg select, #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 input, #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 textarea { font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mlmsg pre, #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 code { font:115% monospace;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mlmsg * { line-height:1.22em;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-mlmsg #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682logo { padding-bottom:10px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-msg p a { font-family:Verdana;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-msg p#ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682attach-count span { color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-reco #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682reco-head { color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-reco { margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-sponsor #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ov li a { font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-sponsor #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ov li { font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-sponsor #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ov ul { margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-text { font-family:Georgia;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-text p { margin:0 0 1em 0;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-text tt { font-size:120%;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682 #ygrps-yiv-377135245yiv4198604682ygrp-vital ul li:last-child { border-right:none !important;} #ygrps-yiv-377135245


Group: egodeath Message: 6360 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/07/2014
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
The Egodeath Yahoo group is a Weblog sent out by Michael Hoffman,
covering the cybernetic theory of ego death and ego transcendence,
including:

o Block-universe determinism/Fatedness, the closed
and preexisting future, tenseless time, free will as illusory, the
holographic universe, and predestination and Reformed theology.

o Cognitive science, mental construct processing, mental models,
ontological idealism, contemporary metaphysics of the continuant
self, cybernetic self-control, personal control agency, moral agency,
and self-government.

o Zen satori, short-path enlightenment, and Alan Watts;
transpersonal psychology, Ken Wilber, and integral theory.

o Entheogens and psychedelic drugs, mystery religions, mythic
metaphor and allegorical encoding, the mystic altered state, mystic
and religious experiencing, visionary states, religious rapture, and
Acid Rock mysticism.

o Loss of control, self-control seizure, cognitive instability, and
psychosis and schizophrenia.


— Michael Hoffman
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/egodeath
http://www.egodeath.com
Group: egodeath Message: 6361 From: andrewfplunkett Date: 13/07/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Thanks for sharing this, it was very interesting to watch.  I had trouble with the link and I had to remove the facebook URL and change the URL encoded characters to their normal form, but got it to work.  In case anyone else has trouble with the above link, this is the version that worked for me:

IMG_6466.MOV – Google Drive

 

Group: egodeath Message: 6362 From: Scott Finch Date: 13/07/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
It immediately influenced my studio practice and the imagery in my artwork. Thank you.

On Saturday, July 12, 2014, andrewfplunkett@… [egodeath] <egodeath@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Thanks for sharing this, it was very interesting to watch. I had trouble with the link and I had to remove the facebook URL and change the URL encoded characters to their normal form, but got it to work. In case anyone else has trouble with the above link, this is the version that worked for me:

IMG_6466.MOV – Google Drive

IMG_6466.MOV – Google Drive
JavaScript isn’t enabled in your browser, so this file can’t be opened. Enable and reload.
Preview by Yahoo

Group: egodeath Message: 6363 From: Kurt Date: 18/07/2014
Subject: [Obituary] Stephen Gaskin (1935-2014)
“To me this is the real inner meaning of the Vow of the Bodhisattva:

The deluding passions are inexhaustible, I vow to extinguish them all.
The way of the Buddha is unattainable, I vow to attain it.
Sentient beings are numberless, I vow to save them all.
The truth is impossible to expound, I vow to expound it.

By the time I get this far, I generally lump them
together as,

“I vow to shovel shit against the tide forever.””

— Stephen Gaskin, Cannabis Spirituality, 1996, 1st. Ed.,
High Times Books, New York, pp 6-7

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/10946714/Stephen-Gaskin-obituary.html

Stephen Gaskin – obituary

Stephen Gaskin was a teacher who led a caravan of hippies across
America to found a commune built on tradition

04 Jul 2014

Stephen Gaskin, was a self-confessed “professional hippy” who became an
unlikely presidential candidate.

As a proponent of love, peace and harmony, he co-founded “The Farm” – a
spiritual community of like-minded tie-die clad, vegetarian,
pot-smoking pacifists – in Summertown, Tennessee, in 1971. It became
the largest hippy community in the world and an example of an effective
self-sufficient subculture.

As a potential leader of the free world – campaigning in the primary
elections of 2000 – Gaskin was a Green Party hopeful with a mission to
introduce universal health care, reform financial institutions and
legalise marijuana.

Although he failed to win the Green Party ticket for the presidential
poll he fought a frank and funny campaign. “Did you inhale?” he was
asked about his personal experience of marijuana. “I didn’t exhale,” he
answered.

Stephen Gaskin was born on February 16 1935 in Denver, Colorado, and
had a peripatetic, eclectic upbringing that, while atheist, was
inclusive of various cultures. His father was variously a cowboy,
builder, mail clerk and commercial fisherman and Stephen was raised
throughout the south west of America, with periods in Santa Fe,
Phoenix, and San Bernardino. “I’d been to so many different places I
had to learn how to make friends on purpose,” he recalled. He
maintained that his freethinking was hereditary, noting that his
grandmother was a suffragette and his great uncle helped the
longshoreman’s union in San Francisco.

Gaskin served in the US Marine Corps between 1952 and 1955, during
which time he fought in Korea. During the Sixties he lived in San
Francisco, where he taught English, semantics and creative writing at
San Francisco State University, working under the celebrated linguist
and semanticist SI Hayakawa.

Gaskin’s formal teaching grew into a more personal and philosophical
pursuit through his experimental “Monday Night Class” – an open
discussion group involving up to 1,500 students and held in 1969 and
1970 at a huge auditorium in the city’s Bay Area. His classes ranged
from “Group Experiments in Unified Field Theory” to “Magic, Einstein,
and God”. In these gatherings he discussed “consciousness, the
spiritual plane, religion, politics, sex, drugs and current events” –
all viewed through the kaleidoscopic lens of the Sixties counterculture
movement (and its psychedelic pharmaceutical refreshments). Unified by
the hippy sensibility, the classes formed the genesis of the group that
settled at The Farm.

In 1970 Gaskin led 250 people in a caravan of “20 or 30 old buses” from
San Francisco to Tennessee on a four-month lecture tour of churches and
colleges. “The farther we went, the more people there were who joined
the caravan,” he said. “Pretty soon there were three or four hundred of
us and the police were meeting us every time we crossed a state line.”

As a location for a commune their pocket of Tennessee countryside, with
its blackjack oaks and Amish communities, held mixed blessings. Though
the thousand acres of farmland they bought was cheap, it was closer to
the birthplace of the Ku Klux Klan than it was to a main road or a
hospital.

The community that Gaskin built was not based on free-love – its core
values included the sanctity of marriage, importance of hard work and
respect for the Tennessee locals: “You can’t jive anybody who’s
teaching you how to run a tractor. It’s something to watch a cat who
was once with the Hell’s Angels being taught to run a tractor by an old
man – and being respectful to that old farmer.”

Eventually, applicants to join The Farm required sponsorship by a
resident, a plan for their livelihood, and an explanation of what they
might bring to the community. They then had to pass a probationary
period.

Gaskin’s attitude to drugs also followed a – relatively – conservative
line. “Don’t lose your head to a fad,” he said. “The idea is that you
want to get open so you can experience other folks, not all closed up
and off on your own trip. So you shouldn’t take speed or smack or coke.
You shouldn’t take barbiturates or tranquillisers. All that kind of
dope really dumbs you out. Don’t take anything that makes you dumb.
It’s hard enough to get smart.”

In 1974, however, Gaskin went to prison for possession of marijuana.
“After we’d been here for a while, we got busted for growing a hundred
pounds of grass in the back,” he said. “And we weren’t sure whether the
neighbours were more uptight with us for doing that or for being so
dumb that we planted it in the deer trails where every hunter who came
through could see it.”

He served one year of a three-year sentence. On his release he
discovered that his voting rights had been rescinded. He sued the
government and after a series of lower court victories won his case, in
1981, at the Tennessee Supreme Court.

Under Gaskin’s guidance The Farm’s ethos extended well beyond its
geographical boundaries. The community supported aid efforts in
Guatemala, Chernobyl, Belize and the Bronx in New York.
Meanwhile, his wife, Ina May, developed a respected free midwifery
service for residents and “outsiders” alike – she turned down an offer
to be privately flown to Hollywood when Demi Moore went into labour.
Other on-site ventures have also flourished, from book publishing to a
soy dairy.

Gaskin was a prolific writer. His books on hippy spirituality include
The Caravan (1971); Hey Beatnik! This is the Farm Book (1974); and
Amazing Dope Tales and Haight Ashbury Flashbacks (1980).

In 2004 Gaskin was inducted into the Counterculture Hall of Fame,
joining the likes of Bob Dylan, Joan Baez and his own wife, Ina May.

While The Farm was home to thousands in its heyday, there are presently
just 200 residents – the majority of whom are over 50. It is, however,
one of the longest running communes in America. When asked in old age
why the community survived, Gaskin emphasised its practical approach.
“We were hippies wanting to live together and we accepted the
discipline it took to do that,” he said. “Utopia means nowhere. The
Farm has a zip code.”

Stephen Gaskin was married and divorced three times before he married
Ina May Middleton. She survives him with their two sons and a daughter,
along with a daughter from his second marriage and a son from a
“non-marital relationship”. Another son predeceased him.

Stephen Gaskin, born February 16 1935, died July 1 2014.



Gate gate paragate parasamgate bodhi svaha

— Prajna Paramita Sutra

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_Sutra



See also:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/03/us/stephen-gaskin-hippie-who-founded-an-enduring-commune-dies-at-79.html?_r=0

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/stephen-f-gaskin-founder-of-the-farm-commune-in-tennessee-dies-at-79/2014/07/03/5bc44a1a-02c0-11e4-b8ff-89afd3fad6bd_story.html

http://www.tennessean.com/story/life/2014/07/01/stephen-gaskin-founder-farm-dies/11934969/

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/2014/07/01/the-farm-summertown-timeline/11936383/

http://peaksurfer.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/stephen-gaskin-1935-2014.html

http://www.thefarm.org/
  @@attachment@@
Group: egodeath Message: 6368 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/12/2014
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
The Egodeath Yahoo group is a Weblog sent out by Michael Hoffman,
covering the cybernetic theory of ego death and ego transcendence,
including:

o Block-universe determinism/Fatedness, the closed
and preexisting future, tenseless time, free will as illusory, the
holographic universe, and predestination and Reformed theology.

o Cognitive science, mental construct processing, mental models,
ontological idealism, contemporary metaphysics of the continuant
self, cybernetic self-control, personal control agency, moral agency,
and self-government.

o Zen satori, short-path enlightenment, and Alan Watts;
transpersonal psychology, Ken Wilber, and integral theory.

o Entheogens and psychedelic drugs, mystery religions, mythic
metaphor and allegorical encoding, the mystic altered state, mystic
and religious experiencing, visionary states, religious rapture, and
Acid Rock mysticism.

o Loss of control, self-control seizure, cognitive instability, and
psychosis and schizophrenia.


— Michael Hoffman
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/egodeath
http://www.egodeath.com
Group: egodeath Message: 6408 From: egodeath Date: 14/12/2014
Subject: Test post

Test post from MH.

Group: egodeath Message: 6409 From: opuslola@… Date: 14/12/2014
Subject: Re: Test post
It seems you have been hacked. Dating sites abound in my e-mails.

—–Original Message—–
From: egodeath@… [egodeath] <egodeath@yahoogroups.com>
To: egodeath <egodeath@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Dec 14, 2014 4:05 pm
Subject: [egodeath] Test post



Test post from MH.
Group: egodeath Message: 6410 From: egodeath Date: 14/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
The photos from Rome by Cyberdisciple bolstered my focus on the image of a snake on a debranched tree, which is shown in books.  There are two paintings, in black and white, which came together Thanksgiving week 2013.  I haven’t recounted the intellectual events from Thanksgiving week 2013 through June 2014.  Staff of Asclepius the healer.  Any combination (esp. pair) of key metaphor symbols implies the entire system: snake/tree, king/tree, snake/pole, worm/bush.  

I have photos of Post-It Notes and art book entries showing how to completely condense the metaphors expressing what is revealed in the mystic state: heimarmene & cybernetics; fatedness, personal non-control (of a key type), and a new idea missing from the 1988 Core Theory: monopossibility, which is the missing link connecting block universe fatedness to personal nullity of control-power.  I explained my summary post-it notes to baristas.  I should describe and post the photos of the post-it notes with maximally condensed, maximally expressive metaphor-diagrams.

Branching possibilities is an illusion; there is only one truly possible path frozen in spacetime.  The more potent the Egodeath theory is, the simpler and more extreme.  There are only two perspectives; we switch from the first to the second.  (And they might talk of “transcending” the second perspective.)  From the false, tree perspective (Possibilism) to the snake perspective (Eternalism).  Mythic metaphor describes the switch from the Possibilism perspective to the Eternalism perspective.
Group: egodeath Message: 6411 From: egodeath Date: 14/12/2014
Subject: Re: Test post
Monitoring.  Might turn off postings.  Might moderate posts.
Group: egodeath Message: 6413 From: egodeath Date: 14/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
My 2006 main article is missing monopossibility/ theory of nonbranching (of possibility).  At ‘stag’… ‘animal’ for example.  Ancients considered the idea of nonbranching to be key and ultimate, given the ultimate position of the image of snake on debranched tree, as in the staff of Asclepius and the donkey with rider reaching the snake on debranched tree.

The concept of Rock (meaning the block universe) gets no attention — fatal oversight.  Rock is as important as snake, king, and debranched tree.  

tree/pole/branch/stauros/stake refer to nonbranching (of possibility).  King on tree = king on cross = king on pole/stauro/stake.  Monopossibility kills the steersman king, everything now recognized as being frozen into rock (spacetime).

— Original R&D by Michael Hoffman
Group: egodeath Message: 6414 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
By “Original R&D”, I had in mind “original research and original discovery”.

Searching for ‘branch’ in the Egodeath Yahoo group shows that I first posted about Possibilism vs. Eternalism September 11, 2007.  The search shows that I developed, discovered, and recognized the Theory of Nonbranching (of possibility) in religious mythic metaphor, during 2011 and 2012.  In the video recording of December 2, 2013, when I said I researched tree vs. snake during the past year, I meant “around a year ago”.  But as always, a “new” idea, an insight breakthrough, has roots going back years.

I have yet to post why my Thanksgiving week discovery that “tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism” was huge.  And why the total fallout from that breakthrough was huge.


April 1987 — A sudden stylistic change; mental construct processing; domain of control; loose cognition; use of acronyms (condensed abbreviations of phrases).  I became a real independent thinker, or idea developer, at that time.  This could be called a breakthrough in approach to modeling thinking, as mental construct processing; mental construct association matrixes.

January 1988 — Block universe breakthrough; birth of the Core Theory.  Main breakthrough.

November 2001 — Reading Revelation, realized the joking metaphors expressing no-free-will; thus got my desired-in-1999 confirmation that “Jesus and Paul assert my Egodeath theory” (as I put it in 1999).  Birth of the Phase 2 theory: religious mythic metaphor describes entheogens revealing fatedness and personal non-control.  A peak breakthrough.

~2003, discovered snake/serpent means Heimarmene (block-universe fatedness).  (Search the Egodeath Yahoo group to see my development trajectory from hypothesis to confirmation.)  An essential key breakthrough.

2006-2007 wrote the main article.

Thanksgiving week 2013, a peak breakthrough: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism.  This was also based on long-term work on the problem of interpreting the story (or story-twist) of tree of knowledge (of good & evil) at the start of the Bible/Old Testament.  Developed this recognition and breakthrough through June 2014, perfecting the diagram of king/tree/snake/rock/puppetmaster/fate-steering-rail.  Staff of Asclepius the healer.  snake on pole, ram caught in bush, king in tree (had been working on Dionysus story of king Pentheus caught up in tree, and “king hung from a tree” in bible (OT & Jesus) for years).  


After the video lecture Dec. 2, 2013, I refined the idea of “meta-steering” — I can clarify that idea, but it does come down to some kind of “meta-steering” is an illusion throughout our experience of being a power-weilding control-agent.  We do a kind of steering, but we lack a kind of meta-steering.  There is change, but not meta-change.  There is pseudo-possibility branching, but only one actual possibility, the one fated and frozen in future spacetime.

Thanksgiving 2013, I had been working on multiple mytheme-interpretation problems for years, including story of tree of knowledge, and Dionysus in tree, and Jesus’ death on a stauros (stake)/cross/pole.  That also led to my full ability to read the Villa of Mysteries fresco, which I haven’t yet posted (huge breakthrough or application of the Egodeath theory’s interpretation scheme to decipher religious mythic metaphor).

January 21, 2014, figured out, and discovered the problem of, the Staff of Asclepius the healer.  Drew Post-It Note explaining the Staff of Asclepius.  Later (I have dates), refined the Post-It Note diagram condensing the metaphors for switching from Possibilism to Eternalism.  Later, June 14 2014, I discovered the interpretive principle that any pair of key mythemes implies the entire system; king on cross = serpent on pole = worm eating bush = king on tree. Broke through in interpreting, fully reading, Villa of Mysteries fresco.  Brought together the Theory of Nonbranching (of possibilities) using 2011-2012 work on branching and nonbranching in mushroom trees, snake/hydra, Typhon father of all monsters, monster living hidden in fountain in cave; hydra (ironic branching of the non-branching Heimarmene snake) vs. nonbranching tree (ironic nonbranching). 

— Michael Hoffman, December 14, 2014, Original Research, Original Discoveries: religious mythic metaphor describes entheogens revealing Eternalism and the illusory nature of meta-steering

Group: egodeath Message: 6415 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
In my 2006-2007 main article, I wasn’t satisfied with “time pole”, as an explanation for Moses’ healing snake-on-pole.  Daily I see debranched trees alongside highway construction, holding up telecomm panels forming a grid.  How do you make a pole?  You find a tree and cut off its branches.  A pole is a debranched tree; the emphasis is not pole=time, but rather, pole=monopossibility — that’s an error in the main article.

The goddess turned the hunter into “an animal” — that is an error in the main article; should say “turned him into a stag with branching antlers and his hunting dogs killed him; negating Possibilism”.

I have carefully analyzed the kylix (mushroom wine drinking saucer) showing Jason spewed forth dead from giant snake, ivy-strand tree where branching is hidden by the Golden Fleece (compare ram caught in bush, in sacrifice of Isaac).  That is the black & white image on the cover of the book Greek Mythology, which inspired my Thanksgiving 2013 tree vs. snake breakthrough when I turned the page of the Joseph Campbell book and saw in black & white the Eve half of a diptych painting, by Cranach the Younger and/or Elder, buddy of Martin Luther, showing Eve holding branch of tree of knowledge, branching antlers behind her, holding branch in front of her.  

Pretty big breakthrough around June 2014, fallout from tree vs. snake breakthrough: I re-did some Web research on Calvinism and found the great book “The Dark Side of Calvinism”, which proves that the hyper-calvinism asserted by John Calvin himself asserts God as the author of evil.  This led to my complaint and observation again, that people misunderstand the nature of ‘heaven’ and ‘hell’; there are two meanings: reward/punishment for freewill egos, vs. mystic-altered-state experiencing of hellish turmoil until sacrifice the egoic freewill power claim.  

Thus, I discovered that Calvin’s extreme Calvinism is correct (systemically coherent) but conventional view of heaven&hell as reward/punishment for egos is incorrect; it’s the lower view in mass religion, not the esoteric revealed higher meaning of ‘heaven’/’hell’.  Rob Bell & Progressive Christianity rejects ECT (Eternal Conscious Torment).  Hell is the loosecog state for purification to remove freewill thinking from our thinking, to become divinized and coherent and healed.  Hyper Calvinism is correct (coherent) but Hell is not what Calvinists think.  Calvinism is true but its Hell is false.  Religion has a lower, false interpretation, and a higher, true interpretation.

Prior to the November 2013 tree vs. snake breakthrough, I had been searching the Web for “block universe”, thinking “*Surely* people have seen the profound implications”.  That period of re-doing some Web research deeper, set up the Thanksgiving 2013 recognition that tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism.

An idea is a connection-network.  An insight is a greater degree of connections, and key revisions (Paul Thagard’s book Conceptual Revolutions).

— Michael Hoffman, the Egodeath theorist.  Original research and original discoveries.
Group: egodeath Message: 6416 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
URL for my video lecture on “tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism”, at Google docs, not as clear as the uncompressed original file.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8qHZAfuY9KxclRzMzJPUjRwRVk/edit?usp=docslist_api
Group: egodeath Message: 6417 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
The link (for my shared video file at Google Docs) isn’t working on my iPhone 6 Plus. The file is at Google Docs and I can view it in my Google Docs account. I plan to upload the video to Egodeath.com, uncompressed.
Group: egodeath Message: 6418 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Best glass oil rig design
Part of the fallout from my Thanksgiving week 2013 tree vs. snake breakthrough is that I thought of this glass oil rig design for vaporizing honeycomb or other texture of cannabis oil: a snake winding up a debranched tree per the Staff of Asclepius the healer; a key feature is the emphatically cut-off branch stubs, asserting the fatedness snake and repudiating the assumption of multipossibilities and our egoic control power of meta-steering among those possibility branches. We steer along our preset steering-rail that is frozen into the spacetime block per Eternalism.

Some glass oil rig designs seem to be unconsciously heading this direction in the abstract, with a snake-like spiral of glass winding around a plain glass cylinder, without debranched stubs, without tree trunk or branch features.

— original research, discovery, & design by Michael Hoffman, the Egodeath theorist, 2014
Group: egodeath Message: 6419 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: To upload
Web image searches showing the staff of Asclepius, Moses’ serpent on a pole, and Hercules’ club — all as a debranched tree.

Video lecture on tree vs. snake, uncompressed

Villa of the Mysteries fresco images with my full deciphering


Books:

The Dark Side of Calvinism

no historical Paul (Robert Price)

ahistoricity of Mohammed

Richard Carrier’s book on ahistoricity of the Jesus figure
What the fall of Mars Hill and Mark Driscoll means for the Egodeath theory; ersatz substitute lower Christianity vs. bona fide higher Christianity.

Martin Ball’s explanation of oneness and we are part of God.



False, lower Islam.

Criticism of attempts to combine God’s goodness & omnipotence, criticism of shielding God from being the author of evil in order to save ethics.

Progress in stopping the war on drugs. Countering antidrug attitudes; adolescents naturally seek drugs and ego death insight, which is spiritual maturation. God is puppetmaster of the evil, delusion-preserving prohibitionists, who have power because God put them in that role, frozen helplessly in spacetime. Forgive the prohibitionist puppets, blame God instead.

Expanding the condensed list of metaphors thread, such as rock stone statue marble.

Photos: Post-It Notes showing snake tree king rock steeering hand-of-God; summaries of metaphor imagery combinations.

— Michael Hoffman, the Egodeath theorist
Group: egodeath Message: 6420 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: To upload
When I wrote the Wasson Plaincourault article, I learned to never trust my memory or impression of what someone wrote, but always triple-fact-check and quote. Especially given weaselly, politically evasive, self-contradictory writings on history of visionary plants in Our cultural history (R Gordon Wasson, Richard Schultes).

I often think that I have written directly on a point, making a particular point explicitly — but when I try to find my writeup, to point to it, I can’t find anything but a slight allusion to the idea in my online published writings. Therefore, I must write anew about things and points I have supposedly covered before. A fresh writeup is the only way to be sure my clearest best latest ideas have been written up. Partial repetition ensures development/evolution of my writings. I wrote about branching and nonbranching (of possibilities that are supposedly open to our personal domain of control/steering power) multiple times between 2011-2012, before the connections exploded into complete recognition of religious mythic metaphor such as nonbranching mushroom trees. “Repeating” my writeups develops the ideas (connection-networks).

— Michael Hoffman, the discoverer of no-free-will in religious mythic metaphor
Group: egodeath Message: 6421 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: To upload
I want to transcribe the video lecture about my discovery that tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism.

–Michael Hoffman, Egodeath theorist
Group: egodeath Message: 6422 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Dates for Priority of Discovery, from photos and their timestamps:

Friday, November 29, 2013, 7:42 pm (the day after Thanksgiving): I discovered that tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism, upon seeing the right half of this painting in black & white, together with the cover of Fritz Graf’s book Greek Mythology: An Introduction, which shows the kylix/mushroom-wine saucer showing Jason spewed dead from the giant Heimarmene-snake, while Athena (with snake-fringes and death-face) and owl looks on, with ram golden fleece hung in nonbranching ivy-strand quasi-tree. This was one of my top 3 all-time breakthroughs.
img_6414.jpg photo of page of a large Joseph Campbell / Bill Moyers book “A. Eve tempted by the Serpent, Lucas Cranach, ca. 1530.”

That was interwoven with recognizing many depictions of person’s head coming forth from a snake, including Eve’s head. I want to inventory and upload pictures of these.


December 2, 2013: chalkboard video lecture on tree vs. snake.

Jan 3 2014 6565jpg found king in tree shot by bow and arrow in esoteric drawing confirming Egodeath theory. De Alchima, Leyden, 1526. Fountain section of esoteric art book.

January 24, 2014: figured out staff of asclepius, drew Post-It Note for Karen barista: “mono-possibility tree- rigid serpent: your future possibility = fatedness. [branch stubs =] illusory virtual-only possibility branch per freewill. Staff of Asclepius the healer”

feb 9, 2014 6604 jpg. draft Post-It Note condensing mythic imagery expressing realization/revelation of no-free-will. led up to refined:

February 11, 2014: gave Post-It Note to Levi barista cosmetologist with gold ink accents, left side: king steering in tree “king with power of steering and control in open future possibility tree”; right side: puppet king steering along fixed real snake path and of God puppetmaster from cloud. lacked indication of rock universe cave surrounding all that, though. “puppet forced to steer by uncontrollable puppetmaster along rigid snake path”

March 9, 2014: 6662-6672 jpg: I drew excellent, refined, condensed diagrams and text in art signing book at coffeehouse, titled Religious Myth Deciphered. snake on pole moses, staff asclepius, debranched club of Heracles, fully mature diagram in metallic multi color ink: appearance reality king tree steering pump at snake rock rigid rock universe with text including:
left side: “normally we experience as an autonomous king with steering power in a multi-possibility tree, with open future.

“King with power of steering and control and open future possibility tree.”
[ there is a mushroom in the middle of the diagram]
right side: “After mixed wine, we experience as a puppet forced to steer a long a pre-existing snake-shaped rail, mono possibility. We have virtual possibilities and a single actual possibility, our path frozen in rock. Puppet forced to steer by hidden uncontrollable puppetmaster along rigid snake path.”

— original research and discoveries by Michael Hoffman, based on research since 1985
Group: egodeath Message: 6423 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
“and of God puppetmaster from cloud”
should read:
hand of God puppetmaster from cloud

“appearance reality king tree steering pump at snake rock rigid rock universe”
should read:
[left side:] Appearance [right side:] Reality
king tree steering puppet snake rock (rigid rock universe)
Group: egodeath Message: 6424 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
“right side: puppet king steering along fixed real snake path”
should read:
right side: puppet king steering along fixed rail snake path
Group: egodeath Message: 6427 From: egodeath Date: 15/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
John Earman has articles about non-branching spacetime, and about varieties of determinism (which “is still a matter of debate”).

Pruning Some Branches from “Branching Spacetime”. 2008
http://pitt.edu/~jearman/Earman2008a.pdf

Aspects of Determinism in Modern Physics. 2007
http://pitt.edu/~jearman/Earman2007a.pdf

Reassessing the Prospects for a Growing Block Model of the Universe. 2008
http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/13214/
Group: egodeath Message: 6428 From: egodeath Date: 16/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
I declare a moratorium on Relativity and Quantum Physics. They add confusion that prevents us from doing first things first; the first thing is to fully grasp block-universe fatedness. In 1900 it was possible to think about the iron block rock universe, possible to grasp the full ramifications of no-free-will. But we didn’t have that clarity, and then we piled-on Relativity and QM and then got ourselves lost in equations, confusions, preventing from ever thinking clearly and simply. So we had to wait until my main article of 2006-2007, and my addition of monopossibility in 2013-2014, to see a full clear view of the entire system of simple block-universe no-free-will, in Philosophy, Psychology, religious experiencing, mythology, and Physics. It’s like trying to learn C++ programming without understanding C programming: step 1 has to be for everyone to understand the Egodeath theory.

— Michael Hoffman, pointing to the simplest ideas first
Group: egodeath Message: 6429 From: egodeath Date: 16/12/2014
Subject: Re: Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism
Why was the tree vs. snake breakthrough experienced by me as so surprising, profound, fundamental, and wide-ranging in ramifications?

I discovered and showed that spacetime physics, and the philosophy of it, is closely aligned with the ancients’ concern with tree, snake, king, rock, steering, searching, death, and myth. Spacetime physics talks of spacetime worms, branching possibility tree, a line of possibility into the future, a tree trunk of what transpired in the past.

I was looking for stag antlers in Greek myth but found them at the tree of knowledge — multiple separate research projects slammed together when I combined seeing Lucas Cranach’s branching-focused tree of knowledge, various human heads coming out of snakes, and the Jason in Garden of Hesperides kylix (mushroom wine drinking saucer).

My research on mushrooms found that we should consider ergonomic the seeminglyly arbitrary use of mixed wine — this is an original announcement: the throwing away of the mushroom dregs, not ingesting the mushroom pieces, might be important to make mushroom extract safer and more psychoactive in proportion to toxicity. Using a krater mixing bowl for a batch enables redosing and controlled dosage, thus lengthening the session and tempering the peak. Thus imitating the way mixed wine was used could be key to increasing the effectiveness of mushrooms.

Ancient Near Eastern religion clearly, evidently, must have understood tree vs. snake and the centrality (crux) of Possibilism vs. Eternalism. Cranach’s painting implies that so too did the Cranaches, Luther, and Calvin. The story of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, this tree and snake, is fundamental and foundational at the start of the Bible. Jesus compares himself with Jonah and the fish (sea serpent spewing forth a man) and Moses’ healing snake on a pole. The tree of knowledge as pointing out the crux as branching vs. nonbranching possibility, extremely confirms my focus on block-universe determinism, giving me far more confirmation than I imagined possible. I felt lightning arcing to connect Greek myth and Jewish stories, as well as Ancient Near Eastern religion, when I put together the Jason kylix and Eve’s branching tree. perfect elegance of expression of the best distinction in philosophy of time: is the future a single preexisting possibility path, or branching? If nonbranching, egoic meta-steering power is dead illusion. Ancients understood but spacetime physics is lost in its complexity and struggles to think about this most basic contrast to its full extent. Only mythic visual art imagery is simple enough to strip away the inessentials and represent what’s at stake, what the two options are and their ramifications: is future possibility tree-shaped, as we initially assume, or snake-shaped?

— Michael Hoffman, the Egodeath theorist, December 16, 2014
Group: egodeath Message: 6430 From: egodeath Date: 16/12/2014
Subject: Re: Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism
A little patch of preserved forest I walk in frequently, looking at mushrooms, put me consciously in the same context as ancients: I knew that just like them, I could think about the basic fundamental ideas: branching paths, branching trees, steering decisions, non-branching mushrooms. I leveraged this timeless simple framework of thinking, provided by this forest patch, to ask what ‘sacred crossroads’ meant, 2011-2012.

— Michael Hoffman, Dec. 16, 2014
Group: egodeath Message: 6431 From: egodeath Date: 16/12/2014
Subject: Re: Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism
All the complexities of determinism in Physics debates simply reduces (boils down) to branching vs. nonbranching possibility, and a concommitant scope of personal control possibility-steering power. Physics in the tightcog state fails to emphasize and perceive {possibility nonbranching interlinked with control-agent non-meta-steering} as the crux of the matter systemically, or else Physics would recognize this theme at the heart of religious mythic metaphor.

There is some sporadic disorganized discussion of no-free-will and illusory agent responsibility, in Physics and in Reformed Theology, but the pieces haven’t been systematically and simply brought together and reduced-down to fundamental clarity, until my tree vs. snake discoveries of 2011-2014.

Either there are branching possibilities and we have meta-steering power suitable for selecting which branch we enter, or there is only one real possibility frozen in place in the future, and we lack the kind of steering power to deviate from that branch (extended trunk).

Elaborate discussions of spacetime models in Physics, and of the order of salvation in Reformed Theology, put forth distracting and irrelevant twists and views and alternative wording, that hides this fundamental simplicity of the opposition and contrast between these only two models of possibility and control.

Thus writers don’t even know the simple worldmodel of Eternalism and noncontrol, even as they assert or reject no-free-will. A specific, focused, relevant connection-network of ideas and metaphors is required but missing from the Physics discussions and Calvinism/TULIP/Reformed Theology discussions.

— Michael Hoffman, simple fundamental thoroughgoing Egodeath theorist
Group: egodeath Message: 6432 From: egodeath Date: 17/12/2014
Subject: Re: Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism
Popular paranormal Physics, pop spirituality, pop pseudo-Calvinism, pop religion, pop thinking — is based on sand, on a foundation premise of possibility branching with egoic steering power and open future. Before mixed wine initiation (loosecog), we think “open-possibility steering power”.

That is the default initial assumption, unstated, taken for granted throughout our thinking; the only way we know how to think, until we are dynamically shown the nonbranching way and its non-meta-steering. Oedipus steered but couldn’t steer away from his destined rail. Anyone who isn’t focusing on comprehensive nonbranching and non-meta-steering (Eternalism), automatically habitually assumes Possibilism; open future, multipossibility branching, metasteering power.

— Michael Hoffman
Group: egodeath Message: 6433 From: egodeath Date: 17/12/2014
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture
In a txt msg I sent June 15, 2014, I alluded to the important idea/principle:

Any pair of key mythemes, or combination of key mythemes, implies the entire classic system of using metaphors to describe visionary plants revealing fatedness and personal non-control.

For example:
snake in tree,
brass serpent on pole,
dead king on tree/pole/cross,
ram caught in bush,
winged eye on pole w 2 snakes coupled,
Snake around pole (debranched tree).

That is a distinct principle of myth.

from txtxs:
photo caption:
“King snake in tree. (crown) A compound mythic image”

With that idea (“mytheme pairs represent the entire system”), my theory of religious mythic metaphor is complete. My 1988 Core Theory, and my 2007 main article, lacked “nonbranching/monopossibility”- a mandatory idea which is as important as the tree/snake contrast eg tree of knowledge of good/evil, which represents/expresses the idea of monopossibility, like king oedipus’ inability to deviate from his fated path; our future is frozen in rock and “alternative paths” are illusory. My 1988 theory & 2007 article didnt see the crucial, fundamental “monopossibility/ possibility-nonbranching” idea & mythemes, discovered 2012-2014.

Any pair of key mythemes represents the entire system of metaphors for visionary plants revealing fatedness & personal non-control.

That important idea/realization was june 15 2014 or couple days later. that was the last key idea to play out from the thxgivingweek 2013 tree-vs-snake breakthru over course of 6 mo 20 days.

Myths closely related:
king on a cross
king caught in a tree
ram caught in a bush
worm eating at Bush; various combinations, conjunctions are interesting

— Michael Hoffman, the Egodeath theorist; original research
Group: egodeath Message: 6434 From: egodeath Date: 17/12/2014
Subject: Re: Paul’s road conversion = Balaam’s donkey conversion
A key characteristic of the donkey is that it automatically follows a path, like a steering mechanism that follows along a rail – the heimarmene snake rigid rail frozen into the future.

On a sarcophagus (a casket made of rock), a relief shows a man riding carried by a donkey along a path leading to a snake on a debranched tree. The man is not holding reins steering the donkey. The donkey is one’s steering-activity, which is frozen into the rock future, frozen carved in the spacetime rock block universe from the timeless moment of creation.

— Michael the Egodeath theorist
Group: egodeath Message: 6435 From: egodeath Date: 18/12/2014
Subject: Bk: Cosmology and Fate (Lewis)
Cosmology and Fate in Gnosticism and Graeco-Roman Antiquity: Under Pitiless Skies (Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies)
Nicola Denzey Lewis
2013
http://amazon.com/o/asin/9004245480

Book review by Michael Hoffman:

Title of review: You are ignorant slaves of fate; we have been released
5 out of 5 stars

People in Mediterranean antiquity including Jews, Pagans, Gnostics, and Christians, around the 1st Century, believed in fatedness. Then around the 2nd Century, people adopted a rhetoric of transcending fatedness, while disparaging other people or the other groups as being ignorant and being slaves to fate. This book supports the 3-tiered systematic analysis in my Egodeath theory, in which we move through three stages during initiation experiences:

1. Ignorant freewill thinking.

2. Enlightened realization of fatedness and personal noncontrol. This stage disparages stage 1 (ignorant freewill thinking).

3. Transcending fatedness to gain a transcendent freedom. This stage conflates and disparages stage 1 (ignorant freewill thinking) and stage 2 (realization of fatedness and personal noncontrol).

Lewis’ analysis is not as systematic, but supports this explanation of how stage 2 was first positively valued and then later was negatively valued.

Lewis shows that competition and rhetoric inflation led all the groups (Jews, pagans, Christians, gnostics) to praise themselves as having true freedom and disparage the other people as being both ignorant (per stage 1) and slaves of fate (as realized in stage 2). People didn’t complain of themselves being enslaved by fate; they disparaged other people as being ignorant and enslaved by fate. However, during initiation, as I have analyzed, the experience of fatedness and personal noncontrol give rise to panic and egodeath, which amounts to suffering enslavement by fate.

Lewis misses this point and understates the intensity of ancient experience of enslavement to fate; she argues that enslavement to fate was mere rhetoric, but in fact enslavement to fate was intense peak experiencing. Lewis’ theory is literary scholarship unplugged from intense, lightning-bolt, ancient experiential transformation of consciousness. Once this connection is made, from initiation experience to the encounter with fatedness, Lewis’ book can be corrected and recognized as relevant to explaining the heart of religious origins in antiquity.

— Michael Hoffman, the Egodeath theorist
Posted first at Amazon on Nov. 11, 2014

Contents (my transcription from the hardcover):
Introduction
Chapter 1: Were the Gnostics Cosmic Pessimists?
Chapter 2: Nag Hammadi and the Providential Cosmos
Chapter 3: ‘This Body of Death’: Cosmic Malevolence and Enslavement to Sin in Pauline Exegesis
Chapter 4: ‘Heimarmene’ at Nag Hammadi: ‘The Apocryphon of John’ and ‘On the Origin of the World’
Chapter 5: Middle Platonism, Heimarmene, and the Corpus Hermeticum
Chapter 6: Ways Out I: Interventions of the Savior God
Chapter 7: Ways Out II: Baptism and Cosmic Freedom: A New Genesis
Chapter 8: Astral Determinism in the Gospel of Judas
Chapter 9: Conclusions, and a New Way Forward
Selected Bibliography
Subject Index


Below is more about the book, which I posted originally in this post:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/6309


Cosmology and Fate in Gnosticism and Graeco-Roman Antiquity: Under Pitiless Skies
Nicola Denzey Lewis
http://amazon.com/o/asin/9004245480
Due out Feb 2013
Nicola Denzey Lewis, Religious Studies professor, specialist in Gnosticism.
Condensed by Michael Hoffman:
“Gnosticism as a philosophically-oriented religious movement, with the perception of the cosmos as negative or enslaving. Astrological fate in the Apocryphon of John, the Gospel of Judas, Trimorphic Protennoia, and the Pistis Sophia. The concept of enslavement to heimarmene originated in Greek Stoicism, was deployed in the Pauline writings, and was later used by Christian and non-Christian second-century intellectuals. The ancient cosmos, its influence, and being free of its potentially pernicious effects. Gnosticism within the context of the intellectual history of the Roman Empire; emergent Christianity; the religions of Graeco-Roman antiquity.”

Contents:
Were the Gnostics Cosmic Pessimists?
Nag Hammadi and the Providential Cosmos
This Body of Death: Cosmic Malevolence and Enslavement to Sin in Pauline Exegesis
Heimarmene at Nag Hammadi: The Apocryphon of John and On the Origin of the World
Middle Platonism, Heimarmene, and the Corpus Hermeticum
Ways Out I: Interventions of the Savior God
Ways Out II: Baptism and Cosmic Freedom
Astral Determinism in the Gospel of Judas
Conclusions, and a New Way Forward

Same author:
Introduction to ‘Gnosticism’: Ancient Voices, Christian Worlds
Nicola Denzey Lewis
http://amazon.com/o/asin/0199755310
2012
Oxford University Press
Group: egodeath Message: 6436 From: egodeath Date: 18/12/2014
Subject: Predestination and Free Will (Barry Clay)
Predestination and Free Will
Barry Clay
March 2014
http://amazon.com/o/asin/B00J8XHITG

Title of review: Freewillist, defines predestination as foreknowledge, not preordaining
4 out of 5 stars

Book review by Michael Hoffman (Egodeath.com), posted June 8, 2014:

The author accommodates predestination by defining predestination as foreknowledge rather than preordaining. He attempts to use an exclusively freewillist solution to reconcile predestination and freewill assertions in the Bible.

The author doesn’t use a “sequential bi-modal meaning-switching” explanation to reconcile predestination and freewill assertions in the Bible. Per the Egodeath theory, the Bible initially asserts freewill to the uninitiated, and subsequently reveals no-free-will to the initiated, with two contrasting networks of meaning regarding ‘sin’, ‘saved’, ‘heaven’, ‘hell’, ‘heal’, ‘wine’, ‘exorcise’, ‘eternal life’, ‘good’, ‘evil’, and ‘die’. The Bible is based in a Reformed theology that systemically redefines these terms, and playfully contrasts the pre-initiation and post-initiation meaning-networks, for the purpose of building a populist egalitarian social-political network, in contrast to hierarchical Imperial Theology which utilized pagan initiation into no-free-will.

Clay’s writing is an example of the freewillist meaning-network of key words, which is the initial mode or layer of the bi-modal or 2-layer religion of New Testament Christianity.

— Book review by Michael S. Hoffman, Egodeath theorist
Group: egodeath Message: 6437 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Bk: Around the Tree: Branching Future (Correia)
Around the Tree: Semantic and Metaphysical Issues Concerning Branching and the Open Future
Fabrice Correia (Editor), Andrea Iacona (Editor)
2013
http://amazon.com/o/asin/9400751664
Group: egodeath Message: 6440 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Bk: Around the Tree: Branching Future (Correia)
Publisher’s description

Over the past few years, the tree model of time has been widely employed to deal with issues concerning the semantics of tensed discourse. The thought that has motivated its adoption is that the most plausible way to make sense of indeterminism is to conceive of future possibilities as branches that depart from a common trunk, constituted by the past and the present. However, the thought still needs to be further articulated and defended, and several important questions remain open, such as the question of how actuality can be understood and formally represented in a branching framework. The present volume is intended to be a 360 degree reflection on the tree model. The contributions is gathers concern the model and its alternatives, both from a semantic and from a metaphysical point of view. ​
Group: egodeath Message: 6441 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Bk: Around the Tree: Branching Future (Correia)
Group: egodeath Message: 6442 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Bk: Around the Tree: Branching Future (Correia)
Search term combinations:
possibility branching no free will
Spacetime worm
Worldline
World-line
“Spacetime worm”
Snake
possibility branching
no free will
“possibility branching”
“no free will”
Tree
Forking path
space time “worm theorist”
Trousers
Group: egodeath Message: 6443 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Bk: Around the Tree: Branching Future (Correia)
For example:
http://4chandata.org/x/Let-s-imagine-our-universe-in-the-fourth-dimension-It-would-appear-as-a-long-growing-snake-the-beginning-of-the-universe-in-the-fr-a70639

Stocking wrote 2012-09-24:
it looks more like a tree since there is a here and now. Not that the other possibilities don’t exist, however our one true existence makes a solid snake, unfortunately, the uncertain future has to look like a giant tree branching ahead of that snake.
… The snake that is history and the tree that is the future, and also the possible tree that is the past, the infinity that surrounds the one true timeline.
Group: egodeath Message: 6444 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Others’ summaries of the Egodeath theory
Intelligible, specific, articulate praise and clarification of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence, alternating with vague and content-free disparagement:

http://www.psychonaut.com/general-psychonautics/35445-whats-happened-michael-hoffman-egodeath.html

Page 8 (2014):
http://www.psychonaut.com/general-psychonautics/35445-whats-happened-michael-hoffman-egodeath-8.html
Group: egodeath Message: 6445 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Others’ summaries of the Egodeath theory
The Egodeath theory is a breakthrough in many ways, including systematically, scientifically unifying and integrating the following fields:
Free will and determinism
Philosophy of Spacetime Physics including Relativity, Quantum Physics, block universe, time travel, many worlds/multiverse
Religious mythic metaphor
Entheogens, Psychedelics in terms of cognitive phenomenology
Cognitive science of altered states; LooseCog Science
Ahistoricity of Jesus, Paul, and other religious founder figures
Religious origins without historicity of founder figures
Western Esotericism; alchemy, magic, exorcism, astral ascent mysticism/astrology
Control agency
Gnosticism
Ancient Near East religion
Ancient mystery cults
Philology; how to read esoteric religious texts and reliefs and frescoes and imagery (eg hydra, Typhon, Medusa/king turned to stone)
Culture of Mediterranean Antiquity
Art interpretation
Jewish mysticism
Et cetera

— Michael Hoffman, theorist of mythic metaphor, entheogens, loose cognitive state, fatedness, and control-limits
Group: egodeath Message: 6446 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Others’ summaries of the Egodeath theory
Additional fields that the Egodeath theory enables integrating together intelligibly and cohesively:

Global universal world mythology from all religions


Rock lyrics (the authentic mystery religion of the late-modern era)

For example: Learning to Fly (Pink Floyd’s standout track), Help!, Stairway to Heaven, Black Blade, Ride the Lightning, Master of Puppets, No One at the Bridge, Somewhere in Time, I Wanna Be Sedated, Twilight Zone (on 2112), The Body Electric; Free Will; find “lyrics” in the Egodeath Yahoo discussion group.

The consistent set of Heavy Rock lyrics, when recognized (like world mythology) as description of cognitive phenomenology of the entheogen-induced loose cognition state, provides confirmation of Egodeath theory’s interpretation of the other integrated fields: academics are untrustworthy and mislead, while Rock lyricists provide a relevant, reliable, more trustworthy report on entheogenic experiential cognitive phenomenology.

Movies: Matrix, Donny Darko

Any idiot can write “I disagree with Hoffman” and some do, but adding persuasive substance to that down-vote is impossible. Generally, thinkers agree with the enlightening value and merit of this integrative theory, or parts of it and selective applications of my Theory as an explanatory breakthrough paradigm that a given thinker is engaged with, though there is still powerful censorship, a discussion blackout, silenced voices of agreement.

— Michael Hoffman, the interdisciplinary Egodeath theorist
Group: egodeath Message: 6447 From: egodeath Date: 19/12/2014
Subject: Re: Others’ summaries of the Egodeath theory
Lyrics: I meant to add here the true masterpiece, the *original* and only real release of the album Diary of a Madman. As an integrated concept album it is greater even than Caress of Steel or its Side B: Fountain of Lamneth. Academics under the boot-heel of the conditions of Prohibition can’t go there. Investigation of higher knowledge was relegated to Heavy Rock lyricists, such as the Professor on the drums.

— Michael Hoffman, King of the Madmen, king of the heads
Group: egodeath Message: 6448 From: egodeath Date: 20/12/2014
Subject: Re: Others’ summaries of the Egodeath theory
There hasn’t been a disparagement of the Egodeath theory that is articulate, only drive-by reductionism that merely indicates the ignorance and lack of reading on the part of the commentor — lack of reading the Theory and lack of reading broadly across domains. I should continue developing in this correct direction I have been pushing. There is no actual pushback; there are no objectors really to write a rebuttal to, but only work to be done further clarifying the direction. It’s not a matter of rebuttal to critics, but purely a matter of further clarification pushing in the same direction I have always successfully pushed. There are no real critics of the theory, only a few inarticulate and vague mislabelings of the theory by those who are not qualified because their thinking and reading is too narrow to evaluate, or interestingly comment on, the Theory.

One person said the Theory is merely the same as Joseph Campbell. That indicates that the person has not read the Theory and is himself overly focused on Joseph Campbell.

These flippant, careless, lazy labellings of the Theory obviously say nothing about the Theory and its scope, but say a lot about the person who wrote the posting and about the limitations of scope of their thought. No one has written a disparagement of the theory or a rejection of it that is worth paying attention to.

Campbell is not wrong and gives partial insight. The only significant thing I got from Campbell so far was Cranach’s painting – rather, showing only half of the painting (one half of the altar dyptich), in black and white not color, which I connected (ignoring any text in the book, which was entirely unhelpful regarding the painting) to a black-and-white image of the Jason kylix (mushroom-wine drinking saucer) painted by Douros.

Someone wrote that the Theory has too much Christianity. That indicates they have not read the Theory except through a narrow filtering lens of blindness and that they have read a little pop Christianity and a little other religion.

Such bald assertions never have any attempt to justify or substantiate or spell-out their claim.
The only real, articulate criticism of the Theory has been on the effectiveness of meditation, but even there the person is not arguing against what the theory says but rather they are arguing against a misreading of the theory. I have always clearly emphasized (I like to think) that meditation is bunk because it “can” induce enlightenment but is extremely non-ergonomic.

The word ‘can’, in their biased, prohibition-complicit rhetoric, is misleading. Meditation *can*, “can”, induce panic attack and enlightenment — except, in fact and in practice, meditation does not, without psychedelics, lead to enlightenment about non-control and fatedness and recognizing religious mythic metaphor as referring to entheogens revealing Heimarmene and Cybernetics.

If you claim that you care about meditation, then you are wrong unless you also advocate our right to meditation with psychedelics otherwise you are just another Tool of the state, fraudulent authoritarian liars, prostituting yourself to be used by the prohibitionists – you are a sellout to the prohibitionist state and an enemy of actual religious experiencing.

To advocate meditation while belittling psychedelics is to be a fraud and to be complicit in Prohibition. Avocates of meditation who falsely belittle psychedelics are guilty and complicit in putting people in jail under fraudulent pretenses. They have the blood of today’s martyrs on their hands. If you advocate meditation, you must advocate psychedelics even more so, or else you’re acting foolish, spouting prohibitionist lies that oppress people.

The meditation advocates are privileged aggressors who cooperate, collaborationist with the prohibitionists. These drug-slandering meditation advocates’ thinking is infected by prohibitionist biased attitudes. These meditation bullies beat up on psychedelics, taking unfair cheap flimsy pot-shots from their privileged Establishment-friendly positions. Due to Prohibition-based censorship, no worthwhile writers are allowed to publish rebuttals to the absurd claims, the absurd put-downs that the meditation advocates make against psychedelics.


The Theory is highly interdisciplinary, but cheap inarticulate critiques, which are merely bald assertions, indicate lack of interdisciplinary awareness and indicate narrow reading all around.

One criticism is “I don’t like the Egodeath theory because I don’t like no-free-will.” That is not an actual critique. More relevant would be to say: given that the Theory emphasizes no-free-will (and monopossibility and a kind of personal non-control – experientially revealed through the loose cognitive state induced by Psychedelics, and described by religious mythic metaphor) as a master solution to many domains, how well does the Theory make that connection? That would be an actual critique of the Egodeath theory – rather than a mere blunt inarticulate dismissive labeling of supposedly the Theory. Does the Theory succeed at its actual claim?

If you critique the Theory, you must critique what the Theory is. The Egodeath theory is the proposal and discovery that metaphor describes Psychedelics revealing fatedness (our inability to avoid the preset future) and a kind of personal non-control, and that that formula enables bringing together some 20 fields that people puzzle over. That is the goal that the theory and the actual critique of the theory would have to be: does it accomplish that goal? These fields that the critique would have to mention include mythology, religious experiencing, altered states, metaphor, and agent control of the future.


Is no-free-will and monopossibility and non- meta-steering (“personal non-control”) the case?

o It is what we experience as revealed in the loose cognitive state induced by psychedelics.

o It is what thinkers in antiquity and various fields have thought and have argued and have represented in art and metaphor.

o It is the way that suddenly we can solve and integrate puzzling interpretation across some 20 domains.

The coherence theory of truth — by that definition of ‘truth’ — says the Theory is true.


If the Egodeath theory is not the explanation of all these puzzles, then what is? There is no explanation unless you count Renée Gerard whose theory of religious violence is utterly worthless and completely off-track, utterly failing to account for psychedelics, the altered cognitive state, free will as an urgently experienced problem inducing panic and a death experience, and personal non-control.

In Philosophy of Science, the theory of paradigm replacement fails to apply here, because the existing “theory” is no theory at all. Our situation is not analogous to Ptolemaic cosmology versus Copernicus. Rather, we have at best literalist misreading of myth in the ordinary state of consciousness, versus the altered-state-metaphor reading. There is no competition against the Egodeath theory. There is no theory that competes against the Egodeath theory; there is only mystification, head-scratching, or plainly wrong literalist supernaturalist reading, as far as the field of religion and myth.

It is not a matter of one theory competing against another for greater explanatory coherence; the situation is that we have no theory whatsoever, and are completely puzzled across these fields (spacetime, freewill, myth, religion, agent control, entheogens/altered states / multistate science ) and then this Theory successfully identifies the puzzles and solves all of the puzzles altogether, across all these domains, interdisciplinary. There are a few books on theories of myth — they are worthless and irrelevant and unhelpful. Those theories are not an effective competitor like Earth- vs. sun-centered cosmology are competitors.

— Michael Hoffman, the interdisciplinary, omnidisciplinary Egodeath theorist, December 20, 2014
Group: egodeath Message: 6449 From: egodeath Date: 21/12/2014
Subject: Re: Others’ summaries of the Egodeath theory
Damned iPhone autocorrect. I turned it off but not in time. The name is Rene Girard.

I want to discuss my thoughts on phablets — lots of room for improvement — if I can keep it on-topic, relevant.
Group: egodeath Message: 6450 From: egodeath Date: 21/12/2014
Subject: Prohibition-compliant meditation
There is a bait-and-switch on the part of (drug-free) meditation advocates. In their aggressive, overreaching, Prohibition-compliant put-down mode, they claim that anything psychedelics does, meditation does better (in particular, give enlightenment).

Then when effectively challenged on that unsustainable claim, they backpedal on what their position is, saying meditation is good for relaxation and that is the relevant goal.

Another contradiction to be deconstructed in meditation rhetoric: meditation is sold as giving enlightenment, and then when it fails as it practically always does, it’s claimed that only one or two people are good enough to reach enlightenment, and enlightenment is difficult and beyond our ability to communicate, and it is nebulous and is transmitted through magical power of touch from mystical authority to obedient follower, and that anyway the purpose of meditation is not enlightenment but merely relaxation anyway, thus changing their claims to far easier claims that they *can* meet, and denying that they made the previous aggressive grandiose claims.

Nothing is so twisted and crooked as the arguments of meditation advocates who sit in their privileged position, paid and egged on by the Establishment (Prohibitionist) press, spewing forth a self-contradictory mixture of praising and belittling psychedelics — an awkward politicized dance — similar to the hot and cold attitudes about psychedelics written by Richard Evans Schultes; Andy Letcher; Gnosis & Tricycle journals special issues on psychedelics.

There is an industry of selling ersatz spirituality in place of Psychedelics, similar to the Historical Jesus industry. Both of these false industries have to be policed vigorously, by the Establishment-compliant paradigm police, censoring any genuine treatment of Christian origins without historical founder figures or censoring any pure unequivocal praise of psychoactives.

You must equivocate, when writing about Psychedelics. Prohibition has not censored all forms of writing: prohibition has created a monstrosity of writing in a waffling self-contradictory way about psychedelics you’re allowed (permitted) to praise psychedelics as long as you also unfairly disparage them. The result begs for deconstruction, to point out the internal self contradictions in such writing.

— Michael Hoffman (Egodeath), December 20, 2014
Group: egodeath Message: 6451 From: egodeath Date: 21/12/2014
Subject: Kenneth Humphreys on apologists for Jesus’ historicity
Kenneth Humphreys – a relatively new page at his site:
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/newapologists.html

If I were on a desktop PC I would quote some passages. This phablet is currently exhausting, tedious, and slow for basic text operations, discouraging that (until the tech industry reorganizes to optimize for this new capable mobile form factor).

It was probably Robert Price who quipped about “paradigm policeman”, probably referring to Bart Ehrman’s book weakly defending Jesus’ historicity.

Were I on a desktop PC instead of this tedious bleeding-edge 2014 phablet, I would quickly fill an evening posting about Richard Carrier’s new ultimate book asserting ahistoricity, and comparable books – Price on Paul’s ahistoricity; a book on Mohammet’s historicity (I think of variable spelling here as reflecting not caring, since founder figures are ahistorical).

Great work here by Humphreys. He elaborates my points, which are clearer than Carrier that I’ve read. As I put it years ago, we must define “Jesus didn’t exist” to mean: there was no *single* individual who was necessary for Christian origins, on whom Christian origins depended, without whom Christianity could not have been created. The Jesus figure is essentially composite, formed in a big crunch, not a big bang.

— Michael Hoffman (Egodeath), December 20, 2014
Sent from my primitive, crippled, not ready for prime time awkward mobile device
Group: egodeath Message: 6452 From: egodeath Date: 21/12/2014
Subject: Entheogenshow.com podcast
I dedicate this post to guys who are 13, justified by Our own western mediterranean antiquity cultural history represented in Our mythic metaphor of ‘youth’ and ‘beard’ initiation and the ‘r*pe’ rapture carrying away carrying off of the ‘maiden’ which is us in our non-initiated youth phase; same as indigenous cultures we are.

http://www.entheogenshow.com

On the iPhone phablet in the Podcasts app I searched on “entheogen” and this new podcast came up as the only hit. I recommend episode three – they completely overlook Prohibition around October 6, 1966 as the cause of the flip of attitude from infusion[Apple bug: teach Siri voice-recognition the word ‘entheogen’]-positive to infusion[entheogen ]-negative in the writings that the establishment permits to be published.

[Simple elementary operations are impossible or extremely difficult and slow with a phablet today, until the industry fixes bugs to de-cripple it. with great difficulty I attempt to copy and paste the webpage episodes one through three descriptions below. as a temporary compensating Band-Aid I need my Bluetooth physical keyboard which I don’t have here.]

episode three suggests to me a profitable discussion three-way topics visionary plants I use that term because voice recognition recognizes it eastern religion western religion IPoint out eastern religion per James Arthur and others is based on visionary plants

eastern religion without visionary plants is fake and fraudulent because it denies the truth that the origin and true nature of eastern religion and meditation is visionary plants

the podcast psychedelicists take for granted the historicity of Jesus: Jesus as head psychedelic head. I found amplifying Carl rock[Ruck] that western religion in antiquity is visionary plants mixed with hierarchical or egalitarian social-economic politics and culture

Western religion in denial of its origin from visionary plants is fake ersatz substitute, in denial of the truth of its visionary plants origin and meaning.

My original research found that the idea in ancient myth is that ‘beard’ equals ‘initiated with mushroom wine’ (at the mushroom banquet the king-steersman is turned to stone; the youth is sacrificed when you see the rigid serpent frozen in the rock block universe) therefore the idea is that as with indigenous culture age 13, *AGE THIRTEEN* is the natural age of visionary plants to induce switching from the childish free will worldmodel of Possiblism (our Power steering among multiple possibility branches in the future) to the adult mental worldmodel of Eternalism (my word: mono-possibility) in which our future is a single pre-existing preset snake-shaped path that we discover and are forced to steer along.

— Michael Hoffman (Egodeath), head psychedelicist


#3:
Is the psychedelic experience “real”? Does that question have merit?

Is taking entheogens “cheating”? Why do people think so?

Is the entheogenic experience comparable to experiences achievable through meditation, yoga, shamanic drumming, etc., or is it substantively different?

REFERENCES:

Interview with Patrick Lundborg: 60’s psych & garage guru, psychedelic culture scholar and author of brilliant „Psychedelia” and „Acid Archives” books

002: PSYCHEDELIC RESEARCH RENAISSANCE, PART 2 /OCTOBER 14, 2014

002: Psychedelic Research Renaissance, Part 2
Brad, Kevin, Joe

Brad, Kevin, and Joe discuss: Dr Robin Carhart-Harris is the first scientist in over 40 years to test LSD on humans – and you’re next

Stanislav Grof, 1975: “psychedelics, used responsibly and with proper caution, would be for psychiatry what the microscope is for biology or the telescope is for astronomy”.

Professor David Nutt: “I think it’s the worst censorship of research since the Catholic Church banned the telescope.”

See also: Nutt calls the outlaw of entheogens “the worst case of scientific censorship since the Catholic Church banned the works of Copernicus and Galileo”

Carhart-Harris scanned test subjects’ brains with an fMRI scanner while they were on LSD, showing for the first time higher activity in the hippocampus, which is involved in memory.

Schedule I drugs: “high potential for abuse”, “no currently accepted medical use”, “lack of accepted safety” – LSD; really?

Carhart-Harris: “It’s slightly hypothetical, but it’s based on what we know about the way the brain works, which is that it settles into configurations of activity that seem to underly certain psychopathologies. Depression and addictions rest on reinforced patterns of brain activity, and a psychedelic will introduce a relative chaos. Patterns that have become reinforced disintegrate under the drug. I’ve used the metaphor of shaking a snow globe”

Carhart-Harris: “music can do a number of things. It can have a steadying influence, but it can also help facilitate emotional release.”
Posted in Research, LSD
0 Likes
Share
COMMENTS (0)Newest FirstSubscribe via e-mail

Preview Post Comment…
← 003: Resident psychedelicists discuss entheogens vs. other paths
001: Psychedelic Research Renaissance, Part 1→
001: PSYCHEDELIC RESEARCH RENAISSANCE, PART 1 / SEPTEMBER 16, 2014

001: Psychedelic Research Renaissance, Part 1
Brad, Kevin, Joe

– Kevin discusses his first encounter with the word Entheogen

– we discuss a recent article in the Daily Beast: Psychedelics Are Ready for a Comeback, featuring an interview with Tom Shroder, author of the new book, Acid Test: LSD, Ecstasy, and the Power to Heal

“The whole idea that it was creating a generation of ‘valueless zombies’ or something or that healthy people would go crazy from taking one dose of psychedelics was never justified by the facts. It was never as dangerous as many other drugs that did become prescription drugs.”

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/04/24/article-2314091-1975384E000005DC-421_634x398.jpg

LSD, MDMA, Research September 18, 2014
Comment 0 Likes











Group: egodeath Message: 6453 From: egodeath Date: 21/12/2014
Subject: List of my claims to priority of discovery
I am the one who discovered these ideas (in the late-modern era): These ideas should spread recognized as my ideas, insights, breakthroughs.

Jesus of Necropolis, is the joke behind Jesus of Nazareth: he came from the cemetary city of the dead, the egodead. I am the one who recognized this mythic joke.

I am the one who recognized Help! as Lennon’s first LSD lyric and wrote about it on the world-wide web.

t b c

— Michael Hoffman (Egodeath), 50 years ahead of other theorists across fields
Group: egodeath Message: 6454 From: egodeath Date: 21/12/2014
Subject: Re: List of my claims to priority of discovery
One organizing structure for my firsts is my onionlayers; what is core and peripheral in my Theory:

from core to periphery:

cybernetics (personal non-ability to steer away from preset path)
fatedness
visionary plants
… mental construct processing; loosecog
metaphor (religious mythic metaphor)
ahistoricity of religious founder figures (Jesus Paul apostles Buddha Mohammed Moses Adam eve)

on the laptop in a 2013 2014 idea file I have a nice two column table: the two views regarding: cybernetics fate visionary plants metaphor and historicity. you either believe all *these* views in these fields or all of these *other* views, as an integrated set/system across these fields — The lower vs higher system of thinking & assumptions.

in Gospel of John and maybe Mark it is surprising how frequently Jesus makes fun of literalist clueless interpreters of the passages scream out mocking today’s clueless non-initiate yetlower thinkers full straight into the pit of literalism and cluelessness perfectly demonstrating what these passages laugh at. I noticed that recently and have not listed out these yet.

— Michael Hoffman Egodeath

Egodeath Yahoo Group – Digest 124: 2013-01-15

Site Map


Group: egodeath Message: 6292 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 15/01/2013
Subject: THE BIG STORY!!! REVOLUTIONARY BREAKTHROUGH!!!
Group: egodeath Message: 6293 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 15/01/2013
Subject: Re: Academic pseudo-study of Myst’m: crippled, phony, censored, comp
Group: egodeath Message: 6294 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 15/01/2013
Subject: Re: Myth-religion as comical puzzle, mystery-joke/riddle
Group: egodeath Message: 6295 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 15/01/2013
Subject: Re: Academic pseudo-study of Myst’m: crippled, phony, censored, comp
Group: egodeath Message: 6296 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 15/01/2013
Subject: Re: Myth-religion as comical puzzle, mystery-joke/riddle
Group: egodeath Message: 6297 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 17/01/2013
Subject: Re: Rock worship & the Rock altar of sacrifice
Group: egodeath Message: 6298 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 17/01/2013
Subject: Re: Entheogenic Reformed theology
Group: egodeath Message: 6299 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 20/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
Group: egodeath Message: 6300 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 20/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
Group: egodeath Message: 6301 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 21/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
Group: egodeath Message: 6302 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 21/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
Group: egodeath Message: 6303 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 21/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
Group: egodeath Message: 6304 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/01/2013
Subject: Re: Rock worship & the Rock altar of sacrifice
Group: egodeath Message: 6305 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/01/2013
Subject: Revelation is monstrous and attractive
Group: egodeath Message: 6306 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
Group: egodeath Message: 6307 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
Group: egodeath Message: 6308 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/02/2013
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
Group: egodeath Message: 6309 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 05/02/2013
Subject: Re: Transcending no-free-will
Group: egodeath Message: 6310 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 05/02/2013
Subject: Re: Transcending no-free-will
Group: egodeath Message: 6311 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 05/02/2013
Subject: Re: Transcending no-free-will
Group: egodeath Message: 6312 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 05/02/2013
Subject: Re: Asymmetry of Reformed theology
Group: egodeath Message: 6313 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 05/02/2013
Subject: Re: Asymmetry of Reformed theology
Group: egodeath Message: 6314 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 05/02/2013
Subject: Re: Transcending no-free-will
Group: egodeath Message: 6315 From: Vincent Bruno Date: 25/02/2013
Subject: Vincent Bruno
Group: egodeath Message: 6319 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/06/2013
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
Group: egodeath Message: 6320 From: Joe Date: 12/06/2013
Subject: Forthcoming essay citing egodeath theory
Group: egodeath Message: 6321 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/07/2013
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
Group: egodeath Message: 6322 From: hahaonlysirius Date: 06/07/2013
Subject: Please repost “Mystianity” graduate thesis paper referenced by Micha
Group: egodeath Message: 6323 From: hahaonlysirius Date: 07/07/2013
Subject: Cancellation of the will
Group: egodeath Message: 6324 From: ajnavajra Date: 07/07/2013
Subject: Re: Cancellation of the will
Group: egodeath Message: 6325 From: Simon Date: 22/07/2013
Subject: Enlightenment/Ego – What is it?
Group: egodeath Message: 6326 From: ajnavajra Date: 23/07/2013
Subject: Re: Enlightenment/Ego – What is it?
Group: egodeath Message: 6327 From: Simon Date: 24/07/2013
Subject: Re: Enlightenment/Ego – What is it?
Group: egodeath Message: 6328 From: tolderoll Date: 24/07/2013
Subject: Re: Enlightenment/Ego – What is it?
Group: egodeath Message: 6330 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/08/2013
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
Group: egodeath Message: 6331 From: letsrap@sbcglobal.net Date: 16/08/2013
Subject: What U-R Learning
Group: egodeath Message: 6333 From: letsrap@sbcglobal.net Date: 19/08/2013
Subject: Be Hungry For Truth
Group: egodeath Message: 6335 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/09/2013
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
Group: egodeath Message: 6339 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/12/2013
Subject: Bk: The Psychedelic Future of the Mind (Thomas Roberts)
Group: egodeath Message: 6340 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/12/2013
Subject: Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 6341 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Re: Caduceus: mycopercep shows sep ctrl-lev relations/harmony
Group: egodeath Message: 6342 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Re: Cancellation of the will
Group: egodeath Message: 6343 From: egodeath Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Re: Cancellation of the will
Group: egodeath Message: 6344 From: egodeath Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Re: Paul’s road conversion = Balaam’s donkey conversion
Group: egodeath Message: 6345 From: egodeath Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Re: Control-loss, panic, urgency; Psychedelic Cog Sci security/safet
Group: egodeath Message: 6346 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Re: Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism
Group: egodeath Message: 6347 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Egodeath so simple, Freewill is endangered
Group: egodeath Message: 6348 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: False religion is freewill religion & anti-drug religion
Group: egodeath Message: 6349 From: egodeath Date: 03/12/2013
Subject: Egodeath diagram and lecture
Group: egodeath Message: 6350 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 03/12/2013
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture



Group: egodeath Message: 6292 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 15/01/2013
Subject: THE BIG STORY!!! REVOLUTIONARY BREAKTHROUGH!!!
What is the big picture, the Big Story, that now with my work from the 1980s, now (as of January 1988 (core theory) and November 2001 (myth/history theory-extension)) we (I) have figured out revelation enlightenment and deciphered myth and religion — our myth in our historical past and roots; our own religions and cluster of brands of transcendent knowledge, including Greek, Roman, Jewish, and Christian religions, and Western Esotericism, as well as Eastern religions and world religion. We now have Transcendent Knowledge, including deciphered loosecog myth, and now we understand how pre-moderns accessed routinely on-demand the mystic state in which religion is made.

Myth is about the experience-induced transformation from freewill thinking to no-free-will realization.


THE BIG STORY!!! The simpler story, put aside the most details, keep sight on the main story, what I have what’s now accomplished: we now understand myth, religious revelation, and enlightenment!!!

I provide many specific, summarizable takeaway points, the fruit and accomplishment, the harvest of the Egodeath theory, like in the bullet list at the top of my Wasson article: here are the executive elevator-speech bottom-line takeaway points of the Big Story and super massive revolutionary breakthrough discovery and invention: The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.

o We now recognize that no-free-will is the master theme throughout the history of religion and philosophy. Myth describes nonfreedom.

o We now know what was revealed in mystery religion.

o We now know how to read mythemes including our own Greek, Roman, Jewish, Christian, and Western Esotericism religions.

o What’s revealed in religion and described by religious myth is no-free-will, and a kind of personal non-control.

o The Bible is 100% fictional, not even slightly historical factual. It was meant to be taken exoterically and then especially esoterically.

o The Bible uses mystic-state revelation to advocate flat social-political-economic structuring.

(Extract the points, revelations, takeaways, implication from my review of the book The Myth of Free Will.)


The unique aspect of revelation in our time (1988/2013): we have a bigger base of confused undeciphered meaning, and misunderstanding of myth and religion, than all previous cultures/times, and, practically no one is enlightened. It’s a long way up, when you start from the bottom, the Kali Yuga of the late modern era. There is a huge voltage differential between truth and the late-Modern era, thus a gianter lightning bolt jumps that gap than ever before. Only a perfectly OSC-based culture is so very far from truth and thus enlightenment is a far bigger collective jump or individual jump now, than in the pre-modern era.

I had to go all the way from 1985’s total darkness — though Robert Graves’ 1957 book was across the street from the dorm, I walked right past in, in the library, revealing the breakthrough, the Big News!!! that mushrooms explain Greek myth and mystery religion and religious experiencing in antiquity. The modern era is connection-challenged. I had to travel further from darkness, a completely dark and dis-connected, non-connected culture, than any other era. But on the other hand, I had much Help. My random, odd, abnormal upbringing just happened to give me from all different directions Resources. And people saw I was intelligent, so they (like around the Beatles) gave me even more Resources. “We wanted to see what you would do with this” they told me.

Convention-following scholars miss the Big Picture, the Big Story, the super simple story. They fail to make the connections. I am the Great Connection Maker. Making these connections required violating multiple taboos in and across fields including: ahistoricity, no-free-will, chronology, psychedelics, entheogen history, spirituality, Rock.

See the recoiling of some people regarding my Acid Rock analysis of Rush, 1997-2006 or so — but remember, always remember to take into account the heavy censorship! Ignoramuses who write against entheogens are fully encouraged; entheogen-positive views are fully discouraged, don’t forget that! You must take it always fully into account, the illusion given by the heavy censorship by Prohibition Press. Everyone is entheogen-positive, but censorship fabricates the Matrix-like illusion, the false reality tunnel, that everyone is entheogen-diminishing or anti-entheogen. In fact, everyone supports, privately, the truth: the strongly entheogen-positive view. Every entheogen-diminishing writing is matched by 100,000 entheogen-positive writings that are censored, prevented from being published.

Knowledge breakthrough now is all about making connections including prohibited connections. One cannot do that which it is not permissible to do, what I did: connect all the key fields truly and coherently, explaining and revealing all mysteries to the entire world.

— Michael Hoffman, January 14, 2013, based on original research and idea-development since 1985
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, http://www.egodeath.com All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6293 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 15/01/2013
Subject: Re: Academic pseudo-study of Myst’m: crippled, phony, censored, comp
Don’t trust any entheogen books! They are all tainted and degenerate, contaminated with False Paradigm by The Man, by the pressure of the Official Tale. Don’t trust any published writers, books, or articles! We need a scorched-earth ground clearing to make way for a completely separate and true alternative thus correct story and paradigm. Always keep it in the foreground of your thinking: remember that authors wrote and still write under the heavily distorting conditions of extreme censorship coerced to misrepresent, and tell a largely negative story, like Andy Letcher’s trainwreck confused mess of a book: even he has no idea what his assertion and position is; it changes constantly, incoherently.

Letcher was permitted by Prohibition Press to publish, only because he made a disheveled heap of negative-sounding noises regarding entheogens. Letcher shows how to get published by Prohibition Press: take truth, turn it upside down, make a pile of vague negative sounds. Don’t delude yourself that Grof is any better! Even McKenna spreads ideas that harm the truth and falsely portray entheogens as missing from our own religious history, and he falsely grants tons of power and history to the Catholic Church, asserting and repeating the falsehoods, that the Catholic Church had total dominant power over the world for two thousand long years. Rubbish all! Burn the books and articles of McKenna, Letcher, Wasson, Ott, Schultes, they are all contaminated by The Man, by the Official Entheogen-Diminishing story.

The more positive — or, the less negative — a book is, regarding entheogen history, that merely means that the anti-entheogen view is hidden more subtly in that book and so you must be even more discerning of the evil lies in the book, the lie that entheogens are not the source of all religion, our own religion, always were, before the start, at the start, and during the history. Surgically pluck potentially useful items out from these ruined books, but wash them in the acid bath and completely melt them down, dissolve and coagulate these books to turn them from the lead which they are, into the gold which they instead ought to be.

Ruck and Hoffman in Entheogens Myth & Human Consciousness page 63-67 show that the Christian revivals of the 1800s were helped by American Indians; for example, Algonquin Indian shamans of the U.S. northeast are known to use Datura and Amanita, and may have used cannabis and peyote. Show me a religion, era, area, and it’s just a matter of filling-in which visionary plants were used there. Show me the damned Church of Mars, and there is the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, founded by drug inspiration.

This is my axiomatic dogma, of the Maximal Entheogen Theory, counter-dogma actually, which lands us much closer to the truth than even the most seemingly, apparently progressive of the entheogen writers who are tainted by their credulity and complicity with the Official Story, which is always inherently a misrepresentative story, the entheogen-diminishing story. Carl Ruck helps spread the entheogen-diminishing story.

Either you are a perfect maximal radical truth-teller per my Maximal Entheogen Theory, or, you are spreading the virus of entheogen-diminishing Official Propaganda. The most seemingly progressive entheogen scholar who is not radical maximal entheogen theory advocate, merely hides their entheogen-diminishing propaganda under the guise of progressive spin, most dangerous of the anti-entheogen moves is to appear fairly progressive, to appear relatively entheogen-positive. Beware of writers who are relatively entheogen positive, meaning, their entheogen-negative propaganda is hidden all the more effectively.

We need purity allegiance tests. Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the entheogen-diminishing story-tellers guild, run by the Prohibition Press? Have you signed my confessional creedal statement to show that your interpretation of the scripture is church-approved by my counter-church?

Be extra suspicious of Bear & Co, Inner Traditions Press, because they *appear* most entheogen-positive; their entheogen-diminishing paradigm they spread is merely all the more insidiously hidden from conscious view. The official axiomatic dogma of the Prohibition Press is that our own religion must not be admitted that it was inspired and has been by psychedelics at its heart, the Holy Spirit came into it through psychedelics and called the church to initial repentance and ongoing.

If it weren’t for LSD in the 1960s and 1970s, there wouldn’t be Evangelical Christianity. The church of the lie is the church in denial of what the role of drug experience in its congregation and leadership is. The church of evil lies, Mars Church, dogma is that the psychedelics experience among the leadership and congregation is the bad stuff that the church opposes, when in fact, that experience is positive experience that positively created the church. That’s an example of how the truth is distorted by Prohibition Press. The spin is all false, all misleading. Evidently the authors of psychedelics books agree, because they always repeat the history, but in their own words: evidently they don’t like the spin others put on the tale.

New books come out with new prohibition-compliant spins, digging the some old ruts even deeper. We must have an entirely new, independent, Maximal Entheogen story of history including ancient and modern. We must put aside all books and articles about entheogens and psychedelics books and articles, and start from a clean slate axiom of my Maximal Entheogen Theory. A radically true and different story is needed that doesn’t rely on the Official Lies at all. Stop reifying the falsities, the false memes and distortions that supposedly pro-entheogen writers propagate.

Entheogens are the standard of truth and *the* source of religion and enlightenment. Greek, Roman, Jewish, and Christian religions are about entheogens, period, and how to use them for good. If you take away entheogens, you destroy all truth in Greek, Roman, Jewish, and Christian religions and in Western Esotericism. The same is fully true with all other brands of transcendent knowledge.

— Michael Hoffman, January 14, 2013, based on original research and idea-development since 1985
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, http://www.egodeath.com All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6294 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 15/01/2013
Subject: Re: Myth-religion as comical puzzle, mystery-joke/riddle
Religious myth is a playful mode of reading, using meaning-flipping.

Hellenistic-mode religious myth is often the paradoxical saying and meaning the opposite; re-connecting meanings the opposite network-flipping. It is like Satanism’s inversion of the usual mappings, to express the same thing as the Bible, which the true (mystically legitimate and coherent, compatible with the intense psychedelic loosecog state) Satanist has correctly decoded like any true mystic: Lucifer –> enlightenment, divine truth; Jesus –> the freewill delusion, ignorant pop followers, darkness, delusion.

Religious myth such as the Bible is pointed deliberate irony and paradox, a game of play with meaning: religious myth is about the “freedom” of truth, which is non-freedom, but by the time you are this advanced with using language, you can state things in two contradictory-sounding ways. Meaning lies in the understanding-network, in your meaning-connections, such as I defined in my 2006 main article.

The Bible is not talking straight; don’t assume it is talking straight; stop assuming that.


People don’t know the mood in which to read religion. They are entirely too serious and they read it under the assumption that the author is serious. Religious myth is comical, ironic, playful, joking, punning, games of deliberate systematic pointed self-contradiction. Religion is a joke, a comedy and tragedy, it has inappropriate affect suitable for divine madness. It is mad humor. The phrase “religious humor” is a redundancy. Mystic-meaning tall-tales, analogies.

God forbids entheogens absolutely: death penalty! ego death
God commands you to be sober: he makes you ingest the psychedelic Eucharist, so that you can become sober and become thus a t-total abstainer from the inebriation of sin and spiritual blindness.

A real mystic can say “I never use drugs. I only use the traditional Eucharist. I don’t eat mushrooms. I chew the flesh of Christ between my teeth.” This is Valentinian Gnostic Christians’ transcendence of word-usage.

This is the key to the mood or mode of reading religious mythic writing.


The Stairway to Heaven:
Sometimes words have two meanings
Sometimes all of our thoughts are misgiven
If there’s a bustle in your hedge-row, don’t be alarmed
It’s just a spring-clean for the May Queen
To be a rock, and not to roll


I was a slave to my passion and fear. (egoic control system, including egoic cross-time personal control-thinking)
I’m free now. (loosecog disengages the egoic control system, psychotic-like absence of fear or desire, to the point of control-instability, desperately requiring a different kind of stabilization than the old egoic system)

When I believed in freewill, I was a slave to sin and delusion, in prison in chains; my mind was possessed by ghosts, demons, and irrational magical thinking, superstition.
Now that I have experienced no-free-will, I am set free; my mind has been exorcised and now I have magic and supernatural power.

I was a slave to sin, of holding the premise of demons, the free-will assumption: a rebellious premise trespassing on and challenging God’s sovereign power.
Now I am freed to know the truth, which is no-free-will.


Mind the pre/trans fallacy: the starting and ending states have some similarities, with profound difference:

When I was deluded, I thought I had freedom, and that was magical thinking.
Now that I am enlightened and the truth has been revealed to my perception, I have freedom, and this is magic power.

If you believe in free will, freedom, you are deluded and have magical thinking.
If you believe in no-free-will, nonfreedom, you are enlightened and have magical thinking.

I was a slave to my fears and passions, avoidances and pursuits, when I thought I was free.
Now I am free, since I know there is no free will and we are frozen in spacetime.

— Michael Hoffman, January 14, 2013, based on original research and idea-development since 1985
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, http://www.egodeath.com All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6295 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 15/01/2013
Subject: Re: Academic pseudo-study of Myst’m: crippled, phony, censored, comp
typo correction:

New books come out with new prohibition-compliant spins, digging the same old ruts even deeper.


Luke Myers’ book Gnostic Visions seems like a rare, genuinely entheogen-truth book, a big step in the right direction.
http://amazon.com/o/asin/1462005489
Assignment: find the false, entheogen-diminishing propaganda in this book.

— Michael Hoffman
Group: egodeath Message: 6296 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 15/01/2013
Subject: Re: Myth-religion as comical puzzle, mystery-joke/riddle
Crowley had correct use of mystic metaphor, but may have advocated social-political hierarchy, whereas the Bible uses mystic metaphor to advocate a flat social-political system.

Huxley & Wasson advocated hierarchy, elitism, exclusivism.
Keysey & Leary advocated flat, egalitarianism.

— Michael Hoffman
Group: egodeath Message: 6297 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 17/01/2013
Subject: Re: Rock worship & the Rock altar of sacrifice
Finding the philosopher’s stone
=
Discovering the perception of the thought of feeling the changeless block universe.

Discovering the feeling of thinking that perceives time as a spacelike dimension, as a mind who is a spacetime worm and worldline snake.

To become a worm theorist.


Heretics must be stoned to death. Especially first-born children who are literalist historicist freewillist entheogen-diminishers who hold the Possibilism model of time.

— Michael Hoffman, January 16, 2013, based on original research since 1985
Group: egodeath Message: 6298 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 17/01/2013
Subject: Re: Entheogenic Reformed theology
The mind’s innate cognitive restructuring potential is: switching the mental model from Autonomy operating within Possibilism, to Puppethood operating within Eternalism.

This mental model transformation occurs as the result of the psycholytic-induced loose cognitive binding state, the intense mystic altered state of being possessed by the power of the Holy Spirit, that results from the traditional eating of Christ’s flesh, which is real, literal food, and drinking of Christ’s blood, which is real, literal drink.

Antinomian mystic radicals were inebriated high on Christ which opened up their cognitive-binding-loosened capacity to recognize mystic metaphor meaning-flipping. They might have written explicitly about visionary plants, but were largely censored. But to those habituated to visionary plants, the meaning and plant source is clearly evident, hardly veiled, and not veiled in the many plain depictions of mushrooms in Christian art, as well as more than enough mentions of psychoactive plants in the Bible.
http://google.com/search?q=antinomian+mystic+radical

It used to be, 1967-2012, there was an official culture, which people actually believed and took seriously, claiming that visionary plants have no role in our Greek, Roman, Jewish, Christian religious history. No-free-will actually used to be controversial. People even recently, believe it or not, actually took seriously the Old Testament as literal historical reportage, rather than as mystic metaphors and ironic joking. Even after that delusion and denseness collapsed, people still, for a few years, continued to assume historicity as the intent of the New Testament. But now, there’s no longer anything “controversial” about openly asserting 100% ahistoricity, that the Bible is 100% fictional mystic metaphors and ironic joking.

I used to make a list of the many reasons people would, at that time, choke on my Egodeath theory. Now, my Egodeath theory is simply a routinely known popular system, like the Web. I used to rail against censorship and the official story. Now, that official story is simply irrelevant, a former, now dead metanarrative like the older generation’s reality tunnel in the 1960s. That self-aggrandizing “official” metanarrative exists now as an impotent, would-be “official” story, which few take seriously. It has no real weight, no compelling force. Reformed theology is going electric, with Reformed theologians on acid. The gospel drama is what goes on in your mind: you against your worldline, then your personal thinking submitting to your worldline, as the source of your thoughts.

The mind is strongly attracted to dramatic depiction of no-free-will. Myth, including Greek drama, and the Cross, provides this satisfying dramatic depiction of no-free-will. We want to somehow know fully a loss of control and expression of no-free-will. But meaning is in the mind, not in action, so how can we fully cathartically express and experience to the fullest, this control-loss and no-free-will? Instead of idiotic gory shallow crucifixion movies, we desire something as intense, but fully altered-state mystic-metaphor based.

Although I’ve been posting my fully formed holistic theory and model of Egodeath on the Internet since 1990, with mythic deciphering since 2001, Sam Harris and the other neuroscience rationalist atheist philosophers don’t perceive how very strong this function of myth and meaning of myth is: the myth of free will; that is, the point of religious myth is to describe the psychotropic drug-induced experience of no-free-will which causes thinking to be re-organized to conform to the no-free-will experiential and intellectual altered-state realization. Harris mocks the arbitrariness of interpretation of religious myth.

The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason
Sam Harris
http://amazon.com/o/asin/0393327655
2004

The first successful interpretation of religious myth is the system that I developed:

1. My initial decoding of myth was preliminary portions in my 1988 first draft of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence (the Egodeath theory): my initial foray into Christian myth, typified in my 1997 Principia Cybernetica website Comment posting.
2. In such fashion, I decoded acid-oriented Rock lyrics around 1992, uploaded to the Web around 1997.
3. I applied that mature ability to myth, including cracking the New Testament myth and world mythology, in 2001, well-presented in my 2006 main article.
4. I continued and completed the deciphering of all the main lyrics and religious myths, 2001-2013.


The puppet’s feeling of autonomy is shown the real power source, by the worldline, and the worldline makes the personal thinking realize and experience the ability of the worldline to threaten the personal control system. When in danger, pray to God who is in control as creator of your worldline. This isn’t necessarily supernaturalist. It’s all about you and your thinking ability, your mind, your Reason, how your worldline brings your thinking into line and causes grace to enter your thinking, so that your mind understands the source of its intentions, lying along your fated, pre-given, unalterable worldline. Your personal control thinking submits to your worldline, and this is equivalent to putting trust in a personal Creator god who controls your worldline.

The hand of God hidden in a cloud holds a chain that controls block universe Nature, which is your worldline, and your worldline, Nature, holds a chain that controls the monkey-mind, which is your personal control thinking. When you are made to trust your worldline, that’s equivalent to you being made to trust a controller of your worldline, outside your domain of conscious personal control ability. Steering your worldline is outside your conscious personal control ability. Your personal conscious self is one agency, and your pre-set worldline is another agency. Praying to and trusting in your worldline is equivalent to praying to and trusting in a separate Controller X in a position of creating and controlling your worldline.

o The personal control thinking system, your domain of conscious control power, is distinct from other powers:

o your pre-set, pre-given worldline

o a demiurgic Creator and controller of your worldline,

o a Good god above fatedness

You can logically, reasonably break things out that way per Gnosticism, Neoplatonism, and Christian options, if you choose. Or, you can simply conceptualize, rationally, per Multistate Science, 2 levels:

o The personal control thinking system, your domain of conscious control power, is distinct from other powers:

o your pre-set, pre-given worldline. Your worldline might make you rationally pray to and trust in the worldline, like sacrificing to Zeus Meilichios, who controls the worldline snake and is easily satisfied when you are made to proclaim loosecog realization and agreement with no-free-will.

Reformed theology is a merely singlestate fallacy reduction of this view, experience, and realization. Reformed theology without the experience of the Holy Spirit from the traditional psychedelic Eucharist, is just children’s practice training-wheels theology. No Reformed theologians are among the elect, nor Arminians, no matter what their view on no-free-will.

Only when Reformed theology goes Electric, as in Marsh Chapel, with psilocybin, will any Reformed evangelists be saved and receive grace and be made to truly submit and be shown the threat: the worldline and your Spirit-inspired insanely adept imagination, will prove to you that you are capable of imagining a threatening loss of control, and you will find that you are positively attracted to the demonstration of loss of control — which is holiness and the sacred point. To the extent you are interested in the Holy, Transcendent Knowledge, revelation and enlightenment, you are attracted to the beautiful glorious Medusa problem through which we are reborn when we turn to look behind us, see the attractive and mortifying face of God, and are turned into stone and reborn from the rock.

Now as I knew when fundamentalist writer Dave Hunt carelessly discovered Reformed Theology, the Great War is on: for control of Christianity in America: the Reformed movement, but in an evil, fallen form, lacking the traditional Eucharist, is taking over Evangelical Christianity. Just add mushrooms, the missing Holy Spirit, to turn mere Reformed *ideas* into actual salvation and revelation that the Bible is all in your mind, per my radical mystic metaphor deciphering and 100% fictional, ahistoricity of the Jewish Old Testament and the Gnostically revealed New Testament.

o No-free-will is trendy,
o Reformed theology is trendy, and
o the Shamanism revolution in Christian scholarship is trendy, and
o now everyone is aware of ahistoricity, rapidly spreading, from Old Testament, to Jesus, to Paul, and
o I push ahistoricity through per Edwin Johnson to the very existence of Christianity in antiquity: Luther wrote the New Testament in 825.

— Michael Hoffman, January 16, 2013, based on original research and idea-development since 1985
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, http://www.egodeath.com All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6299 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 20/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
The Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: Heracleon’s Commentary on John
Elaine Pagels
http://amazon.com/o/asin/1555403344
1973
128 pages

Title of my book review:
The elect vs. moralists, sacrament of apolytrosis (redemption)

This book is Pagels’ 1973 dissertation. This reprint of Pagels’ book is decent, good printing, decently bound, blue cover, paperback. This dissertation follows academic conventions, which prevent clear communication and present information backwards. Read her book in my Satanic way, that is, last page first, because the dullest information is the first couple regular chapters, and the best information is the last page and the summary (“Synthesis”). This book lacks a glossary and lacks an index of normal useful words. She provides a “Glossary-Index” (her term) of technical theology terms, which is neither a glossary providing definitions nor an index of useful normal words.

I provide a clear summary here, assisted by decades of original work on my theory of religious experiencing and metaphor, with a summarization approach that is lacking from current conventions. The Jesus Mysteries (http://amazon.com/o/asin/0609807986) is a readable preparation for Pagels’ early books.


Pagels’ book shows that Valentinians presented the following 2-level system. I’m able to summarize it here through better communication conventions combined with my 2001 theory of mystic metaphor. See my comparable contrast summary in my review of Pagels’ book The Gnostic Paul (http://amazon.com/o/asin/1563380390).

Higher Christians (‘pneumatic’; spiritual)
Lower Christians (‘psychic’; mental)

o Don’t rely on the historicity of the Bible (page 12). What matters is the mystic-state meaning and metaphorical analogies. Deny the uniqueness of the Christian revelation. page 15
o Believe in the uniqueness of the Christian revelation, emphasizing the literalness of its occurrence of historical events.
Pagels discusses ahistoricity, or the unimportance or irrelevance of Jesus’ literal historical life and crucifixion, on pages 12-16, 44, 46, and 118.

o Received the higher Eucharist; they are given grace through receiving the sacrament of apolytrosis (which I point out is entheogenic-equivalent, like the “sacraments of Phrygia and Eleusis” mentioned on page 15).
o Only have baptism by water, associated with forgiving sins but in such a way that free-will moral thinking is still implied (various pages in Pagels). They only eat literal ordinary bread and drink literal ordinary wine.
Pagels discusses the Eucharist, wine, feast, banquet, eating, drinking, sacrament of apolytrosis, bridechamber, marriage wedding banquet, and other entheogen-equivalent topics, on page 15 (sacrament of Eleusis), 62-65, 76-82, 92-96, and 115. See my review of Gnostic Visions (http://amazon.com/o/asin/1462005489) and Flights of the Soul (http://amazon.com/o/asin/0802865402).

o Are masters of metaphor interpretation, describing experiential insights received through the sacrament of apolytrosis (redemption). Are able to interpret all brands of mystic writing (page 15)
o Literalists. They depend on a historical reading of events in the Bible, assuming that those events literally happened. This prevents them from understanding spiritually (which I explain explicitly: they don’t understand the entheogen Eucharist and its revelation of no-free-will).

o Think in terms of this higher vs. lower understanding, making this distinction.
o Don’t believe in or understand higher Christianity and metaphor reading in terms of spiritual experience.

o Redemption and heaven is now, for the elect.
o Redemption and heaven is in the future, in the age to come.

o Receives redemption, purely by God’s grace (matching Reformed theology, my theory points out). Though veiled as “election” and explained indirectly through symbolism, these Christians basically are brought to believe the supposedly “pagan” idea of no-free-will, upon discovering that they are among the elect and receive their redemption though grace — though they initially and originally think, mistakenly, using the lower way of thinking.
o The lower Christian reaches, if they are morally good, Salvation (still reifies the free-will moral premise). These can earn salvation through works. Receive a lower salvation, a forgiveness of sins, while that forgiveness still reifies free-will moral thinking; ‘ethics’ per Pagels. They believe in free-will moral agency. They conceptualize religion in terms of freewill ethics and moral conduct as the way to earn salvation.


Pagels discusses determinism, election theology, grace, works, and moral ethics on pages 49, 57, 72, 82-83, 98-113, and 120-122 especially (that is the end and climax of the book). Pagels explains how Valentinians enabled treating both higher and lower Christians both as authentic Christians. Valentinians are interesting Christian Gnostics because they define an ‘asymmetric theology’ (a term from my theory) that enables treating both higher and lower Christians both as authentic Christians. Pagels’ doesn’t point out (but my theory does) that Augustinian theology has this same asymmetry: those who are not saved, are condemned by their own freewill-type moral guilt; the elect are chosen for redemption by God in a no-free-will type of framework.

Mainstream writer Origin accuses Gnostics of asserting a fatalistic determinism theology of salvation like the pagans (page 49).

How can Pagels not mention Reformed theology here, as my theory covers? Pagels writes “To counter the fatalism of pagan religion and philosophy, mainstream Christians stress freewill ability against fatalism, and dismiss this election theology as determinism, if not arrogance. Plotinus also criticizes the Valentinians for not discussing ethics, the soul, purifying the soul, and right conduct.” (page 122) She characterizes ‘the soul’ as being a factor that’s part of free-will ethics in lower Christianity, in Valentinian Gnosticism.

Per Pagels, Valentinians as a concession to the mainstream Church that was trying to maximize its member count, Valentinians didn’t demonize freewillist Christians as “not real Christians”, but rather, included them as lower Christians, who could be saved after death, in the future time to come.

But per Pagels, page 112, Gnostics tend and want to posit 2 races:
o The race of the elect
o The race of perdition.

But Valentinians wanted to define an inclusive framework so they posited 3 races, as a concession to the mainstream church:
o The race of the elect (I point out these are those destined to believe in no-free-will, amply supportable by quotes in this book)
o The race of the freewillists, who seek a freewill morality type of salvation, that the higher Christians should humor them about and theologically affirm per Valentinian theology)
o The race of those who are predestined definitely for perdition. Pagels says little (page 104) about this group and why Valentinian theology even had this grouping.

Pagels (page 104) points out that the Gnostic Heracleon doesn’t use the term “free will”, but discusses “their only choice is whether to obey the will of the Father or the will of the devil”. Heracleon’s scheme of characterizing psychic (lower) Christians is essentially thinking in the mode of freewill moral agency. Heracleon’s Valentinianism is a veiled no-free-will theology that sort of reifies a freewillish moral salvation system, for lower Christians. Heracleon’s 2-level theology tries to keep freewillist moralists on board as legitimate but lower members of the same inclusive church.

The mainstream church tried to maximize its member count and that the Valentinian broad-church Gnostics also held that goal. Regarding the Social Gospel: I point out that Gnostics are accused of being anti-world, and that recently, salvation-focused Protestants are accused of “Protestant Gnosticism”, meaning that these Protestants demonize the world and seek only to individually escape from it, supposedly like Gnostics sought. But this book about Valentinian Gnosticism doesn’t support that “anti-world” accusation made against Gnostics at all; rather, this book shows Valentinian Gnosticism was concerned with accepting both higher and lower Christianity into the mainstream church.

This book doesn’t discuss the social gospel (flat egalitarian society) as the New Testament Christianity’s driving goal, by either the mainstream church, nor by Valentinian broad-church Gnostics, nor by supposed elitist, supposed anti-world Gnostics. The book does mention Gnostic cautions against elitism and arrogance on the part of higher Christians — I point out that the same caution is found in Reformed Theology.

The grand finale of Pagels’ book shows why it’s taboo, silently forbidden, to bring together the topics of no-free-will and Reformed theology (as my theory does): to openly admit that Christian theology asserts no-free-will would be to admit an equivalence of Christianity with paganism, and shuts out the freewillist majority of people, or threatens to eliminate the beloved, popular, and lucrative church-friendly idea of human freedom.

Her grand finale of the book, the Synthesis section, inspires me to define the church as being “universal” in the sense of using a veiled combining of two incompatible theologies: no-free-will as higher theology, together with a provisional freewill theology for the lower mass of Christians. Pagel’s Synthesis section is the summary of the book, and describes the Valentinian “complexity of their doctrine”. She describes how Valentinian theology veiled its determinism (election theology) aspect, “to express their apprehension of election in mythical and symbolic terms … imagistic and symbolic.” (page 122; the last sentence of the book). ‘Election’ means being fated for redemption.

Election theology was used by the Gnostic Heracleon and the mainstream Origen to obscure and deny the “pagan” fatalism and determinism, by relabelling the terms to enable indirectly asserting fatedness and by avoiding discussing fatedness in general but instead restricting the topic to election and using roundabout wording.

Pagels’ grand finale section is titled Anti-gnostic polemics: the development of a theory of “free will”. She explains how two incompatible theologies — elite determinism and popular freewillism — were combined into an oil-and-water or two-level hybrid system, “valid on different levels”, in an effort to maximize the size of the church. It’s great that Pagels’ dissertation essentially points this out, though her presentation is ineffective at communicating this big revelation, which aptly describes theology in general: an exercise in combining distinct systems of elite no-free-will theology (veiled, occluded, evasive, obscurantist, or in-denial) and popular free-will moralism. After reading her conclusion, I describe all religion as deliberately veiled no-free-will, disguised as freewill moralism promises of rewards, of salvation, per the scheme of Valentinianism as revealed by Elaine Pagels.

— Michael Hoffman, January 19, 2013, based on original research and idea-development since 1985
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, http://www.egodeath.com All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6300 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 20/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
The Big News, the greatly rewarding result of me applying my knowledge to read this book: theology *deliberately* suppresses and occludes its assertion of no-free-will. That’s why Reformed Theology is kept far away from books about free will and determinism. A big train crash is coming, as I prophesied when fundamentalist writer Dave Hunt in 2002 belatedly discovered Reformed Theology. Run for cover: the big train of atheist no-free-will and, unknowingly, the separate big train of pop hipster neo-Reformed, headed toward the same point, are both headed toward freewill Christianity.

At the same time as Sam Harris condemns religion and asserts instead, no-free-will, what’s going on in our religion? The empty-headed superficial entertainment Christian clubs are discovering Reformed Theology. After I read Dave Hunt’s books in the 1990s and then read Reformed Theology books, I posted a review at Amazon of his book A Woman Rides the Beast, criticizing him for failing to inform me about Reformed Theology during the 1990s. He took my advice, and others’, and, shocked, wrote a book against Calvinism. In a Christian bookstore, I saw Hunt’s anti-Calvinism book right away, and I laughingly told people about the ramifications: empty-headed Evangelicalism discovers Reformed Theology! This is going to be a trainwreck! The two systems are diametrically opposed.

If “a woman rides the beast”, the beast is bogus pop Christianity, and the kingdom of heaven is truth, which is known (albeit in garbled fashion) in all authentic esoteric religion:

As explained simply, clearly, completely, and explicitly in my 2006 main article, what all authentic esoteric religion asserts is:
o Puppethood; no self of a particular nature
o Eternalism block universe fatedenss; no-free-will
o Entheogen-induced dissociative state; loose cognition induced by psycholytic chemicals
o Metaphors and analogies describing the above

Everything written by fundamentalists and evangelicals is true. But only metaphorically true.

Surfaces and Essences: Analogy as the Fuel and Fire of Thinking
Douglas Hofstadter
http://amazon.com/o/asin/0465018475

Salvation, eternal life, Jesus has done away with sin and death, just as they say — but, metaphorically, referring to repeated exposure of the mind to entheogens. Dave Hunt wrote fair and almost enlightened statements about psychedelics; what little that he wrote about psychedelics that I read will stand; it’s not false.


o What’s going on in Christianity: where’s the action at? The emergent church, which breaks away from conventional “church” structure and liturgy, and Reformed theology, which in roundabout, obscured fashion, asserts pagan idea of no-free-will. Bow down to Heimarmene and its ultimate creator, accepting it as yourself — or go out of control, irrational, insane, since a house divided against itself cannot stand.

o On a separate topic: in Atheism, the big pop topic is no-free-will, and those who *claim* they give a damn about religion are discovering Shamanism. I am Jonah, camping out under a bush waiting for God to smite Nineveh as the big train of Reformed theology draws close, unknown, toward the big train of “atheism” which is pushing no-free-will as a “new” and “modern” idea.

o And here comes ahistoricity: the Social Gospel author John Dominic Crossan waves his arms to assure the professional Historical Jesus Guild that he believes Jesus existed — he has to sign a litmus test confessional creedal statement, “I worship the Historicity of Jesus as my God”, which no one had to mention just two years ago.

o Meanwhile, Jewish scholars now permit themselves to admit the existence of religious experiencing, not just the Enlightenment era rationalist pretended version of Rational Jewish religion (read, “ordinary state of consciousness based, non-mystic-metaphor belief system).

o And Christian scholars permit themselves to preciously dance around the topic of Shamanistic-like “alternate states of consciousness” among Jesus and crew.

o Worm theorists have eaten the Possibilism branching theory of Time.

I am here where the train tracks come together, waiting to welcome you all and watch the explosion. Welcome to the post-Modern era. Here is my 1997 Core theory and 2006 summary article.

I have killed Christianity, or it has finally killed itself. Who’s Next?


The extended Theory:
The Entheogen Theory of Religion and Ego Death (including the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence; Transcendent Knowledge; The Egodeath Theory)
http://www.egodeath.com/EntheogenTheoryOfReligion.htm
2006

The core Theory:
Ego Death and Self-Control Cybernetics
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/egodeath/message/5870
1997 (drafted 1988)

— Michael
January 19, 2013
Group: egodeath Message: 6301 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 21/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
Direct self-contradictions of Elaine Pagels in this book

Pagels does almost admit that Reformed theology is the same as Gnostic no-free-will, on page 111, footnote 15:
>B. Drewery, in his book on Origen and the Doctrine of Grace, concludes: “Origen’s doctrine of grace is a cardinal flaw of his theology, being infected with the disease of merit theology. Origen makes grace and merit so complementary as to cast an iron curtain of human capacity, human desert, and human achievement around the free grace of the Almighty, opening the way of the later heresy of Pelagius’.” (205-206).

Note:
‘psychics’ means lower, freewillist-assuming Christians — per my plain, clear wording.
‘pneumatics’ means higher, no-free-will believing Christians — per my plain, clear wording.


Self-contradiction 1:

A. On page 103 bottom, Pagels writes:
Heracleon says that psychics can choose to become by adoption either “sons of the devil” or “sons of God” (Commentarium in Johannis, by Origen, 20.25). Their choice reconstitutes their nature, directs them either into “evil” or “good works”, and decides their eternal destiny.

B. But *directly* contradicting herself, on page 104 paragraph 2, Pagels writes:
Heracleon himself never uses this term [‘free will’]. He shows that the psychics do experience a range of “choice” between salvation and destruction, but their “choice is not the power to constitute themselves; it is not “free will” (autexousia) in the proper sense of the word. This philosophic term, applied to Heracleon’s doctrine, proves to be anachronistic and misleading . The conditions of psychic existence and of their “choice” are constituted for them by the demiurge. Their “choice,” in fact their only option, is whether to obey the will of the Father or the will of the devil.

Assignment: Based on the above two passages asserted by Pagels, answer this question:
Does the psychics’ choice constitute their nature and thus decide their destiny? Is the psychics’ choice the power to constitute themselves and thus decide their destiny?


Self-contradiction 2:

A. On page 112 end of paragraph, Pagels writes:
Bultmann, Langerbeck, and Schottroff all discuss the Valentinian view of natures in terms of this antithesis between “determinism” and “free will.” These categories neither occur in the gnostic texts themselves nor do they reflect the concerns of Valentinian theologians.

B. But *directly* contradicting herself, on page 115 middle of paragraph 2, Pagels writes:
Although created with free will, men have allowed themselves to fall into “sins.” Thus they stand under the penalty of death. (Heracleon supports his restatement of this view by referring to Romans 1.18 f.)

Assignment: Based on the above two passages asserted by Pagels, answer this question:
Is Heracleon concerned with free will?

(He is the main Valentinian theologian who Pagels discusses.)


Where there is self-contradiction, there is flimsy apologetics; ulterior motive; an intent to misrepresent. Accidentally muddled writing is a convenient pretended excuse to assist in the cover-up. Pagels writes in an apologetics self-contradictory tone, showing the same kinds of self-contradictions I smelled and excavated with devastating results in Wasson’s book SOMA.

She betrays that she is worried about defending Valentinian Gnosticism from the “accusation” (her word) of asserting determinism. Repeatedly she asserts that Valentinian theology has nothing to do with free will and determinism, but rather, instead, is about election theology. But she never makes much effort to explain how election theology is any different than “philosophical determinism”. And then, she *directly* point-blank contradicts herself, on these points, in the passages I present above.

The Egodeath theory, which I defined, is the simplest possible theory and is the point of reference for all theory of religious experiencing and Reformed Theology and theory of what’s revealed in enlightenment and revelation. God is the author of sin and evil. That’s the simplest point of view. We are puppets, not ultimately responsible. God only, is ultimately responsible, and, God suffered the death penalty on the cross. God is the virtual reality script-kiddie who we are all subject to in his demiurgic Matrix simulation. Our higher thinking demands that we acknowledge our helpless dependent position with respect to whatever it is that has timelessly set our worldline in place — Controller X, that is outside our practical domain of personal control power.

This is the view, the philosophical system that I define, that I am responsible for defining, because it is the simplest possible model. I don’t give a damn about saving God from being the author of evil. The puppetmaster doesn’t need his puppets to save him from anything. I don’t give a damn about saving our moral freewill culpability. I don’t, perhaps, even care about truth. I care about defining mental model that doesn’t contradict itself, as a *useful* simple point of reference to explain Transcendent Knowledge and mystic-state experiencing.

http://google.com/search?q=reformed+determinism

The first version of Reformed Theology that everyone must learn and use as the first point of reference, is incompatibilist determinism, where God is the author of evil and sin, double predestination, and what is revealed is that we are helpless ultimately non-responsible puppets. You can’t start thinking about being the savior of God’s goodness or being the savior of our ultimate moral responsibility, until you first learn my spelled-out crystal clear model of Transcendent Knowledge as Exhibit A. My version of determinism is not causal-chain materialist determinism, but rather, time as a spacelike dimension, with a single future (not manyworlds QM). Why? Because it is the simplest possible model! My Egodeath theory is Exhibit A: the simplest possible model of the nature of ego transcendence.

Every two-bit acid rock lyricist knows this model. What’s wrong with you intellectuals that you try to bypass comprehending what the acid sacrament of apolytrosis communicates to the lowly Rock Gods? You can’t start by assuming compatibilism of freewill and determinism. Freewill was invented by Valentinian theology which held freewill to be lower thinking, and held no-free-will (block-universe Eternalism) as higher truth. To expand church membership and sell salvation in a lucrative installment plan, Origen then attempted to do away with the no-free-will view held by paganism and by Gnosticism, which was the altered-state revealed model, block universe determinism with time as a spacelike dimension.

The entire project of theologians who try to be the savior of God, rescuing God from being the author of evil, and rescuing humanity from puppethood, is Pelagianism. Does the Bible command theologians to save and rescue God from being the author of evil, and be the savior of human freewill? The Bible contains playful mystical self-contradiction: “You are morally responsible, and, you are a helpless non-responsible puppet. And don’t you dare point out that this is contradictory, as if God made you incorrectly.” The Bible contains weak implications that people are ultimately morally responsible, and strong implications that we are puppets. The only people asserting freewill are neo-Calvinists.

Freewill is actually a surprisingly rare position, in the history of thought. This supports my point, that we must love and protect our childish thinking, because nothing is more delicate and temporary and easily killed than the childish freewill mode of thinking, a mere shadow, a ghost, which immediately collapses in light of mushroid loosened cognition. The Bible is designed to support, contingently and on the surface, for a limited time, the freewill delusion, but then to reveal and unveil and un-conceal the truth, of no-free-will. It’s not complicated! Don’t make it complicated. I show how very simple it is: two-mode meaning-flipping; the mind is programmed to initially be shaped in freewill form, but then upon loose cognition, reshape to no-free-will.

Bible mythemes and terms are designed to meaning-flip to support that maturation, and, support social justice and flat social structuring. I am the one who points the way, in full detail to the extent needed, to dirt-simple thinking about mental model transformation. To form an impossible project of compatibilism, to be the savior of God and Christianity and freewill, start by my simplest possible theory.

Meditation, contemplation? That’s complicated, vague, difficult, and rarely effective. Entheogens are vastly simpler of an explanatory theory of how mystics have always entered the intense mystic altered state routinely on-demand, on-tap. “Traditional Christian contemplation” (taken as non-entheogenic) is nothing but an academic bluff, a vague arm-waving, by those who try to suppress the entheogenic basis of traditional mystic practice. There’s no such thing as non-entheogen-based traditional Christian contemplation; that’s an oxymoron. Show me a historical mystic, I’ll show you a visionary plant user.

There is no “traditional Christian mystic practice” without visionary plants. That whole concept is a bluff, a transparently obvious cover-up conspiracy. We’ll take real actual religion instead of bluffing tales and engineered misrepresentations conjured out of the imaginations of those who deny and suppress the truth and are eagerly published by Prohibition Press.

— Michael Hoffman, January 20, 2013, based on original research and idea-development since 1985
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, http://www.egodeath.com All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6302 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 21/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
clarification:

Freewill was invented by the Catholic church. Valentinian theology didn’t invent freewill; the popular mainstream church and theologians such as Origen invented freewill.

The project of saving God by working on compatibilism, is essentially the Catholic project. If you strive to save God by designing a system of compatibilism, you are a Catholic. The only kind of compatibilism that doesn’t contradict itself is my two-phase model: the childish mind is shaped like freewill animal, the adult mind, initiated by visionary plant exposure, is shaped no-free-will. Thus, free will and determinism are compatible: first we think freewill, then no-free-will is unveiled in the loosecog state, after which, we rely on freewill animal thinking, as a useful fictional shorthand tool, consciously recognizing freewill thinking as an inaccurate model.

Freewill was popular in Christian practice, and Valentinian theology was based around the principle of accepting that view as Christian — but only as a lower level of Christianity than true, no-free-will Christianity, which was revealed through visionary plants, as in all authentic brands of transcendent knowledge. Every authentic brand of transcendent knowledge was revealed through visionary plants. This is the theory I clarify and define, because it is the simplest possible explanatory model: the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture.

— Michael Hoffman, January 20, 2013
Group: egodeath Message: 6303 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 21/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
Double-predestination is as serious a matter as anything in mystic metaphor.

The souls of freewill thinkers go to heaven for reward after they die, or go to hell for punishment after they die.

No-free-will thinkers are left out of that game. They have only a shadowy ghost of a soul. They just cease to exist after they die. But at least they get to be in heaven during life, upon realizing no-free-will fully, in the loose cognitive binding state. These thinkers have eternal life, but only between enlightenment and death. I have attained immortality, but only until I die. I have stopped re-incarnating and escaped the round of karma.

Where do compatibilist pseudo-Calvinists go after they die? An ill-defined limbo, appropriately. Their eternal reward and punishment is to work toward constructing a coherent system of compatibilism. That’s an important project because it’s up to you to save God and Jesus from being the author of evil, and to save everyone’s souls from the threat of no-free-will. We’re all counting on you to save us!

— Michael the Archangel
Group: egodeath Message: 6304 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/01/2013
Subject: Re: Rock worship & the Rock altar of sacrifice
My theory of mystic state metaphor decodes thousands of mythemes all throughout Christian, Jewish, Roman, and Greek writings of “Antiquity” (however long ago they were written).

Judas hung himself from a tree, exactly the same as Jesus.

Judas stumbled on a stone, same as Jesus’s crucifixion is a stumbling block for the Jews.

Judas’ intestines poured out, as Jesus’ blood poured out from the spear wound in his side.

God hid Moses in a split in a rock to shield Moses from seeing God and thereby dying.

The mystic experiences phenomena analogous to these mythemes. The story elements seem odd, arbitrary, crayonish, primitive, strange, clumsy, artificial, unbelieveable, because they strive to refer in joking way, as double-entendre, to something entirely different than the surface literal meaning.

It is a coding game, which is why it seems odd and artificial when read straight; it is all winking to those who are in on the joke or riddle or meaning-translation. We’re not discussing rocks and trees and snakes; we’re discussing altered state phenomena, through presenting analogy, allegory, metaphor.

Thus all the books about religion are garbage, since they fail to grasp this basic nature of the writings. The books are hardly worth reading; profoundly off-base, a massive category error. Reformed theology has God so evil he sends most people to Hell for eternal punishment — except that it’s all mystic-state metaphor, numbskulls.

God is the author of sin and evil, but no one is going to Hell or Heaven for egoic freewill agency punishment or reward. That freewill moral soul is illusory, and so is the associated concommitant Hell and Heaven.

My postulates gain us, and cost us. Good news: I have cracked the meaning of religion. Bad news: no one is punished eternally in Hell, nor remnant (after delusion burned off) rewarded in Heaven after bodily death.

I’ve solved some objections to Reformed theology, which suffers from chronic endemic literalism, as it lacked my mapping to the visionary-plant-induced intense mystic altered state.

This theory is the most useful, relevant, ergonomic, simple, elegant, easy to understand. And confirmable, reproducible readily, immediately.

The Bible is a library collection of variant mystic-state metaphors, mytheme combinations. A computer could write inspired scripture per the Core theory and stock analogies.

What use is 200 years of modern scholarship and theology about the Bible, when they all fail to know the type of literature it is? The Bible etc. is analogies of intense visionary plant induced experiential phenomena, as I have deciphered, not literalism. I discovered fully and teach the world how to begin reading religious writings in the correct, mystic mode.

John Allegro was right in that the NT must be deciphered in a visionary plant way, though I figured out the *main* ultimate referent of religious metaphor, in terms of self control agency, fatedness/possibility, and the loose cognitive association binding state specifically from visionary plants.

Allegro and Acharya and Ruck and Ulansey and Borg are correct so far as they go, but I complete the deciphering, in that I identify the ultimate referent, systematically: altered state experiencing, not s*x or plants or the sun and planets and stars.

Even Timothy Freke didn’t figure out this deciphering, mapping specific altered state experiential phenomena to mythemes. Nor Graves; he only mapped the plants themselves, to myth, and only generally, around 1957.

Ralph Metzner’s book Metaphors of Transformation has some elements that are in my solution. Scholars try to find Bible meaning, but they remain hopelessly literalist, lacking loosecog phenomena as the referent.

Like good Rock lyrics, such as Pink Floyd’s standout song Learning to Fly, every word must be mapped to the classic cognitive experiential phenomena. Rock tree snake king die fear mortal everlasting gate ride battle storm chaos drink meal etc.

Compare my outlook now vs 1988 — back then I felt some entheogens in the book of Revelation, but was far from reading all Bible etc in terms of metaphor analogy referring to the full list of entheogen-induced cognitive phenomena that I had identified by September 1988. I had the full core theory with closure, but not the mapping to metaphors in religious myth — and I had the idea of the mapping; my 1988 draft and 1997 core summary have some Bible religion theme tie-ins (explanations), but not a well-developed idea of 100% metaphor reading.

I wish 1/11/88 I had instantly known all myth and recognized its meanings-mappings to the Crystalline Ground of Being and the ramifications of noncontrol. But as I’ve show with every breakthrough, understanding is a matter of deepening the connectiions over time. It took only from October 1985 to October 1988 to formulate my Core theory, but 1999 to 2013 to fully map mystic metaphor to the Core theory (along with other developments).

1985-1998, my thinking was tainted with far too much received literalism then; literalism with a mere sprinkling of metaphor points. I had to develop the opposite. Per Swiss cheese, the Bible etc. isn’t literal as the cheese and metaphor as the holes; it’s a solid block of metaphor, no literalist content. All metaphorical cheese, no literalism holes.

— Michael Hoffman, Egodeath.com, written Jan. 23, 2013
Group: egodeath Message: 6305 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/01/2013
Subject: Revelation is monstrous and attractive
Psyche is soul as in the mind’s center of free will moral control agency. God’s face if you see it you die

Voice dictate

in the myth of psyche (female perishable butterfly winged delicate mortal) and Eros the question is is Eros (male immortal imperishable god) horrifically hideous and ugly or is Eros beautiful and attractive such that every psyche will fall in love with it

is gods glory beautiful or terribly monstrous

The mind of the personal control agent is attracted and drawn towards the beauty that we seek but when we see it we run away in fear and trembling and terror we are horrified and made to think things that kill our ruts of self-control thinking we think things we are forced to think things and our usual thinking is all offended and broken by the things that are transpersonal thinking discovers that it can think and intend

it is amazing attractive compelling horrible shocking frightening exciting and the psyche is seduced and ruptured and overtaken it falls

spirit is the higher transpersonal level of one’s mind

Thus the Gnostic valentinian levels make sense in the way they break out in terms of initial free will thinking and later initiated no free will thinking:

psychics, psychic Christians — free will moral Christianity, soul as the seat of free will moral agency. Psyche equals soul equals childish free will thinking

pneumatics, pneumatic Christians — no-free-will thinking is spiritual thinking. Pneumatic equals spirit equals breath equals divine wind


Penetrating the gate of no free will is like penetrating a layer which has thickness with a lower surface and upper surface generally thinking moves in Valentinian gnosticism demonize and separate from the items of the previous level the lower earlier level

imagine if you had a five level, 5-stage developmental scheme the final stage V could demonize a mixture of all previous levels and call them all the deceiver revelation in general does condemn being self-centered that is it condemns free will thinking but it also focuses a lot on condemning the prison of fatedness even though those two things contradict each other

Pride hubris self dependence contradicts the no free will revelation but both of those have negative aspects

in fact everything has negative aspects; even God has the negative aspect of wrath and being a creator of evil and moral sin, so everything has its negative aspect

Thus in stage III in a three stage system, stage III may demonize contradictory elements of stage one and stage II, yet stage III also has elements that can be demonized or criticized, like the wrath of God for example.

Michael Hoffman 2013 egodeath.com
Group: egodeath Message: 6306 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 25/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
Good books on Valentinian Gnosticism and Sacrament of Apolytrosis, versus woefully pathetic books attempting to cover the Eucharist without any knowledge that the Eucharist is mushrooms

Elaine Pagels’ earliest books are best: John, Paul, then Gnostic Gospels. I feel similarly about Ken Wilber’s books and the Rush albums from their 3rd (Caress of Steel, when Peart had his acid/myth connection breakthrough) through Signals or perhaps Grace Under Pressure. Pagels’ first book, the Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis, is good, and I connect coherently with Valentinian Gnosticism as she portrays it and contrasts it against “mainstream” early Christianity. I might re-read her 2nd and 3rd books: I feel like I am in modern, intelligent company, with Valentinian Gnosticism, which focused much on defining the relation between mystically informed Christianity versus “mainstream” Christianity, of whatever era that Gnosticism was formed (“150”, “825”, or “1525”, in some chronology system or other).

Freke and Gandy’s book The Jesus Mysteries was crippled by the publisher’s strategic censorship, they told me. Evil publishers these days say “We’ll sell more books by omitting entheogens coverage.” Idiots! Sellouts! Wh*r*s! They commit blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, especially when they commit the entheogen diminishment fallacy. Without the entheogenic psychoactive alchemical sacrament of apolytrosis, redemption, we cannot receive Grace and be redeemed to gain cancellation of sin and gain eternal imperishable non-collapsing life. Without ingesting the mushroid flesh of Christ, in the likeness of man, we cannot receive the Holy Spirit.

The Jesus Mysteries drew my attention to Pagels’ The Gnostic Gospels. Her earlier books are even better, and her later books seem to have less to deliver for my Theory. Maybe her later books are less novel to me because she covers more well-trodden ground, but her first books cover ground that is usually ignored or badly distorted and covered-over.

Valentinian Gnosticism is coherent, and makes full sense mapped to the Egodeath theory, including the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence and the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion. The way Valentinian Gnosticism critiques “mainstream” Christianity seems contemporary and enlightened.


Christ, Baptism, and the Lord’s Supper: Recovering the Sacraments for Evangelical Worship
Leonard Vander Zee
http://amazon.com/o/asin/0830827862
2004

Vander Zee’s book is *so* bad, so pathetic and hopeless, after reading about Valentinian Gnosticism in Pagels’ book, it is painful. I feel sorry for the author, who has spent years trying to make sense of the Eucharist, but never heard of psychoactive mushrooms, which instantly enables making 100% sense of Eucharistic theology. I want to run and tell him, “It’s mushrooms, you fool! You need to rewrite your book to allow for this, like good writers, and not contradict this!” Reading other writings about the Holy Spirit and the Eucharist, such as the church fathers, I feel that the author recognizes that the Eucharist is visionary plants such as mushrooms or acacia bark and Syrian rue, as the Valentinian Gnostics obviously knew.

I eat the flesh of Christ; by chewing and ingesting Christ’s flesh, I receive the Holy Spirit, in fear and trembling, my eye is opened, I turn around and am made to repent, and a new life impregnates my psyche, marrying her to Christ, my spiritual husband, my other nature, in the pleroma outside the cosmos. You cannot write that mushroom-allowing pattern, if you are an outsider, a literalist, one who only is aware of plain bread and plain wine, like the painfully pathetic, hopelessly outsider, mystically and experientially illiterate books like Vander Zee’s. Vander Zee has never taken the Eucharist, only a placebo Eucharist, and is not saved nor reborn nor married to Christ.

It’s possible to make a good guess; you can tell that obviously Vander Zee doesn’t even consider the mushroom, which totally demolishes his chronic distinction between “physical” and “spiritual”. To him, bread means bread, wine means wine, and the rest is ingenious interpretations of how we receive grace and the Holy Spirit by ingesting this literal bread and literal wine (neither considered for even a moment as psychoactive).

How good of an Acid Rock mysticism song can a person write, if they don’t know the Egodeath theory or have any experience? We’d be able to easily recognize it as a poor Acid Rock lyric. Similarly, it’s generally possible to gauge how well or poorly a writer understands the Eucharist; I can tell how likely it is that a given writing reflects an underlying recognition that the Eucharist is mushrooms or other visionary plants.

But the moment a Christian writer is enlightened that the Eucharist is mushrooms, I am a package deal: they also must swallow that the Bible, as the Valentinians recognized, is 100% fiction, mystic metaphor, and, asserts no-free-will (even though fatedness is also demonized as something we must be rescued from).


Realizing Determinism is Tantamount to Transcending Determinism

Christianity advocates the theme of transcendent free will, while rejecting egoic free will. Coraxo in the Entheogen group was overly rigid in portraying the gnostics as rejecting my block universe determinism model (time as a spacelike dimension, with a single future; Eternalism). There really isn’t much distance between awakening to no-free-will, and then transcending fatedness; thus, the Ptolemaic model provides a scale, where stages 1-7 are early initiations, then you reach the 8th and 9th (the fatedness-gate of Saturn and the sidereal sphere of the fixed stars and constellations), then you punch through into the pleroma, the high heavens outside the fate-controlled cosmos.

The initiation sequence is:
animal/childish freewill
loosecog session 1 — (the air) (Moon)
loosecog session 2
loosecog session 3
loosecog session 4
loosecog session 5
loosecog session 6
loosecog session 7
loosecog session 8 — discover fatedness, no-free-will (Saturn)
loosecog session 9 — ” (fixed stars)
loosecog session 10 — transcend fatedness; divine rescue (pleroma)

Thus you rise, rise, rise, rise, rise, rise, rise, rise, then hit fatedness and then punch through it. Discovering fatedness (no-free-will) quickly becomes a problem requiring restabilization and rescue by a guardian angel, an even higher way of thinking. The Greeks waffled on whether Zeus or God was subject to the Fates. This issue is important, in that restoring your mental stability in the sea-storm, beset by the sea-serpent Typhon and Leviathan, is important; but, Coraxo overstated the difference between the gnostics believing in Heimarmene demonizing determinism.


Determinism != Heimarmene

I somewhat regret using the term ‘determinism’, because it is corrupted and ruined by the way moderns always define it, as causal-chain determinism. They overdefine it and poorly define it. It’s a poor, irrelevant, impotent model of determinism — impotent as far as helping to cause mystic control seizure. Ancient Greeks pick the superior, potent, psychoactive version of determinism.

Heimarmene, Fatum, and Determinism are nominally synonymous, but, in fact, they are defined with very different connotations.

What’s revealed in religious revelation and enlightenment is that you were thinking in terms of Autonomy operating within the Possibilism model of time and personal control, but you perceive and experience the compelling greater merit of Puppethood operating within the Eternalism model of time and control. None of this has much to do with “because events at one point in time cause the events at the next point in time”. Rather, this is experienced in terms of time as a space-like dimension, and the feeling of frozen time.

The term ‘Heimarmene’ captures and amplifies this experience and perspective; causal-chain ‘Determinism’ doesn’t, any more than we can experience Quantum Mechanics or many worlds. We can experience Heimarmene — time as a space-like dimension; it’s not a materialist reductionist notion that’s merely formed in the Ordinary State of Consciousness. The OSC gives birth to the mystically inert and impotent idea of causal-chain “Determinism”, while the ASC gives potent birth to the psychoactively amplifying, ego-killing idea of frozen-time Heimarmene; fatedness, Eternalism.


Mis-translations, lacking the Egodeath theory and mystic-state metaphor literacy

The more I learn to decode myth in English, the more I realize the translations from Greek are gross distortions that cover up the meaning. The Greek maps directly to the Egodeath theory, the bad English mis-translations — bad because they are not proper, mystic-state mytheme-literate translations — only put random barriers between the original meaning and the Egodeath theory. The word is not ‘immortal’, damn it, the word is “non-dying” or “imperishable” — completely different! Metaphor in Greek is easy to recognize as mystic analogy; mis-translated into not just literalist, but rather, just plain wrong English (literal would be better!), metaphor becomes near-impossible to recognize as mapping to the Egodeath theory and intense entheogenic mystic state cognitive experiential dynamics.

Only by reading the Greek did it become fully reasonable for me (I mean, effective confirmation of my Theory) to translate “eternal life” and “immortal” and “everlasting life” as “non-dying”, “imperishable”, “non-collapsing”. The King James Bible is obscurantist. Reading the Greek, with the Egodeath theory, is more worthwhile than any one English mis-translation that violates the mystic metaphor rules. An ideal translation of the Bible would be from Greek with the Egodeath theory. I am the new Shakespeare, showing that English *can* support a proper, mystically literate translation of pre-Modern Greek writings. We should consider the English translations of the Bible just as bad as machine-translation: highly garbled and randomized.

The Bible needs to be re-translated to English using the Egodeath theory, to do a mystic-metaphor-informed coherent translation. See Douglas Hofstadter on translation in conjunction with metaphors and analogies and cognitive science or Philosophy of Mind, albeit, at least officially, his writings are crippled by the single-state fallacy; they are (supposedly) informed by the tight cognitive binding state, only. Loosecog isn’t explicitly integrated into Hofstadter or his fields. What’s needed is to translate Hofstadter into Egodeath-informed English.


Chrono-logical A-gnosticism

I consider early Christianity to be identical in the years we call “150”, “825”, and “1525”. I get the most mileage of interpretation by collapsing-forward those eras to the era of Luther, which followed shortly after the Roman Empire. I reject the received chronology — I have to be specific and stop using charged, reifying terms such as “official” or “mainstream”, but instead be more direct: I reject the chronology which says Luther was 1,525 years after Augustus and that early Christianity was 150. But the alternative chronology is so hazily defined, it can’t even be called a proper revisionist or conspiracy theory. I totally reject the received explanation of Christian history, regarding the chronology. But I don’t have a replacement alternative hypothesis that I can precisely define. I live in a limbo in this regard.

I am resisting investigating alternative chronology as a focused research project. It’s an incidental side project, yet even diminished, it is profitable. It is more profitable to totally disbelieve the received view on religious history and chronology, and experiment with fragments of alternative hypotheses, than to adhere to the received view. What does Paul Thagard’s Philosophy of Science say about that situation: when the old theory is rejected, but the new theory hasn’t been pieced together to formulate it yet, and yet even so, the new proto-theory and rejecting the old, is more productive in its results than the old theory?

The received view is confusion and implausibility, so reject it. It’s better to have fragments of hypotheses, than to adhere to a highly implausible theory that we have many reasons to disbelieve.

— Michael Hoffman, January 24, 2013
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, http://www.egodeath.com All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6307 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 27/01/2013
Subject: Re: Pagels: Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis: key = det’m
Valentinian Gnosticism and my Egodeath theory agree that:

Higher Christians think:
o No-free-will; religion is not moralism
o Entheogenic Eucharist
o Ahistoricity; scripture is not historical reportage at all, but is strictly metaphor, analogy
o Purely metaphorical
o Heaven and hell are metaphors referring to entheogenic mystic state, its experiences, and what it reveals. We don’t have any idea what happens after bodily physical literal death.
o Christianity is one of many true expressions of transcendent truth; anyone who adheres to the pattern of meaning and experiencing indicated by the symbol of the crucifixion story, conforms to truth and God’s thinking, and is redeemed.

Lower Christians think:
o Freewill moral agency, religion is moralism
o Placebo Eucharist
o Historicity; salvation depends centrally on the physical sacrifice of Jesus
o Literalism
o Heaven is where good freewill moral agents go after physical death, for moral reward. Hell is where bad freewill moral agents go after physical death, for moral punishment.
o Christianity is the only true expression of transcendent truth; historical literal exclusivism.

Childish thinking, of lower Christians, holds to a cluster of views. Esoteric religion is higher religion is higher Christianity, which holds a different cluster of views. Valentinian Gnosticism asserted that differentiation, per Elaine Pagels’ at least in her first three books; this differentiation was her focus in her first three books, which makes them more important and profound than her later books. She started by writing about the heart of the matter, and then her later books drifted out to peripheral concerns, in such a way that she lost touch with the heart of the matter. Valentinian Gnosticism per Pagels’ strongly affirms my Egodeath theory including my treatment of religious myth and peripheral concerns.


“God tests the heart and tries the reins” is mis-translated in modern bibles as “God tests the heart, mind, and feelings.”

The idea of ‘free will’ is an invention of early mainstream Christianity.

True theology must be centered on the entheogenic Eucharist and the Holy Spirit, not on grace as conceived in the ordinary state of consciousness.


Mis-translated bibles obscure the mapping to the Egodeath theory. This article is helpful:

http://www.sovereignword.org/index.php/will-kinneys-king-james-bible-defense-articles/285-reins-heart-mind-or-emotions

The original text is:
God tests the heart and tries the reins.
or, tries the kidneys, where kidneys are considered as desires, emotions, or feelings.

Reins are a cybernetic steering and control mechanism. Whip or goad appears in religious art and writing, as in the Stoic “kick against the pricks”, meaning, resisting the force of fatedness.


The instant Mark Driscoll stops quoting the Bible, and instead uses his own summary, he speaks falsely. On page 108-109 of Religion Saves + Nine Other Misconceptions, he rightly says “Sin has corrupted my mind, so that I do not think God’s thoughts”, citing Rom 6:16. He rightly says “sin has corrupted my behavior, which includes pagan worship of created things, rather than right worship of my creator, God”, citing Rom 1:18-31.

Then Driscoll falsely speaks from his own thinking, and adds his own wording, without citing scripture: “my sinful condition is thoroughly my own doing and in no way the fault of God” — no scripture citation. His assertion here fits with Augustinian asymmetry: when we do evil, we are ultimately responsible, and get all the blame (implying freewill thinking). When we do good, God is ultimately responsible, and gets all the credit (implying no-free-will thinking).

The most interesting aspect of the bible is when it treads on this delicate, asymmetry ground, out of the one side of the mouth, asserting freewill moral agency when talking of sin, and the other, asserting no-free-will when talking of God’s absolute sovereignty. Any assertions like such asymmetry, a delicate mystic meaning-flipping move, should be tied directly to scripture citations. The bible delicately asserts and condemns freewill thinking at the same time.

The book A Free Will, about the history of the idea of free will, shows that popular freewill thinking, of a kind that modern thinking recognizes as the freewill concept and not just the words ‘free will’, was developed in pagan and Christian thought, but especially became popular in early mainstream Christianity. For all practical purposes, the idea of free will is an invention of early mainstream Christianity.


When Mark Driscoll cites or closely paraphrases particular scriptures, I nod and agree, “Yes, that fits the rules of mystic-state metaphor describing self-control cybernetics, frozen time and mono-possibility, entheogenic loose cognition.” Then he steps away from close paraphrasing particular scriptures, and I frown and shake my head, “No, now you are violating the rules of mystic-state metaphor. The tone and connections are wrong, literalist; an outsider’s reading. You are a trespasser, an imposter, you don’t belong here. You are not one of the higher Christians. You are a literalist. You don’t get it; you don’t understand the pattern.”

Driscoll writes “God does not delight in the death of unrepentant, hell-bound sinners,” after citing scriptures that mention “death of the wicked, turn, turn back, die, saved, the knowledge of the truth, perish, repentance, not perish, eternal life”. His tone is wrong, modern, literalist. There’s a tonal difference between the scriptures he cites, which were written from an entheogenic no-free-will perspective, and Driscoll’s writing, which is written from the non-entheogenic, superficial no-free-will perspective without rich recognition of meaning-manipulation.

My core Egodeath theory, I map to scripture and other religious myth and pre-modern philosophy, deliberately speaking from a modern explicit style, so I work with two tones: the modern explicit tone, and the myth tone, mapping them, but my core Theory is coherent and multi-state compliant, unlike the basis of thinking Driscoll is limited to, since he lacks the entheogen Eucharist recognition.

Driscoll fails to emphasize the Eucharist enough. Grace saves, but the point he fails to make is that we receive grace through ingesting the Lord’s Supper/Eucharist, which is the vehicle for the Holy Spirit. If we fail to receive the Holy Spirit and then grace through ingesting the Lord’s Supper, this indicates that the Lord’s Supper was a fake, fraud, placebo. Lower Christians are tainted with freewill moral thinking, sin, lies, failure to understand, no matter how much they read Berkof’s book Systematic Theology. Berkof’s book fails to recognize the entheogenic Eucharist, so it cannot be very profitable.

You have to translate Berkof and Driscoll to the entheogen Eucharist and holy spirit, to make them become profitable to read. Thus Berkof and Driscoll lack the inspiration of the holy spirit. Some Reformed writers probably recognized the entheogenic nature of the Eucharist. Reformed theology from outsiders is false and wrong, because it is centered on grace, but instead, theology should be centered on the entheogenic Eucharist and the Holy Spirit that thereby results, as my Egodeath theory elegantly provides the model for.


Reformed theology sits in an awkward null space, like Arminian theology; it is a semi-correct, largely still incorrect muddle. It’s more correct than Arminian theology, but it is far from mystic esoteric truth and comprehension and recognition of mystic-state metaphor. You cannot do true theology without placing entheogens in the center of your thinking and your model of religious experiencing and interpretation.

This is how my Egodeath theory agrees with and disagrees with Driscoll’s Christianity. The Egodeath theory is higher Christianity, thus esoteric truth, with authentic Eucharist. Reformed popular Christianity of the modern era is lower Christianity, thus is not esoteric truth, does not have the authentic Eucharist, and these are people who say “Jesus, Jesus”, but do not belong to him, except in the grudging little slot permitted to them as baby immature pre-Christians, per the Valentinian Gnosticism system. In short, Valentinian Gnosticism and the equivalent Egodeath theory are true, and pop Reformed Christianity such as Mark Driscoll’s Christianity as of 2012 is false. Driscoll-type Christians have only received the placebo, fake Eucharist; they have not actually taken the Lord’s Supper.

Some pop Reformed Christians have used entheogens, but not in a coherent, integrated way, like the sacrament of apolytrosis (redemption) and the wedding banquet and marriage-chamber of Valentinian Gnosticism. Per Pagels, earlier Gnosticism before Valentinian Gnosticism was not accommodating mainstream Christianity. I always question the word ‘mainstream’, because it begs the question and risks making a false assumption. Reading Pagels’ early books through the Egodeath theory including the Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion, I question, I pose *the* question, in a more pointed expression than I have ever before written:

To what extent was the Eucharist entheogenic, throughout Christian history?

Was mainstream Christianity non-entheogenic, as Pagels asserts if she is read through my Maximal Entheogen Theory? What percentage of Eucharist was entheogenic versus placebo, in Christian history? We must avoid McKenna’s fatal disastrous error of asserting that the Eucharist was never or almost never entheogenic. My Maximal Entheogen Theory dictates that we must assume that the Eucharist was always 100% of the time entheogenic, we must assume, until proven otherwise. Never assume that the Eucharist was thought of as non-entheogenic; never assume that Christians took a placebo Eucharist, my Maximal Entheogen Theory says.

— Michael Hoffman, January 27, 2013
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, http://www.egodeath.com All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6308 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/02/2013
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
The Egodeath Yahoo group is a Weblog sent out by Michael Hoffman,
covering the cybernetic theory of ego death and ego transcendence,
including:

o Block-universe determinism/Fatedness, the closed
and preexisting future, tenseless time, free will as illusory, the
holographic universe, and predestination and Reformed theology.

o Cognitive science, mental construct processing, mental models,
ontological idealism, contemporary metaphysics of the continuant
self, cybernetic self-control, personal control agency, moral agency,
and self-government.

o Zen satori, short-path enlightenment, and Alan Watts;
transpersonal psychology, Ken Wilber, and integral theory.

o Entheogens and psychedelic drugs, mystery religions, mythic
metaphor and allegorical encoding, the mystic altered state, mystic
and religious experiencing, visionary states, religious rapture, and
Acid Rock mysticism.

o Loss of control, self-control seizure, cognitive instability, and
psychosis and schizophrenia.


— Michael Hoffman
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/egodeath
http://www.egodeath.com
Group: egodeath Message: 6309 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 05/02/2013
Subject: Re: Transcending no-free-will
Gnostic Liberation from Astrological Determinism: Hipparchan “Trepidation” and the Breaking of Fate
Horace Jeffery Hodges
Journal: Vigiliae Christianae: A Review of Early Christian Life and Language
Vol. 51, No. 4 (November 1997), pages 359-373
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1583867
“Hipparchus’ discovery of the precession of the equinoxes was used as evidence for intervention in the world by the soteriological god, a miraculous intervention that shifted the zodiac sphere to break the bonds of astrological fate and release the elect from the power of the cosmos and its creator.”


Cosmology and Fate in Gnosticism and Graeco-Roman Antiquity: Under Pitiless Skies
Nicola Denzey Lewis
http://amazon.com/o/asin/9004245480
Due out Feb 2013
Nicola Denzey Lewis, Religious Studies professor, specialist in Gnosticism.
Condensed by Michael Hoffman:
“Gnosticism as a philosophically-oriented religious movement, with the perception of the cosmos as negative or enslaving. Astrological fate in the Apocryphon of John, the Gospel of Judas, Trimorphic Protennoia, and the Pistis Sophia. The concept of enslavement to heimarmene originated in Greek Stoicism, was deployed in the Pauline writings, and was later used by Christian and non-Christian second-century intellectuals. The ancient cosmos, its influence, and being free of its potentially pernicious effects. Gnosticism within the context of the intellectual history of the Roman Empire; emergent Christianity; the religions of Graeco-Roman antiquity.”

Contents:
Were the Gnostics Cosmic Pessimists?
Nag Hammadi and the Providential Cosmos
This Body of Death: Cosmic Malevolence and Enslavement to Sin in Pauline Exegesis
Heimarmene at Nag Hammadi: The Apocryphon of John and On the Origin of the World
Middle Platonism, Heimarmene, and the Corpus Hermeticum
Ways Out I: Interventions of the Savior God
Ways Out II: Baptism and Cosmic Freedom
Astral Determinism in the Gospel of Judas
Conclusions, and a New Way Forward

Same author:
Introduction to ‘Gnosticism’: Ancient Voices, Christian Worlds
Nicola Denzey Lewis
http://amazon.com/o/asin/0199755310
2012
Oxford University Press


Excerpts from the book This Way, condensed by Michael Hoffman:

The Sethians were very concerned with escaping astral determinism, escaping from heimarmene/fate, by recognizing and denying the influence of the astrological Archons on one’s existence in the World of Forms. In the Books of the Saviour (Pistis Sophia), the Christos ascends through the Planetary Spheres, during which he “changes the direction” of the Spheres, thereby ruining the ability of astrologers to divine:

Thou hast taken their power from them and from their horoscope-casters and their consulters and from those who declare to the men in the world all things which shall come to pass, in order that they should no more from this hour know how to declare unto them any thing at all which will come to pass.

The soul of the Knower, ascending through the Spheres, delivers a resounding denial to the Rulers of Fate who would subject it to Destiny:

Take your destiny! I come not to your regions from this moment onwards. I have become a stranger unto you for ever, being about to go unto the region of my inheritance.


In the text “Trimorphic Protennoia”, the Spheres are disturbed, thereby eliminating Fate:

And the lots of Fate and those who apportion the domiciles were greatly disturbed over a great thunder. And the thrones of the Powers were disturbed, since they were overturned, and their King was afraid. And those who pursue Fate paid their allotment of visits to the path, and they said to the Powers, “What is this disturbance and this shaking that has come upon us through a Voice to the exalted Speech? And our entire habitation has been shaken, and the entire circuit of the path of ascent has met with destruction, and the path upon which we go, which takes us up to the Archgenitor of our birth, has ceased to be established for us.”


Sacramental practice removes the bonds of Fate. From the “Excerpts of Theodotus,” a collection of Valentinian sayings recorded by Clement of Alexandria:

Until baptism, they say, Fate is effective, but after it [baptism] the astrologers no longer speak the truth [that is, their assertion of fatedness is nullified -mh]. It is not the bath [baptism] alone that makes us free, but also the knowledge [gnosis]: who were we? what have we become? where were we? into what place have we been cast? whither are we hastening? from what are we delivered? what is birth? what is rebirth


Again and again we find this concept [of escaping fatedness] in the literature. The human is trapped within the World of Forms, under the subject of the Archons, who rule the Zodiac and the Planetary Spheres.


In the Tractates Cryptica Scriptura, Philip K. Dick discusses escape from astral determinism:

Two realms there are, upper and lower. The upper, derived from hyperuniverse I or Yang, Form I of Parmenides, is sentient and volitional. The lower realm, or Yin, Form II of Parmenides, is mechanical, driven by blind, efficient cause, deterministic and without intelligence, since it emanates from a dead source. In ancient times it was termed `astral determinism.’ We are trapped, by and large, in the lower realm, but are through the sacraments, by means of the plasmate, extricated. Until astral determinism is broken, we are not even aware of it, so occluded are we.


// end of excerpts from The Way, condensed by Michael Hoffman
Group: egodeath Message: 6310 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 05/02/2013
Subject: Re: Transcending no-free-will
The history of transcending fatedness

Theologians are not consistent, pure asserters of no-free-will. An advantage of deciphering mythic images is the simplicity, the lack of verbal self-contradictions and backpedalling.

My generalization hypothesis: the Old Testament is creator-worship, fate-worship, heimarmene-snake worship, and that the New Testament (or more broadly, New Testament Christianity) is reactionary against that, in the spirit of its era. The new religious idea of Late Antiquity is reactionary. The New Testament (like Mithraism) emphasizes the theme of “transcending fatednesss” while the Old Testament emphasizes the theme of “realizing fatedness”. The new, transcendent god of Late Antiquity turns the sphere of fixed stars, not meaning simply that the god = fatedness, but rather, that the god transcends and controls fatedness. Clusters of related idea-combinations basically is God controlled by Fate or is God the controller of Fate? Part of the good news of Late Antiquity is that here is a way to transcend fatedness.

Demonizing “the Jews” is really disparaging fatedness. ‘The law’ means freewill moral agency but also came to mean fatedness, when for Gnostics, “the Jews” came to mean the negative aspects of stages 1 and 2 in a 3-stage entheogen initiation system.

The 3-stage system I figured out and theoretically modelled 2001-2007:

naive freewill -> no-free-will -> transcendent freedom

In the 3-stage system, from the perspective of stage 3 thinking, stage 1 and 2 are deliberately conflated, are negatively valued, and are symbolized. The confusing result, that I have deciphered, is that the devil maps both to freewill thinking *and* its opposite, no-free-will! I am the one who figured this out, unravelled it, and adequately summarized this in my 2006 main article as well as circa 2001 postings.

Contradiction:
o The devil believes in naive animal free-will, so he is “guilty of pride”.
o And, the devil imprisons us in fatedness.

Freewill thinking = the devil.
No-free-will = the devil.
Transcendence of no-free-will = the Good God; Truth that remains standing; redemption from the world.
Transcendence of the freewill delusion = Godly thinking; Truth that remains standing.

My debate with Coraxo in the Entheogen Yahoo group in 2001 led to my recognition of this problem and my solution of this problem, by describing both a 2-level and 3-level system. Before the debate, my theory covered the 2-level system; afterwards, I added level 3. Divinity inflation. I conclude that in Classical (early) Antiquity, people affirmed the 2-level system, and then in Late Antiquity, in a collective inflation-of-the-divine move, people added a 3rd level. Classical Antiquity’s invention is the religion of realizing fatedness. Late Antiquity’s invention is the religion of transcending heimarmene.


o In early Antiquity, everyone thought Fate controlled Zeus.
o In late Antiquity, everyone thought Zeus controlled Fate. This was equated with precession of the equinoxes, symbolizing transcending the fate-ruled cosmos.

o The Old Testament asserts fatedness (no-free-will) and equates God with fatedness.
o The New Testament asserts transcendence of fatedness (transcendent freedom, distinct from initial freewill thinking), and equates God with transcendence of fatedness.
o Catholic Christianity and Gnostic Christianity agreed that God transcends fatedness, but Catholic strategically affirmed the world, in order to rule the world; the Catholic Church made the Gnostic world-demonizing anathema, and sought a balanced view that maximized church membership and worldly power for the Catholic Church.

Religion is the waffling about whether we have freewill and whether God is a puppet controlled by Fate. We end up with strong assertions and strong condemnations mixed impurely with waffling, in religion and philosophy, regarding whether we are puppets controlled by fate, or not. Luther starts by asserting no-free-will, then his theology drifts, prevaricates, waffles, and backpedals. A good way, I realize, to explain this ever-repeated trajectory, is that the mind undergoes this refinement process when the mind is exposed repeatedly to the river of fire:

Stage 1. Naive freewill thinking, animal, child. Later,
Stage 2. Realization of no-free-will, in entheogen initiation. Later,
Stage 3. Realization of the problematic aspect of no-free-will thinking (control instability), and, accommodating the reality that when the tight cognitive binding state of consciousness returns, the mind returns to freewill-shaped thinking. The rescue of the mind from the peril of non-control and no-free-will thinking (by transcendently being given trust in its fate), amounts to transcending no-free-will, in a way.

Thus we see religious thinking explode initially with assertions of no-free-will, and then after that, we see waffling, complexity, a mixture of views that can be accused of impurity.

Before full initiation, the mind has impurity: a mixture of no-free-will and freewill thinking.
After full initiation, the mind has impurity, or, has a proper, justified combination: a mixture of no-free-will thinking, retained childish freewill thinking on a practical daily basis, and transcendent freedom thinking.

How to affirm both no-free-will and transcendence of no-free-will, without ending in rank nonsense and irrationality? A kind of pre/trans fallacy looms; debates loom, and self-contradiction looms. I affirm no-free-will. Do I also affirm Gnostic or NT or Mithraic escape from the snake-wrapped cosmos into transcendent freedom? How can we avoid the pre/trans fallacy of equating naive freewill thinking with transcendent freedom?

Everything in the world is determined. But everything outside of the world is not determined.


Referent:
Stage 1 thinking (pre-initiation): naive perishable egoic free will thinking; the delusion of free-will morality
Stage 2 thinking (fairly advanced initiation): the realization of fatedness/heimarmene & being subject to it; being a slave of heimarmene

Symbol:
any symbol for the negative category
the Jews
infidels
idolators
those who are displeasing to God and condemned to perish


Do Luther, Lutheranism, Reformed theology, and Calvinism assert no-free-will? “Yes. But No.” Initially Yes, then later, a qualified Yes. Does the NT assert no-free-will? Yes. But.

o No-free-will is the case. But:
o On a practical daily basis, you continue to utilize childish or initial freewill thinking.
o Realizing no-free-will in conjunction with personal non-control in the psychotomimetic state of divine frenzy brings the problematic aspect of no-free-will thinking (control instability). The practical need arises for the rescue of the mind from the peril of non-control and no-free-will thinking, by transcendently being given trust in its fate, from a source outside the domain of practical personal control power.

This is why in religion and philosophy we see an overwhelming tendency toward waffling even by those who assert no-free-will; we always end up with the assertion that “No-free-will is the case but.” All theologians and philosophers chronically end up agreeing, producing a messy mixed view, that “No-free-will is the case but.” Any time someone writes “No-free-will is the case”, eventually they write “but”. Books of Reformed theology assert that mankind’s salvation is predestined, but then, in some of those books, the author rejects “the philosophical concept of determinism”. Thus while reviewing Pagels’ first book, it struck me that official religion is the assertion of no-free-will, accompanied always and inevitably by backpedalling and denying that very assertion.

The chorus of reformed theology sings “No-free-will is the case, but we are not asserting that no-free-will is the case.” My ironic joke: Now that “determinism” (better called ‘no-free-will’) is a popular idea, the only people who assert freewill anymore are Reformed theologians. When Luther was inspired, he asserted no-free-will, for the first 5 minutes of his thinking. Then after that, the history of Reformed thought is the history of adding the “but”; adding freewill back in again, waffling, backpedaling, and denying what they asserted.


I see a similar tone of self-contradiction in the entheogen history books. The minds of entheogen history writers are polluted by Prohibition’s thought-censorship. They always end up contradicting themselves, and asserting that religion comes from entheogens but religion doesn’t come from entheogens, especially not our own religion — for example, everything Wasson ever wrote.

Wasson’s evasive pile of mush, when interrogated fully, asserts that entheogens were used only in proto-Jewish religion before Genesis was written — despite his efforts to give the impression that he may have asserted more use of mushrooms in Christian history, and despite the efforts of Carl Ruck to *claim* that Wasson asserted otherwise. Nowhere in his *writings* (at least) does Wasson assert that Christians used or even merely may have used entheogens. Schultes, same: a heap of inconsistent assertion and backpedalling, both taking a position and trying to evade that position. Like politicians, both authors seem more concerned with what they *appear* to be asserting, than with what they are actually asserting.

We see the same kinds of evasiveness and pathetic dancing against oneself, in books about Shamanism in Christianity. “God forbid I even allow the possibility of drug use in our religion, I’m just saying that the experience in the NT is shamanistic.” That’s the tone of the authors (slaves of Prohibition Press) who dare to write on this taboo, prohibited, forbidden subject. Now we have books — thanks to __ — that dare to mention (dismissively) the idea that Jesus didn’t exist. Next we’ll have more books that finally are so bold and brazen as to condemn the idea that drugs are the historically normal Christian eucharist (and thus, that acknowledge the existence of the idea) — not just as an aside, but as an entire book — like Shroom (another example of an evasive heap of inconsistent assertions).


The history of no-free-will in religion certainly must start by the affirmation of no-free-will, but in Late Antiquity, that theme was so highlighted that the reaction or inflation also was emphasized. Luther H. Martin rightly says that the master theme of Hellenistic Religion is heimarmene, but he needs to add “and transcending that heimarmene”. As a theory of what’s revealed in the altered state, my 2001 Core Theory was correct. But as an explanatory model of religion in antiquity, my 2001 theory had to add the idea of transcending no-free-will. That concept had to be added as part of my Extended Theory.


As a modern, scientific thinker, I assert no-free-will (in doing so, I make Gnostics unhappy, and I make determinists happy (though I disdain their intellectually irrelevant and experientially ignorant *causal-chain* conception of determinism, in favor of the timeless determinism), and I make Reformed theologians happy insofar as they consistently assert no-free-will).

As a historian of the mystic altered state, I have to also provide an explanatory framework covering transcending no-free-will (in doing so, I make Gnostics happy, and making determinists unhappy).


My Core Theory is as simple as possible, so can do without the concept of “transcending fatedness”. Ancient Greek religion did without the concept of transcending fatedness. Before the late Hellenistic heyday of “heimarmene and transcending it” (the Precession Revolution in religion), my 2-level model from the core theory applies fully: according to ancient religion, when the mind is exposed to entheogens repeatedly, the mind switches from the initial mental model of autonomy operating within the Possibilism model of time and control, to the mental model of puppethood operating within the Eternalism model of time and control. Fate tends to dominate Zeus. Late Hellenistic religion, in competitive inflation, added a 3rd level: Jupiter came to dominate Fate.

Early antiquity: Fate controls Zeus.
Late antiquity: Jupiter controls Fate.

There, I mean ‘Jupiter’ as Good God, the Gnostic hidden God, and Mithras. This was achieved by splitting gods into levels, in a debatable way. God’s Providence has 3 levels (per Michael Williams): the primary highest level of Providence is above Fate, and the secondary and tertiary levels of Providence are not above Fate but are in, of, within, or under Fate.

I conclude that an image of the highest god turning the zodiac should be seen as simultaneously asserting “no-free-will and transcending no-free-will”. In the religion of Late Antiquity, the initiate is redeemed from the prison of no-free-will, but the work of initiation, the work of initiating a person, is the work of awakening that mind to no-free-will (like in early Antiquity), *and*, providing that mind with some sense in which the mind transcends that no-free-will.

In this sense, the entheogen initiation gods of Late Antiquity were thought of as higher than Demeter in Eleusis, from early Antiquity.

Despite the history of muddle and backpedalling, religion is ultimately concerned with the revelation of no-free-will. Religion centers around the experiential revelation of no-free-will, even though sometimes the theme is added, of transcending no-free-will, and even though, in practice, theologians who assert no-free-will tend to also backpedal; their initial purity of assertion ends up being an impure mixture. There may be room for a consistent or pure kind of mixture, a way of asserting “No-free-will. But…” that doesn’t end up in irrational self-contradiction or a cover-up and denial of what you are asserting. We end up comparing each theologian and philosopher in terms of what version of “No-free-will. But…” they construct.

One solution is: God is all-powerful, and all-good, where ‘good’ is redefined. God is not the author of sin and evil — hasten to redefine ‘sin’ and ‘evil’ and ‘author’, or per Gnostics, ‘God’.

(irony/sarcasm:)

God only is the author of the primary Providence, not of secondary Providence. Evil is not God’s fault; blame God’s secondary Providence instead.

As virtual reality creator, I’m not the author of the evil actions in the virtual world I created, I’m only the author of the program that created those evil actions.

As puppetmaster, I am not responsible for the evil committed by the puppet: I have an intermediate-layer puppetmaster below me; it’s his fault, not mine.

— Michael Hoffman, February 4, 2013, based on original research and idea-development since 1985
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, http://www.egodeath.com All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6311 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 05/02/2013
Subject: Re: Transcending no-free-will
I put forth a theory of no-free-will, then a Gnostic, Coraxo, said that the position I expressed is Calvinism or “unbiblical hypercalvinism”.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Entheogens/message/1480
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Entheogens/msearch?query=mhoffman

Our exchange of multiple posts here is historically important, in tracing the development of the mythic metaphor extended Egodeath theory; that debate is where I brought in “transcending no-free-will” into my extended, peripheral Egodeath theory, to explain religion and mythic metaphor historically. It is literalism, to overstate the difference between no-free-will religion and “transcending no-free-will” religion. Extending my theory to cover Gnosticism merely amounted to further explaining dynamic mythic metaphor — my core theory of religion didn’t have to change, to cover “transcending no-free-will” religion.

It is not the case that there are two different religions to explain: “no-free-will” religion and “transcending no-free-will” religion. There were merely various mythic metaphors to explain. Imagine Sam Harris (advocate of OSC-based causal-chain determinism) condemning Gnosticism because Gnosticism asserts freewill. That would be a misrepresentation and a misunderstanding. Gnosticism asserts no-free-will, and puts forth metaphors in terms of transcending no-free-will. It would be a pre/trans fallacy to assert that Gnosticism asserts freewill thinking. Gnosticism — typical of the religion of Late Antiquity — asserts transcendent freedom, not naive animalish/childish/youthful freewill thinking. The religion of transcendent freedom is the echo, shadow, or reaction produced by the religion of no-free-will. It’s really the same religion, with an added theme.

Hellenistic “no-free-will” religion is nearly the same thing as later Hellenistic “transcending no-free-will” religion. The later is framed as an escape from the former, but that “difference” is more a matter of interpretation, than substance. The substance of the late Hellenistic religion of “transcending no-free-will” is the same as the substance of Classical Hellenic or early Hellenistic “no-free-will” religion. Overstating the “difference” between these shows shallow understanding. The concern is the same: mystic esoteric religion throughout antiquity was concerned with experiencing no-free-will, regardless of what spin is put on it in one cultic brand or another.

Coraxo was correct that my theory of religion was missing or misrepresenting Gnosticism in a central, crucial way. But he was not right to think that my no-free-will theory of religion (my Core Theory) was essentially different than Gnosticism. So you see my main article is apathetic about whether we are controlled by fatedness or by a God who controls fatedness. Worshipping the heimarmene-snake is tantamount to worshipping Zeus Meilichios (easily appeased) who controls the heimarmene-snake.

Gnostic metaphor chooses to draw a hard distinction between the demiurge, who created and thus controls Fate, versus the transcendent Good God who is entirely outside of Fate and not involved with Fate but is above Fate and radically superior to Fate such that God cannot be blamed as controller of Fate; God is not in control of Fate. God is all-good, all-powerful, and is not the creator or controller of Fate.

Coraxo accuses me of Calvinistic moral inconsistency. (He’s projecting typically inconsistent, moralist Calvinism onto me; I never asserted moralism or freewill moralism.) But Gnosticism is guilty of inconsistency and evasiveness as bad as any snake-tongued Reformed theologian who proudly proclaims no-free-will out of one side of his mouth while preaching freewill moral culpability out of the other side of his mouth.

Martin Ball is correct, in the single point that he wrote: you have to trust in the uncontrollable. Whether you call it Fate or call it the Good God who is ineffably and incomprehensibly separate from Fate and irresponsible for Fate, religion is a matter of seeing your vulnerability to no-free-will, and transcendently trusting the power, outside your practical control domain, whether that power is thought of as demiurgic or as incomprehensibly transcendent. Gnosticism has its cop-out as surely as Reformed theology does.


God is all-good and all-powerful and the problem of evil contradicts that. No move is any better than redefining ‘good’ to mean ‘good and evil’. God is all-powerful and is beyond good and evil; God is all-powerful and God is much good and much evil, mixed together, fused together with your thoughts and body frozen in time. Trust in Sam Harris’ determinism, put your life consciously in its hands, in the hands of the demiurge. Trust in the demiurge, even though the demiurge has created all the evil, harm, and misfortune in the world. Trust in causal-chain determinism, put your full trust in it, for your life, even though causal-chain determinism has created all the evil, harm, and misfortune in the world.

Depend for your very life, your life depends on it, trust in the machine that gives your thoughts and has produced all the harm in the world. It is easier to trust in the loving mother figure of Isis and Virgin Mary, or a Good God who has nothing to do with the Creator. Job appreciates this problem, that (at the ultimate, trans-personal level) you have to trust in and “love” the very same God who causes all the affliction in the world. You are physically attached, through your mind and body, to the same cognitive machinery that produces all the harm that’s ever happened, as revealed in the intense mystic altered state. No wonder we try our hardest to trust in our own autonomous control power instead, taking up arms against the Fatedness machinery, which is naturally experienced as a threat.

Sam Harris disparages religion, but (real, esoteric, source) religion is concerned with the difficulty of doing what Harris is essentially advocating: putting trust in, and depending for our life on, uncontrollable Fatedness: control power lying outside of our personal practical domain of control power; trusting It with our very life. It is a last resort and we have no alternative, only nonsense.

Coherent, orderly thinking requires that we realize our situation: by its very nature, our hidden source of thoughts, that lies beyond our practical personal domain of control power, it makes no sense to not trust our hidden source of thoughts: thus the primordial chaos-monster Typhon, father of all monsters, has snakes for legs, and Zeus controls those snakes, so Typhon *has* to trust fatedness, trust Zeus, trust the very source of his own thoughts, worship the mysterious threatening fountain (spring) behind the veil in your mind, worship crazy Dionysus who is the hidden source of your thoughts — even the source of your thoughts of having and directing (steering) your personal control power.

http://google.com/search?q=zeus+typhon&num=100&tbm=isch

Your thoughts are steered by the machine-God, by the demiurge. Fall down and worship in terror and awe the demiurge snake, because that is the very source of your pathetic thoughts of self-reliance and autonomous personal control power. Look at your legs: they are the snake-machine. Look at your thoughts: they are given to you by the snake-machine. (Snake = frozen worldline, spacetime worm, in the Eternalism model, in which there’s a single pre-existing future and no real possibility-branching.) Thus Typhon shields his cybernetic self-control heart with his hand, when his perception is raised by entheogens, and he sees Zeus aiming a threatening thunderbolt at his heart, and Typhon perceives his legs as snakes holding him up, holding you up in the altered state.

Is Typhon’s realization-experience the religion of “no-free-will”, or is it the religion of “transcending no-free-will”? It is the religion of “no-free-will”. Is it substantially different than the religion of “transcending no-free-will”? Only in details of metaphor. They are the same religion, or mystic engine — perennial entheogenic esoteric mystic-state shamanistic religion — with merely a different veneer or skin of metaphor. “Transcending no-free-will is not a new religion, in Late antiquity; it is merely a new metaphor or theme or idea added to the one and only religion, the “Hellenistic Religion”, of Heimarmene, per Luther H. Martin’s book. The religion of transcending Heimarmene is the religion of Heimarmene, brand-labeled or skinned or packaged as “(Transcending) Heimarmene”.

— Michael Hoffman, February 4, 2013, based on original research and idea-development since 1985
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, http://www.egodeath.com All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6312 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 05/02/2013
Subject: Re: Asymmetry of Reformed theology
Lutheran Theology
Steven Paulson
http://amazon.com/o/asin/0567550001
April 2011

Excerpts condensed by Michael Hoffman:


The first thing in Lutheran theology is God, who is almighty, and so naturally a predestinating God and thus we come upon the inexorable, logical conclusion: God’s will is free; yours is not; everything happens by divine necessity. Therefore the first lie that must e exorcised from theology is the Liberum Arbitrium — the myth of the free will. Luther loved Melanchthon’s _Loci_ because it dared to begin with the bondage (slaveness, puppethood) of the will. Since all things that happen, happen necessarily, according to divine predestination, our will has no liberty. Lutherans, at the beginning at least, were the most uncompromising monotheists around and took Jeremiah 10:23 at face value: The way of man is not in himself; it is not in man who walks to direct his steps.

It is appalling to think that all things happen by almighty power, and none from the choices of our will. But this revolt against God’s being God is not caused by omnipotence itself, it comes from living under a delusions perpetrated by the legal scheme that requires free will in order truly to be free. When this myth strikes the reality of God the free-will shaped mind must rebel — it has no choice. God is omnipotent; your will is not free. But who wants to trouble themselves with this unpleasant knowledge? People don’t want to know this slap to the face we call fate. Melanchthon said “Predestination must intrude into all parts of the theology discussion.” Free will must be the first discussion in theology because it is the operating assumption of nature, reason, philosophy, all false theology, and so of the entire legal scheme.

Free will refuses monotheism, omnipotence, and predestination and therefore is in open revolt against God the minute free will is created in the mind of the sinner. The revolt is so strong, so basic, and so carefully hidden from view that it really must be brought out into the open. Paul’s calling or commission, along with all things, happens by divine necessity. There is no free will, no choice, no decision, no acceptance (of salvific grace) or any other verb you could try to give the human in relation to the Creator. This is not a passing conjecture of Paul’s; it lies at the heart of all theology. Lutherans don’t assert that only Scripture or special revelation shows you the almighty nature of God; they were always aware that the philosophers and especially the dramatists of Greece, tried to reconcile themselves to fate.

Predestination is natural knowledge for people, who then proceed immediately to deny this. The necessity of our knowing that God is almighty, together with the inevitability that we will deny that God is almighty, is what makes humans what they are, creatures of their Creator in rebellion. What your heart desires is to rebel against the Almighty. Nietzsche was son of a Lutheran pastor, that’s how he caught enough theology to know that the simplistic desc5riptions of a free will were foolish. “God’s immutable will: this bombshell knocks free-will flat, and utterly shatters it.”

Melanchthon became frightened of that doctrine and warned of “Stoical madness”, hedging and altering in later editions, asserting free will cooperating with grace under the scheme of the law, like later Protestant theology; certainly Lutheran and every other kind of theology has qualified God’s omnipotence. Modern theology is finally the rejection of omnipotence, the refusal of predestination, and the reworking of the medieval attempt to unite divine and human work in salvation under the rubric of ‘grace’. *The* question of all theology is whether or not you have free will. If you have it, then God is not omnipotent. The goal of the myth of free will is to bring the almighty God under the law. But if you do not have such free will, then everything depends upon how God is disposed toward you; that is, whether or not you have a gracious God.

Paul was speaking about the most frightening thing in the world as if it were the very hope and freedom of the world — God’s almighty power, his wrath, our slavehood in which we have no free will, and so God’s divine election apart from the law [freewill moral agency] — in which case some are chosen and others not. Who wants this as our hope?”


// end of Paulson excerpts condensed by Michael Hoffman
Group: egodeath Message: 6313 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 05/02/2013
Subject: Re: Asymmetry of Reformed theology
My commentary about my excerpts of Paulson’s book Lutheran Theology:

Regarding “Lutherans were always aware that the philosophers and especially the dramatists of Greece, tried to reconcile themselves to fate”. Paulson contradicts himself here; he moments before, asserted that philosophy asserts freewill: “Free will is the operating assumption of nature, reason, philosophy, all false theology, and so of the entire legal scheme”.
He writes both:
“Philosophers tried to reconcile themselves to fate.”
“Free will is the operating assumption of philosophy.”

This is apologetics kettle-logic. “Lutherans are superior people: they believe no-free-will, whereas heathen pagans believed in freewill. And, Lutherans are superior people: they are well-informed, and realized that even the heathen pagans were aware of fate.” This is like trying to condemn Gnostics because they are libertine and because they are ascetics and because they assert free will and because they assert no-free-will. “Gnostic pagan heathens are bad people, because they choose coffee, and, conversely, because they choose tea. Those error-filled godless pagans believed in fate. Also, those error-filled godless pagans believed in free will. They are guilty of abstinence. Additionally, they are guilty of indulging.”

This is a cheap rhetorical move, found all the time in apologetics that never miss an opportunity to misrepresent the Other (Gnostics, pagans, moderns, Jews, Shamans, Catholics, etc.) in every possible way, no matter the contradiction within and between the apologetics authors. This incoherent apologetics project of omni-defamation of the Other is like sleazy R. Gordon Wasson condemning the early 20th Century mycologist as “ignorant” for asserting that Plaincourault means Amanita, and then, proudly showing us that Wasson figured out that Plaincourault means Amanita (but in a way that the painter was unaware). This kind of haughty and self-contradictory kettle-logic apologetics is as low and nonsensical as insults in discussion forums, where the goal isn’t truth or coherence, but to make oneself appear superior in status, at a glance.


Regarding “Free will must be the first discussion in theology because it is the operating assumption of nature, reason, and philosophy” – that’s only true of OSC-based nature/reason/philosophy. ASC-based nature/reason/philosophy makes the mind perceive no-free-will.

Regarding “predestination is natural knowledge”, clarification is needed. The natural mind, per Antiquity, is ignorant of no-free-will; it is the animal/childish thinking, in terms of freewill-shaped agency. Only after ingesting the super natural light particles of the Eucharist, is the mind impressed upon by the paradigmatic stamp of no-free-will awareness. This impressing by the entheogen is, in the Gnostic metaphor-system, characterized as transcending no-free-will, almost as soon as the sacrament of apolytrosis reveals no-free-will. ‘Apolytrosis’ = redemption, purchasing or saving or setting free from captivity, from the threatening prison of fatedness.


Regarding “freewill is the assumption of philosophy” — not according to the book A Free Will, until just before New Testament Christianity. That book traces the historical origin of the idea of free will. After I built independently my original model of what’s revealed in loosecog, I began reading the history of philosophy and religion, and was surprised that everyone agrees with my no-free-will conclusion, though — I now understand — because modern culture is based in the ordinary state of consciousness (OSC) with no integrated exposure to the ASC, we tend to revert or backslide constantly to naive freewill thinking.

Theology is a coward and refuses to take responsibility for its assertion of no-free-will; theology — as this book explains — keeps adding freewill back in, boldly asserting no-free-will with one hand, then, cowardly, adding freewill back in with the other hand.


Regarding “this slap to the face we call fate”:

Kicked in the face
You can pray for a place in heaven’s unearthly estate
— Rush


Regarding “thus we come upon the inexorable, logical conclusion:” — even more so, when done right, with the non-placebo, entheogenic Eucharist, in the entheogen Eucharist altered state of the Holy Spirit when we eat the actual physical real flesh of Christ in the Supper of the Lord, when you have Christ for dinner. Jesus was here, in the flesh, in history. I know, because I ate him for dinner. I saw him myself. I even have photos of Christ here in the flesh, to corroborate this, taken at 10:10 on 10/10/10.


Regarding his phrase “the myth of the free will”, compare the naive-as-Oedipus title of the OSC-based causal-chain determinism book, “The Myth of Free Will”: the Attic tragedy chorus exclaims, upon mention of that title, which expresses ominous truth uttered from within ignorance: actually, Myth is about the entheogenic revealing of no-free-will; my Egodeath theory discovered that myth is precisely about the revealing that free will is a myth.

Take my hand, I’ll lead you to the other side
To see the truth: the path for you is decided
— Iron Maiden

Opinions are provided
The future pre-decided
— Rush

Destiny planned out
Speculation of the wise
— Bob Daisley, of Blizzard of Ozz


Religion loudly proclaims no-free-will, God is almighty. And then, backpedals from that, saying “nevertheless, you are still ultimately culpable per freewill moral agency. You really are an evil moral freewill agent, and, God is almighty. Evil is not ultimately God’s fault, it’s ultimately your fault, even though God is almighty. This obvious contradiction is not our fault, as theologians; it’s your fault, as a confused and deluded sinner. And who are you, a mere creature, to question God’s logic that we freewill-denying theologians have created?” I haven’t seen so much waffling and self-contradiction since I lifted the rock from Pope-buddy Wasson’s book and saw all the worms underlying it try to crawl away and hide.

If you tell me that God is almighty and that we are ultimately-responsible moral agents rather than puppets, you are insincere, a lying serpent; you don’t believe your own words. You can’t have it both ways in the same sense at the same time, trying like Wasson to invent a mass of verbiage to try to hide your brazen self-contradiction. The child simply has freewill thinking, innocently. Theologians are guilty of hypocrisy, of preaching a garbage theology that they themselves don’t believe in; of striving to contradict themselves and pretend they aren’t. Sin is the mixture of asserting freewill and no-free-will.

The Reformed theologian pushed into a corner admits self-contradiction with the feeble excuse “the fallen mind of man cannot understand the mystery of God”. No, “1+1=3”, or “Yes = No”, is not a “mystery”; it’s nonsense and simple self-contradiction. Don’t falsely label it as a “mystery”. What’s truly the mystery is the source of our personal control-thoughts. Saying that we are ultimately responsible freewill-type moral control agents is not a mystery; it’s simply an outright falsehood, one that is undeniably common and standard in Reformed theology books, as Paulson’s book explains.

First Luther discovers no-free-will, and immediately after that, Lutheranism adds freewill moral agency to that, as is standard practice throughout the history of religion except in the pure source of religion, during the loosecog fountain in the peak window of the mystic altered state. The revelation of no-free-will is given in the heart of esoteric religion (including in Gnosticism), and then, the labor of exoteric theology and religion is to cover-up that embarrassing nakedness, hide, shield the eyes in public, to protect society from the embarrassing, horrific though attractive truth that is revealed, protecting religion by censoring the taboo heart of religion.

— Michael Hoffman, February 4, 2013, based on original research and idea-development since 1985
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, http://www.egodeath.com All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6314 From: Michael Hoffman Date: 05/02/2013
Subject: Re: Transcending no-free-will
Clarifications:

Now we have books — thanks to [Bart Ehrman] — that dare to mention (dismissively) the idea that Jesus didn’t exist. Next we’ll have more books that finally are so bold and brazen as to condemn the idea that drugs are the historically normal Christian eucharist (and thus, that acknowledge the existence of the idea[; that is, my idea, that normally, in Christian history, the Eucharist was understood as visionary plants; per my Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion and Culture]) — not just as an aside, but as an entire book — like Shroom (another example of an evasive heap of inconsistent assertions).

— Michael Hoffman
Group: egodeath Message: 6315 From: Vincent Bruno Date: 25/02/2013
Subject: Vincent Bruno
Group: egodeath Message: 6319 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/06/2013
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
The Egodeath Yahoo group is a Weblog sent out by Michael Hoffman,
covering the cybernetic theory of ego death and ego transcendence,
including:

o Block-universe determinism/Fatedness, the closed
and preexisting future, tenseless time, free will as illusory, the
holographic universe, and predestination and Reformed theology.

o Cognitive science, mental construct processing, mental models,
ontological idealism, contemporary metaphysics of the continuant
self, cybernetic self-control, personal control agency, moral agency,
and self-government.

o Zen satori, short-path enlightenment, and Alan Watts;
transpersonal psychology, Ken Wilber, and integral theory.

o Entheogens and psychedelic drugs, mystery religions, mythic
metaphor and allegorical encoding, the mystic altered state, mystic
and religious experiencing, visionary states, religious rapture, and
Acid Rock mysticism.

o Loss of control, self-control seizure, cognitive instability, and
psychosis and schizophrenia.


— Michael Hoffman
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/egodeath
http://www.egodeath.com
Group: egodeath Message: 6320 From: Joe Date: 12/06/2013
Subject: Forthcoming essay citing egodeath theory
The forthcoming book ‘Breaking convention: essays on psychedelic consciousness’ (currently available for preorder on amazon) contains an essay which is based on Michael Hoffman’s theory of mental construct processing (loosening of associations in the psychedelic altered state), and which includes several citations to the egodeath theory website. The title of the essay is ‘Cognitive phenomenology of mind manifestation’, it covers the following topics:

Relation of psychedelic tripping to the mind’s association and pattern forming capacities
Using analogies to describe altered state experiences
Plato’s allegory of the philosopher in the cave, and how it maps onto the psychedelic state
Frank Jackson’s philosophical thought-experiments about radically novel kinds of experience, and how they map onto the psychedelic state
Andrew Marr’s theory of visual perception, and Jerry Fodor’s theory of mental modularity, and how both these theories imply a broadly representationalist metaphysical view (perception mediated by mental symbols, as opposed to direct perception of external reality)
Michael Hoffman’s concepts of explicit representationalism and metaperception in the psychedelic state
Undulating qualia – the specific way in which ordinary perception of physical objects is altered in the psychedelic state, and how this alteration indicates a representationalist theory of perception
Edmund Husserl’s concept of phenomenological epoche (= deliberate ‘bracketing-off’ of natural, habitual assumptions for the purpose of carrying out phenomenological analysis), and how it describes both psychedelic tripping and schizophrenic/psychotic mental fragmentation.
Freud’s analogy of the mind as a crystal vase which shatters during episodes of psychosis, making the underlying crystalline structure become visible
Humphrey Osmond’s concept of tripping as ‘psychotomimesis’
Louis Sass’ concept of schizophrenic cognition as ‘hyperreflexivity’ and how this concept also applies to the psychedelic cognitive modality
The phenomenological inaccuracy of the term ‘hallucinogen’
Benny Shanon’s analysis of the ayahuasca experience, in particular his description of the way in which ayahuasca can reorientate a person’s ontological understanding
How the psychedelic state reveals the mind’s basic function of fusing together mental representations with their external referents
How Michael Hoffman’s analysis of the psychedelic trip effect explains the proper way in which tripping is related to hallucinating
Michael Hoffman’s concept of the mental worldmodel, and how psychedelic tripping can lead to a radical overhaul/restructuring of the mental worldmodel
Using the process of waking up from a dream as an analogy for the psychedelic mental reconfiguration
Paul Thagard’s writing on paradigm conversion and how it maps onto the psychedelic mental reconfiguration
Group: egodeath Message: 6321 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/07/2013
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
The Egodeath Yahoo group is a Weblog sent out by Michael Hoffman,
covering the cybernetic theory of ego death and ego transcendence,
including:

o Block-universe determinism/Fatedness, the closed
and preexisting future, tenseless time, free will as illusory, the
holographic universe, and predestination and Reformed theology.

o Cognitive science, mental construct processing, mental models,
ontological idealism, contemporary metaphysics of the continuant
self, cybernetic self-control, personal control agency, moral agency,
and self-government.

o Zen satori, short-path enlightenment, and Alan Watts;
transpersonal psychology, Ken Wilber, and integral theory.

o Entheogens and psychedelic drugs, mystery religions, mythic
metaphor and allegorical encoding, the mystic altered state, mystic
and religious experiencing, visionary states, religious rapture, and
Acid Rock mysticism.

o Loss of control, self-control seizure, cognitive instability, and
psychosis and schizophrenia.


— Michael Hoffman
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/egodeath
http://www.egodeath.com
Group: egodeath Message: 6322 From: hahaonlysirius Date: 06/07/2013
Subject: Please repost “Mystianity” graduate thesis paper referenced by Micha
I would like to read the graduate thesis paper mentioned on egodeath.com by Michael Hoffman here: http://www.egodeath.com/MysticInitiationOriginChristianity.htm

>I’m amazed at the excellent quality of this summary by a student. This “report”, a graduate thesis, is about Christianity and the Mystery Religions.
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JesusMysteriesdiscussion/files/Mystianity.zip

The link no longer works, and I’ve done some googling around the web but haven’t had any luck. Does anyone have a copy they could repost? I would be very grateful.
Group: egodeath Message: 6323 From: hahaonlysirius Date: 07/07/2013
Subject: Cancellation of the will
I’ve had some involvement in a reformed church founded on Calvinist principles recently, and the discussion of the Holy Spirit in relation to the will of man came up. The position asserted was that the Holy Spirit descends on the elect, through the concept of Grace — these elect few are pre-destined for Salvation. Then, the degree to which the elect is filled with the Holy Spirit is dependent on how one submits to the Holy Spirit. By becoming an empty vessel — total submission, one can become completely full of the Holy Spirit. However, if one clings to the flesh — continues to rebel — there will be no fertile ground for the Sprit to take root.

This oddly sounded very much like the theory of egodeath, minus the entheogens of course, but it left me slightly bewildered. First, the elect have no choice whether they are chosen or not. However, being chosen, they are provided a choice: submit or rebel. Yet, is it not God’s Providence that determines whether we will submit or rebel? This seemed like waffling to me, and contradictory to the “compatibilist” position the church has professed in the past: i.e. man can do what he wills, but not will what he wills. Then how can man will to be submissive?

Surely, one can experience the cancellation of the will in the altered mystic state. However, can one cancel one’s will in the ordinary state of consciousness? Can I will myself to be an empty vessel, in anticipation of being filled with the Holy Spirit? How does this relate to ego transcendence as state in the egodeath theory?

Thanks for any insight.
Group: egodeath Message: 6324 From: ajnavajra Date: 07/07/2013
Subject: Re: Cancellation of the will
My take on this derives from enough “egodeath” experiences with
entheogens to find a sense that “I” have a continuity before this birth
and after this coming death. Sort of a reincarnationalist type view, but
that the “I” that is my true self (Self) is more than this present
personality.

Therefore the will that this current personality possesses is a smaller
amount that the Over Will of the Higher Self. (That Self may also be an
integrated unit within a yet larger Greater Self. The whole thing is
likely a fractal reflection)

So “my Father in Heaven” is my Higher Self, who as in the parable of the
talents, have given me a small “trust fund” of will, and whether I
remember this fact or not, I am still operating at His sufferance.

Many people using 5 MeO have reported being expanded back to Godhead and
then they remembered laying out the script of this lifetime. Coming back
down has the sense of being “squeezed” into a smaller more limiting
little self.

Taken in the way, your current lifetime is not by far your only one, and
the only expression of your will, or His Will. In this level of the
“video game” you have to achieve “beating the level” or the “boss” of
the level, in order to start the next level. This may involve some kind
of body upgrade too, with a new nervous system capable of sensibilities
now undeveloped.

As a child has limited will under the Will of the parent, so we too act
out our part at this level, knowing there are aspects we canot yet
understand.

All of this is predicated on having some kind internal initiations or
experiences which you can begin to trust, rather than the kind of
“faith” that comes from reading other people’s opinions. I believe if
you continue to explore taking the sacred communion with the INTENTION
of finding out what is next, and opening to there being an invisible
support group of higher beings in whose tribe you are already
integrated, they will carry you to your next level. You are already
surrounded and live in the womb of the Great Light Mother, or Holy
Spirit, and your life derives from Her. She will give you what you need
at the moment, so don’t bewilder yourself by trying to solve the entire
puzzle now! You have to grow, and keep growing.

Thus in the end, every act of your “will” small as it is, derives its
force from the greater Intention or Will of the Mother-Father who has
carried you to this moment of questioning. “They” will not abandon you.
In my opinion this “threat” of making a mistake in your decisions is
some kind of mind control bullshit laid on us by priests and
mind-slavers to cultivate our obeisance so they can milk our “soul
juice”, pick our pockets, and misdirect our forces. You are made “in the
image of God”. Follow your spiritual umbilical cord back to Source, and
feel it like a substance, a Rock, the Foundation. Now trust your will,
even when it makes mistakes.

Does a plant “decide” to grow, flower and fruit? No, the interior force
of the Holy Spirit carries it. Thus friend, be like the Lilies of the
Field. Be yourself warts and all, allow mistakes, and accept
Father-Mother’s forgiveness and GRACE and trust that “they” will carry
you onward, knowing you must fall many times in learning to walk.


— In egodeath@yahoogroups.com, “hahaonlysirius” wrote:
>
> I’ve had some involvement in a reformed church founded on Calvinist
principles recently, and the discussion of the Holy Spirit in relation
to the will of man came up. The position asserted was that the Holy
Spirit descends on the elect, through the concept of Grace — these
elect few are pre-destined for Salvation. Then, the degree to which the
elect is filled with the Holy Spirit is dependent on how one submits to
the Holy Spirit. By becoming an empty vessel — total submission, one
can become completely full of the Holy Spirit. However, if one clings to
the flesh — continues to rebel — there will be no fertile ground for
the Sprit to take root.
>
> This oddly sounded very much like the theory of egodeath, minus the
entheogens of course, but it left me slightly bewildered. First, the
elect have no choice whether they are chosen or not. However, being
chosen, they are provided a choice: submit or rebel. Yet, is it not
God’s Providence that determines whether we will submit or rebel? This
seemed like waffling to me, and contradictory to the “compatibilist”
position the church has professed in the past: i.e. man can do what he
wills, but not will what he wills. Then how can man will to be
submissive?
>
> Surely, one can experience the cancellation of the will in the altered
mystic state. However, can one cancel one’s will in the ordinary state
of consciousness? Can I will myself to be an empty vessel, in
anticipation of being filled with the Holy Spirit? How does this relate
to ego transcendence as state in the egodeath theory?
>
> Thanks for any insight.
>
Group: egodeath Message: 6325 From: Simon Date: 22/07/2013
Subject: Enlightenment/Ego – What is it?
Enlightenment as many of you may know means ego death, but what is Enlightenment and what is ego?

Enlightenment means coming to a state of perfect goodness and this means that ego is anything and everything that is bad in a person, in you…

Zen has quite a history of Enlightening people but not so much these days. Why..? There are no enlightened zen masters any more; they have all been lost due to poor students. Although this is not really their fault as you may have guessed. Evolution procedes and there is a reason for everything.

Ego includes all sickness, though not everything the modern person calls sickness is sickness. THings like schizophrenia and alhzimers are NOT sickness but glipses outside of ego.

Physicality is ego, so when a person becomes more aware, their sense of thinking things on the physical plane are important diminishes and they become more aware of the non-physical dimensions of life. This is often mistaken for illness in todays society and awareness of the non-physical is termed illness by many.

It seems society has a great deal against anything truly good and this needs to end. It is just ego playing its tricks but once the ego’s tell-tale signs are seen it is not a problem.

So a thorough understanding of ego is important for ego death proper. Remember ego is all negativity, while enlightenment and everything outside of ego is positive and life enhancing.

Society doesn’t like an Enlightened person, because society has a big ego collectively, but when that ego diminishes, the Enlightened person will become the most popular man in the world, as is to be expected. All Enlightened Souls were popular, but these days there is a lot more negativity and ignorance.

IT is all a product of Evolution and will and must work out.

Peace to you all.
Group: egodeath Message: 6326 From: ajnavajra Date: 23/07/2013
Subject: Re: Enlightenment/Ego – What is it?
— In egodeath@yahoogroups.com, “Simon” <buddhaneo@…> wrote:
>
> Enlightenment as many of you may know means ego death, but what is Enlightenment and what is ego?
>
> Enlightenment means coming to a state of perfect goodness and this means that ego is anything and everything that is bad in a person, in you…
>
> Ego includes all sickness, though not everything the modern person calls sickness is sickness. THings like schizophrenia and alhzimers are NOT sickness but glipses outside of ego.
>

> So a thorough understanding of ego is important for ego death proper. Remember ego is all negativity, while enlightenment and everything outside of ego is positive and life enhancing.
>
**************************

wow! this is a really dualistic mentalized model. Gadzooks. “perfect goodness,” “bad…???”

this seems to me to be another expression of the “run away” sickness that infects “spirituality.” Gotta get from here (“illusion”) to there (“enlightenment”). This model itself is the “illusion.”

These values of “good” and “bad” arise in the dual state which is NOT enlightenment. When the mind truly stops, these models will stop. What One is left with is what IS, and THAT includes all models of illusion and “enlightenment.” It IS what IT IS.

Even your illusion is perfect goodness!

Look up Churning the Milky Sea. Note that the forces of Darkness, Asuras, are evenly matched against the forces of Light, Nagas.. Names are not important. But the vision is that the game we call Cosmos with its supposed “evolution to higher states” is actually a balance of cross-cancelling forces, meaning that there is actually no movement at all. The only movement is an artifact of Mind scanning Itself. Every time one touches on Mind, we realize there is no place to go but here! This ends Seeking, trying to map a way out of “illusion” which is an equal part of Reality.

Capiche?
Group: egodeath Message: 6327 From: Simon Date: 24/07/2013
Subject: Re: Enlightenment/Ego – What is it?
Even YOUR ideas are illuisions…

The ego is everything that DOESN’T KNOW its unity with God.

E dge
G od
O ut


**************************
>
> wow! this is a really dualistic mentalized model. Gadzooks. “perfect goodness,” “bad…???”
>
> this seems to me to be another expression of the “run away” sickness that infects “spirituality.” Gotta get from here (“illusion”) to there (“enlightenment”). This model itself is the “illusion.”
>
> These values of “good” and “bad” arise in the dual state which is NOT enlightenment. When the mind truly stops, these models will stop. What One is left with is what IS, and THAT includes all models of illusion and “enlightenment.” It IS what IT IS.
>
> Even your illusion is perfect goodness!
>
> Look up Churning the Milky Sea. Note that the forces of Darkness, Asuras, are evenly matched against the forces of Light, Nagas.. Names are not important. But the vision is that the game we call Cosmos with its supposed “evolution to higher states” is actually a balance of cross-cancelling forces, meaning that there is actually no movement at all. The only movement is an artifact of Mind scanning Itself. Every time one touches on Mind, we realize there is no place to go but here! This ends Seeking, trying to map a way out of “illusion” which is an equal part of Reality.
>
> Capiche?
>
Group: egodeath Message: 6328 From: tolderoll Date: 24/07/2013
Subject: Re: Enlightenment/Ego – What is it?
Why are you spamming the group? It’s obvious you’re not interested in the topics of discussion here.

— In egodeath@yahoogroups.com, “Simon” <buddhaneo@…> wrote:
>
>
> Even YOUR ideas are illuisions…
>
> The ego is everything that DOESN’T KNOW its unity with God.
>
> E dge
> G od
> O ut
>
>
> **************************
> >
> > wow! this is a really dualistic mentalized model. Gadzooks. “perfect goodness,” “bad…???”
> >
> > this seems to me to be another expression of the “run away” sickness that infects “spirituality.” Gotta get from here (“illusion”) to there (“enlightenment”). This model itself is the “illusion.”
> >
> > These values of “good” and “bad” arise in the dual state which is NOT enlightenment. When the mind truly stops, these models will stop. What One is left with is what IS, and THAT includes all models of illusion and “enlightenment.” It IS what IT IS.
> >
> > Even your illusion is perfect goodness!
> >
> > Look up Churning the Milky Sea. Note that the forces of Darkness, Asuras, are evenly matched against the forces of Light, Nagas.. Names are not important. But the vision is that the game we call Cosmos with its supposed “evolution to higher states” is actually a balance of cross-cancelling forces, meaning that there is actually no movement at all. The only movement is an artifact of Mind scanning Itself. Every time one touches on Mind, we realize there is no place to go but here! This ends Seeking, trying to map a way out of “illusion” which is an equal part of Reality.
> >
> > Capiche?
> >
>
Group: egodeath Message: 6330 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/08/2013
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
The Egodeath Yahoo group is a Weblog sent out by Michael Hoffman,
covering the cybernetic theory of ego death and ego transcendence,
including:

o Block-universe determinism/Fatedness, the closed
and preexisting future, tenseless time, free will as illusory, the
holographic universe, and predestination and Reformed theology.

o Cognitive science, mental construct processing, mental models,
ontological idealism, contemporary metaphysics of the continuant
self, cybernetic self-control, personal control agency, moral agency,
and self-government.

o Zen satori, short-path enlightenment, and Alan Watts;
transpersonal psychology, Ken Wilber, and integral theory.

o Entheogens and psychedelic drugs, mystery religions, mythic
metaphor and allegorical encoding, the mystic altered state, mystic
and religious experiencing, visionary states, religious rapture, and
Acid Rock mysticism.

o Loss of control, self-control seizure, cognitive instability, and
psychosis and schizophrenia.


— Michael Hoffman
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/egodeath
http://www.egodeath.com
Group: egodeath Message: 6331 From: letsrap@sbcglobal.net Date: 16/08/2013
Subject: What U-R Learning
Group: egodeath Message: 6333 From: letsrap@sbcglobal.net Date: 19/08/2013
Subject: Be Hungry For Truth
Group: egodeath Message: 6335 From: egodeath@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/09/2013
Subject: File – EgodeathGroupCharter.txt
The Egodeath Yahoo group is a Weblog sent out by Michael Hoffman,
covering the cybernetic theory of ego death and ego transcendence,
including:

o Block-universe determinism/Fatedness, the closed
and preexisting future, tenseless time, free will as illusory, the
holographic universe, and predestination and Reformed theology.

o Cognitive science, mental construct processing, mental models,
ontological idealism, contemporary metaphysics of the continuant
self, cybernetic self-control, personal control agency, moral agency,
and self-government.

o Zen satori, short-path enlightenment, and Alan Watts;
transpersonal psychology, Ken Wilber, and integral theory.

o Entheogens and psychedelic drugs, mystery religions, mythic
metaphor and allegorical encoding, the mystic altered state, mystic
and religious experiencing, visionary states, religious rapture, and
Acid Rock mysticism.

o Loss of control, self-control seizure, cognitive instability, and
psychosis and schizophrenia.


— Michael Hoffman
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/egodeath
http://www.egodeath.com
Group: egodeath Message: 6339 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/12/2013
Subject: Bk: The Psychedelic Future of the Mind (Thomas Roberts)

The Psychedelic Future of the Mind: How Entheogens Are Enhancing Cognition, Boosting Intelligence, and Raising Values
Thomas B. Roberts
http://amazon.com/o/asin/1594774595
January 2013

 

I wrote this review, below, and posted it to Amazon as soon as the book first shipped, Feb. 8, 2013.
My reviews: http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1YFCQT60M4XAJ


4 stars out of 5
It’s a start, but perpetuates limiting, incoherent assumptions

 

This book is an assortment, a compilation of pieces, including a couple chapters by other authors. This too-short book somewhat achieves its goal; it’s appropriate for an entheogen library but uncritically perpetuates fatally self-defeating fallacies. The book really needs to be better, more consistently enlightened, with a thoroughgoing critique. This book is average, conventional groupthink in too many ways, and where it breaks away, it does so insufficiently. Regarding the cognitive potentials of entheogens, it’s a start, but could be more substantial (without being longer). It’s a useful brief survey of the field, of current attitudes; that’s a relatively strong point of the book.

 

The sections on entheogen history and on psychedelics in cognitive science need to be expanded, but without the tepid compromise that limits this book. It needs to be harder-hitting; it’s not good enough to accomplish its goals. It relies too much on Stan Grof’s quirky, narrow model, his fixation on the birth-trauma metaphor.

 

It needs to go deeper on the taboo, censored huge interest and role of entheogens throughout many fields. As suggested but not emphasized enough in this book, millions of people (researchers, professors, priests, and mystics) are highly interested though censored and silent, and we get glimpses of this interest in several points in the book. Roberts doesn’t step up to the plate and in a sustained and direct way tackle this key blocking impediment, of communication censorship; he only keeps noting it, too feebly. I would expect his survey of thousands of books to point out what’s really going on, to explain why I go into the New Age bookstore and am told they have no books about psychoactive drugs in religion, when in fact, as Roberts knows, those books and sections are strewn throughout the store, separated, scattered, diluted.

 

Roberts vaguely mentions that there is much entheogen activity at websites, but his book is too retrograde to cover them seriously. The limited and self-defeating thinking (or lack of thoroughgoing consistent critical thinking) seen in these books that cite each other, shows why the future of clear thinking is driven online, where there is less hidebound and conventional thinking than in old fashioned and old conventional-thinking printed books.

 

I disagree with Roberts’ assertion in this book that entheogens should be controlled and doled-out by authorities. The law should be the same as it always was from the beginning of time until a few years ago in 1966 and Nixon’s drug schedules, which is to say, no law, other than accurate labelling and quality control, since religious freedom means freedom of traditional mystic methods which were entheogenic, as the books Roberts cites show. He should know better, for this book and from his Entheogen Chrestomathy (a collection of passages about entheogens from many books).

 

Instead, we get more crypto-Prohibition, Roberts allowing himself to be coerced by mental censorship into contradicting his own position, effort, and evidence, and training his readers to similarly sustain their uncritical key assumptions about religion, and training them how to hold self-contradictory ideas in their mind like himself, Walsh, and most of the other authors. Clark Heinrich is relatively enlightened in his book, Magic Mushrooms in Religion and Alchemy (http://amazon.com/o/asin/0892819979), elegantly tracing Amanita throughout our Western religious history. For coherent clear thinking about rights and meaningful religious freedom, see Steve Kubby The Politics of Consciousness: A Practical Guide to Personal Freedom (http://amazon.com/o/asin/189362644X).

The books Roberts cites and surveys show that Greeks and Christians used mixed wine freely, and we claim to legally have religious freedom, so against this incoherent book, we must insist we be as free in our religious banqueting parties as we were during Antiquity; we cannot settle for any lesser pseudo-freedom while claiming we have religious freedom and claiming that America is religious. Follow the Supreme Court consistently: leave the entheogen churches alone; reject Roberts’ compromising authoritarian administration of entheogens.

 

This book claims to be forward-looking rather than a historical recounting, and yet it perpetuates major fallacious assumptions about history, in a self-defeating way, by implicitly asserting a history while lacking sufficient critical examination of our Western history of entheogens. Being forward looking shouldn’t be at the expense of telling a false and self-defeating story of the past. It would be better to be silent about the past than to tell a false story of our past lacking entheogens, so you could say this book is not exclusively forward looking enough. It’s a fairly good forward-looking story combined with a bad careless habitual historical story that defeats the forward effort.

 

Roberts needs to read the books excerpts he’s gathered and put together the pieces more, on an independent basis. Like all prominent authors of entheogen books, his thinking is far too compromised and unoriginal, coerced into unconsciously shooting himself in the foot and affirming the underpinning doctrines that support the Prohibition-friendly reality-tunnel. Schultes does the same, and Roger Walsh’s article that’s a chapter of this book does the same. They ask the Prohibition-saturated question “Do drugs have religious import?” These drug policy reform leaders are preventing success by declaring defeat before they’ve begun, by framing the self-evidently obvious as if it were something that’s in doubt. Walsh titles his article self-defeatingly as a question, “are entheogens false?”

 

This book — its authors — reify habitually the uncritically adopted unspoken Prohibitionist-compliant dogma, a hazy, incoherent dogma, that scholars understand how Christian mystics throughout history accessed the intense mystic altered state, and we know that they accessed it through meditation, and we know they didn’t access it through drugs. It is unthinkable and unwriteable by Walsh and Roberts — mis-leaders of reform — to consider the question I pose: to what extent were visionary plants used by Christians throughout history? Roberts contradicts the evidence he has collected: he cites the book The Psychology of Religion by Hood et al The Psychology of Religion: An Empirical Approach (http://amazon.com/o/asin/1606233033), which states that Dan Merkur has shown in his book The Psychedelic Sacrament: Manna, Meditation, and Mystical Experience (http://amazon.com/o/asin/089281862X) that Jewish mystics used visionary plants.

 

Yet these writers continue, as firmly repeated in the present book, to put forward without any critical examination, the assertion — taken as if granted and established — that traditional Christian mysticism is distinct from the use of visionary plants. Per my Maximal Entheogen Theory of Religion, Ruck et al, cited by Roberts’ book, have demonstrated enough evidence that we must assume the opposite: every Christian mystic used visionary plants, unless proven otherwise. That’s the exact opposite of the strong tendency of all these authors. They contradict themselves. Roberts advises about the Entheogenic Reformation, and yet, he in unthinking convention, together with the other authors, robs visionary plants of their credit.

 

He gives Christianity and Christian religious experiencing, he gives credit to non-visionary plant vague ill-defined practices, contemplation practices that are assumed without any critical thinking, to be non-plant based — despite copious evidence that Merkur and Ruck and the entheogen historians have gathered, including mushrooms in art that I have routinely identified. Roberts cites books that contain that evidence, and yet he unthinkingly fails to connect, instead, he omits and shuts out visionary plants, robbing them of their due central credit throughout our religious history.

 

He contradicts himself; he compromises with the mental shackles of Prohibition unspoken dogma (the silent Reform-preventing dogma of repeating the harmfully misleading nonsensical phrase “entheogens vs. natural traditional mystic methods”), even while citing books that contradict that phrase and show it is a false dichotomy, a massive category error. Evidence citied in many of the hundreds of books Roberts surveys, indicate — when you engage your critical thinking, consistently — that the category “entheogens” is identically the same as the category “traditional mystic practice”.

 

This book purports to advocate entheogens, yet the author permits himself to be psyched-out by Prohibitionist mental shackles and the very kind of endemic, biased thought-censorship that he mildly comments on in this book. Roberts ends up advocating against entheogens in our religious history, despite the evidence (which Roberts gathers in his books and citations, pages 146-151 here, and his book An Entheogen Chrestomathy) that shows that Christian mysticism is the same thing as entheogens; that entheogens are the traditional method of accessing the intense mystic altered state. He cites Clark Heinrich, and Carl Ruck et al: The Apples of Apollo: Pagan and Christian Mysteries of the Eucharist (http://amazon.com/o/asin/089089924X).

 

Uncritically parroting repeatedly the nonsense phrase “entheogens vs. natural methods” (going directly against Jonathan Ott’s title Pharmacophilia: or The Natural Paradises [1888755016]), Roberts robs and steals from visionary plants the central credit they are due, within our own Western history. Just like almost all the other prominent, Prohibition-friendly, collaborationist, compromisers (Schultes, cited on page 148: Plants of the Gods: Their Sacred, Healing, and Hallucinogenic Powers [http://amazon.com/o/asin/0892819790]). Roberts and all authors need to weed out their self-contradicting compromises from their thinking, purify their thinking of Prohibition-friendly unstated, uncritical dogma, and start telling the true, coherent, evidence-based history, abandoning care of what the mental shackles of censorship and Prohibition dictate.

 

Walsh (chapter 5 of this book) needs to move forward and stop asking whether drugs have genuine religious import, and engage substance: how does religious experiencing come through visionary plants, as seen throughout religious history? This isn’t a matter of citing more evidence, so much as a matter of stating coherent connections, and being consistent in their thinking and handling of the evidence Roberts has gathered. The key false dichotomy of “drugs vs. traditional mystic methods” is totally entrenched in Walsh’s writing, and totally void of any thought of critical examination, despite the seemingly open-minded questioning implied in this chapter title (false advertising): “Psychedelics and Religious Experiences — What is the Relationship?”

 

Walsh’s chapter is based on a massive fallacious assumption never mentioned or examined for even a moment: that mystics didn’t use entheogens — despite the books cited by this book. Walsh’s name is given with M.D., Ph.D., and D.H.L., but he utterly fails to think about his underlying assumption, in this article supposedly about inquiring into this relationship. As Roberts writes about censorship and omission of psychedelics in Cognitive Science: “Whether this omission is due to a simple lack of information or scientists’ and scholars fear for their careers by touching a taboo topic is hard to say; it is probably some of both.”

 

Roberts and Walsh colossally fail to effectively counter and call for an end to this mental straightjacket and censorship. But at least Roberts mentions it; a glimmering of consciousness of the conditions of Prohibition begins to awaken, but we need a thousand times more, and this gentle, compliant, positive-thinking book is too mild to tackle these key blocking dynamics, resulting from Prohibition for Profit.

 

What use is Roberts’ advice on Reform when he despite his evidence persists in reifying a key Prohibitionist lie, that historical religion uses (vague, undefined) “traditional methods” that are not visionary plants? Roberts repeats that dogmatic assumption, and never stops to subjective it to critical examination. His section on entheogen history is not connected and integrated into his thinking through the rest of the book. Ralph Metzner (who is mentioned on page 70) wrote that he made a strategic mistake in the 1960s by portraying psychedelics as something new. Roberts hasn’t learned that lesson, despite decades of scholarship gathered in his Chrestomathy, such as Robert Graves’ discovery of mushrooms in Greek religion and myth in 1957.

 

That fatal mistake and persisting in robbing entheogens of their fully due credit as the source of the mystic state throughout history, continues to reign supreme even as Ruck et al pile up more and more evidence; Roberts continues omitting and shutting out entheogens from our religious history even while he dabbles incoherently in showing that the reality is the opposite. This book is futile because in the name of Reform, it falsely eliminates entheogens from our history, despite evidence the book cites. This book inadvertantly keeps telling the story of self-defeat, as the master narrative. The key to Reform involves quitting telling that 1960s Prohibition-supporting story; Roberts doesn’t have a compelling enough story without integrated that evidence throughout his thinking.

 

This book’s purpose is Reform, yet this book perpetuates a key fallacy that pushes entheogens away: Roberts tells the story, reifying and repeating it, that our religion’s history is not entheogenic. He falls short of providing complete coherent independent critical thinking. His error is deeply entrenched in this book: page 55, he mis-portrays antiquity as having merely rites and activities, as opposed to later word-based religion of 1500, and now, new, “primary religious experiencing”. This is the evolutionism fallacy: that we have entheogens now, and we are more evolved than antiquity, therefore, antiquity lacked entheogens, but had merely “rites” (presumed uncritically and inconsistently in this book as being non-entheogenic).

 

He ought to tell the more compelling true story, of returning to the non-placebo original Eucharist which inspired Christianity throughout its history, as the evidence and coherent thinking indicates. Roberts isn’t interested in looking at the copious evidence for entheogen Christianity because it contradicts his preconceived self-defeating and incoherent story of religious evolution — a false story that is encouraged by Prohibition’s censorship effect. Roberts several times in this book criticizes authors for omitting and hiding their pro-entheogen views; for example, page 122 points out that authors censor William James, like I have criticized Ken Wilber for starting with first book by omitting William James’ lead-in, “On nitrous oxide, …” (before “it occurred to me that perception is a veil; multiple states…”).

 

But Roberts needs to gain self-awareness of how he is censoring and shackling his own thinking, and thus perpetuating the mental shackles of his readers, helping to keep Prohibition in place and prevent us from perceiving the central role of entheogens in our history. He should take a lesson from his coverage of the censorship D.C.A. Hillman’s dissertation was subjected to (The Chemical Muse: Drug Use and the Roots of Western Civilization [http://amazon.com/o/asin/B00342VG0E] and ask: How is this present book also compromised and coerced into being self-censored?

 

Roberts should’ve gathered together the several points in his book, instances of censorship he points out, calling for breaking through these mental chains and start putting the pieces of evidence, the connections, together, coherently, to tell a story that makes compelling sense. I’m surprised that Roberts didn’t mention along with Hillman, Michael Rinella’s book Pharmakon: Plato, Drug Culture, and Identity in Ancient Athens (http://amazon.com/o/asin/0739146874), which was also extremely censored. Censorship is the top topic, the main restriction now, for policy reform, which is why online has taken the lead away from the hidebound, conformist press: Prohibition Press, I have named it, after I spoke with the entheogen-friendly Park Street Press about this problem at a Western Esotericism conference.

 

Roberts mentions that people around 1970 were drawn to religion by LSD, and yet, he tells the Prohibition-friendly version of the story, a false tale artificially created by a censorship filtering effect, and fails to mention that people were forced to move away from entheogens and attempt to substitute meditation and a placebo make-believe Eucharist instead, and forced to tell the entheogen-diminishing story of how religion with its entheogen removed is better — a story now entrenched as dogma, mitigating against Roberts’ Entheogenic Reformation project. (Jonathan Ott advocated that term in his book The age of entheogens & the angel’s dictionary [http://amazon.com/o/asin/0961423471].)

 

Roberts calls for $1 billion for research including “education” toward Prohibition reform, but should more emphasize abandoning the phony drug schedules and fully re-legalizing entheogens like before October 1966. Just get rid of obstructionist Prohibition. We don’t have a budget problem, we have a Prohibition problem. We don’t need a billion dollars so much as we need bona fide actual religious freedom, which means nothing if not the freedom to access ecstatic fear and trembling and awesome power that has always been the source of religion, through the traditional mystic method: the sacred meal of the Lord’s flesh, which is real food and which transmits effective grace just as has always been claimed for this the traditional method of mystic experiencing.

 

— Michael Hoffman

Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, Egodeath.com.  All Rights Reserved.

Group: egodeath Message: 6340 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 01/12/2013
Subject: Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism

A week-long Art High: This week, I got confirmation of my hypotheses of around a year ago, about branching vs. non-branching, tree vs. snake, branching antlers of a stag, in ancient Greek & in Christian mythic art. Confirmed: artists understood that mystic revelation about moral agency is a matter of moving from freewill thinking to no-free-will thinking, moving from autonomous monolithic personal control to puppet/slave/ rail-driven personal control with 2 levels or layers of control involved: the transpersonal driving layer (hidden thought source you must trust your life to) and the personal local locus of control-power (a reactive driven-gear, your forceful control-power that you exert is forcefully steered by the rail: you are forced to push in the direction that the hidden controller has pre-set you to push).

 

Diagram of Possibilism (the diagram fails to show the tree) vs. Eternalism (rigid snake worm worldline in rock/block universe): http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/spacetime-bebecome

 

Another daring hypothsis from me has been confirmed: Pre-moderns in loosecog had equivalent of multistate or altered state-based Cognitive Science, about 4-D spacetime (the Rock Universe), illusory control power (kingship, vs. puppet/slave), mental construct sequences positioned in spacetime (ivy strand with leaves; pine cone that opens its scales when dry and closes its scales when wet).

 

The art evidence emphatically and pointedly confirms my theorizing of a year ago that the man riding the donkey or horse toward the broken-branch tree trunk with snake, on sargophagii, means awareness passively being carried forward in time along your frozen rigid worldline, while the donkey or horse — a separate control-agency component of the psyche — steers your thinking, following the invisible rail(way). The donkey is the personal steering among virtual possibilitiyy branches through time. The one possibility branching path that is destined and pre-set and pre-existing is the path the steersman donkey is forced to follow, forced to choose.

The artworks convey “is personal moral control agency power a matter of possbiility branching, as you originally think and feel in the OSC, or is it non-branching, like snake/ivy/monocoursal/dragon/serpent/worm/ Eve’s long hair? ” The artworks say “You thought possibility branching, with you having that particular key kind of power: steering-control power of a kind that can manifest either branch A or B into the future. But per Peart, No One at the Bridge, in the mystic state you see you have no arms to steer, no power in the present to steer to one vs. a different future branching-path.

 

This system of art confirmation is maximally profound, exactly as powerful and reputation-boosting as the confirmation of bending of light near the sun in a complete solar eclipse some time after Einstein predicated light bending near the sun’s gravitational spacetime-curving field. Artworks directly and pointedly confirmed during the past few days, that the ego-transcendent understanding and knowledge about moral agency is a matter of repudiating Possibilism and affirming Eternalism, and trusting in your near-future worldline & hidden source of control-intentions, not battling against that.

 

Art clearly and definitely confirms my Cybernetics/Heimarmene/Entheogens/Metaphor (CHEM) explanatory model of myth & religion. The kylix (saucer-shaped shallow cup) painted by Douris completely fits with and affirms the Eden tree of knowledge. This art confirmation, though “merely confirmation” of my breakthroughs of a year ago, I report that this mere confirmation actually caused substantial link-tightening and compaction of my Theory of ego transcendence and metaphor — the *real*, relevant, central, driving force in the mystic altered state, the *real* nature of ego transcendence (as discovered in my initial, main, January 11 1988 “Crystalline Ground of Being & concomitant non-control” breakthrough). Journal of Transpersonal Psychology in 1985-1988 asserted that ego transcnedenence is spatial unity. I said no, ego transcendence is illusory control together with Eternalism (one’s future stream of control-intentions is pre-set, pre-arranged into a rigid snake shaped future-worldline).

 

The pearl of great price: The unenlightened illegitimate king sends Jason to retrieve the golden fleece. The fruit of the tree in the Garden (of Hesperides/Eden) is Transcendent Knowledge about personal control power being illusory; the fruit of the tree is understanding Cybernetics/Heimarmene/Entheogens (CHE) (including understanding how Metaphor describes Cyberneics, Heimarmene, and Entheogens/Loosecog; M->EHC). Metaphor describes entheogens causing loose cognitive binding revealing fatedness and non-control.

 

In religious myth, Metaphor describes entheogens experiencing Heimarmene & Cybernetics.

M->EHC

 

CHEM:

C – Cybernetics, personal control power; loss of control; self-control seizure, control vortex, non-control, autonomous personal control, switch from autonomous kingship to puppet/slave following hidden rail into future, unable to control which control-intentions come up in the fountain/spring/wellspring behind awareness.

H – Heimarmene; no-free-will; pre-existing near-future control-intentions; block universe; worldline; non-branching possibility tree.

E – Entheogens; loose cognitive binding state, mental model transformation.

M – Metaphor, myth, religious myth, esoteric symbol usage about C/H/E above.

 

Joseph Campbell says there’s no (single) Myth for our time. I say the equivalent of the myth-system of our future, quintessentially late-Modern or transitional to post-Modern, is my layout: an explicit non-metaphorical Core Theory plus mapping that to reliigious/mythic/esoteric metaphor, and, as far as *specific* brand-styling, we must consider STEM-style themes like:

o In the Matrix series, the Animatrix movie’s tripping android segment

o Rush songs — not Pop Sike (girl-relationship as metaphor for acid experiencing) but Tech Psych (STEM as metaphor for loosecog experiential insights)

….. The Body Electric

….. Cygnus X-1

….. Vital Signs

….. Chemistry

http://egodeath.com/rushlyrics.htm

 

(STEM means Science, Technology, Engineering, & Mathematics.  A standard acronym.)

 

In the present, late-modern or post-modern era, we won’t have a myth (in Campbell’s sense), per Campbell. My response is that we will have correct non-mythic explicit explanation of ego-transcendent knowledge & no-free-will, and, we will have correct mapping to all past mythemes/tropes and the ability to created unlimited number of themes/tropes. Metaphor-only expressions of one’s correct understanding of TK proved (historically) to have problems, so it is urgent that everyone knows the non-metaphorical Core Theory, my Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence per my 1988 first drafts and 1997 summary at Principia Cybernetica (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/egodeath/message/5870).

 

Transcendent Knowledge (Cybernetics/Heimarmene/Entheogens/Metaphor) is the forbidden fruit forbidden to the egoic mind. The fatedness snake-dragon guards the fruit of the tree of knowledge of the illusory nature of moral control culpability in light of no-free-will and the pre-givenness of all your control-thoughts. Your snake made you choose as you did; you had no meta-choice; you have pseudo-freedom, the illusion of having the kind of steering-power that can select some other possibility branching path. The heimarmene snake dragon serpent monster (this is *the* monster, forcing you to intend against your self-protection programming in such a way that your steering-power with respect to your future possibility branching is shown to be illusory impotent cybernetic control power. You are only allowed to steer how you are forced to steer.

 

The serpent guards ego-transcendent knoweldge in at least 2 ways:

 

o If you are among the Elect, the serpent makes you wrestle with and submit to & put full intimate trust in your threatening thought-source, then the serpent as gate-controller lets you pass, to get the golden fleece or eat the apple of knowledge of the illusory nature of moral agency — to get ego-transcendent knowledge. The pearl of great price held in the claw of the challenging/threatening/enlightenment-bringing dragon/monster/serpent: you must sacrifice your childish free-will thinking *and* (stabbing your heart) sacrifice your claim to have the kind of control that could prevent a fatal control-intention from arising; to stop the sea-storm shipwreck control-instability, you must pay the price, repudiate your childish animal naive initial implicit essential claim that you have possibility-branch steering control power.

 

o If you are not among the predestined, pre-existing Elect, it is impossible for you to get to the fruit, impossible for you to steer down the possibility-branching path in which you gain the elegant pearl of ego-transcendent knowledge; you are pre-destined so that you in the future are destined to not ever come to (this elegant compact explosive system of) ego-transcendent knowledge.

 

Take my hand, I’ll take you to the other side, to see the truth: the path for you is decided

— Iron Maiden, album Somewhere in Time

 

Destiny planned out … speculation of the wise

— Bob Daisley, album Diary of a Madman

 

In these artworks, also I spotted clearly the theme, across systems/brands of ego-transcendent knowledge (= no-free-will, interlinked with personal non-control (non-sovereignty)).

o Jonah being spit out by the sea serpent

o Human torso w/ serpent legs in the Gigantomachy

o Snake in Eden tree: Eve’s torso with arms, or just her face, and a serpent lower body.

o Jason in the kylix (saucer-cup for drinking mixed wine/mushroom wine) painted by Douris, ego-dead, torso coming from the guardian heimarmene-dragon/serpent.

Sometimes the serpent’s head is shown in addition to the human head. Usually the human has arms but I especially resonate with the Eden serpent that just has Eve’s face; she has no arms to steer into her future possibility-tree branches, and the serpent has no arms.

 

Invisible railways crackle with life

— Rush/Peart, Spirit of Radio

 

Printed as “airwaves”, sung as “railways” the first time, “airwaves ” the 2nd time.

 

 

Theology is too policitized, it is misleading, and you have Augustine’s winking asymmetry: God is the author of good, humans are the author of evil. God is all-powerful, all-good, and isn’t the author of evil (directly or indirectly). But the entire Theology industry knows this is self-contradiction. Gnostic-like thinking (in whatever metaphor-systems of ego-transcendence) solves that by splitting the creator god (who is responsible for layout out our evil actions in spacetime) saying the evil creator (Demiurge) *is* the author of evil, and the high God is purely good and isn’t the creator. Theology advocates confusion and waffling, leading Reformed theologians to falsely say “man’s mind can’t understand this apparent contradiction: God is all-powerful and all-good” when the truth is, it’s blatantly self-contradictory and impossible to “solve” other than by subtle or covert or dishonest meaning-shifting.

 

Art tells a simple, valuable story: no-free-will, your snake-rail controls & pre-sets your steering, your awareness can only helplessly look on as the future destined thoughts & steering-direction are revealed, and thus God is the author of evil – ‘evil’ as unethical acts and as the delusion of freewill moral culpability. The essence of the story is beautifully straightforward as communicated in art, rather than in Theology: ingest entheogen, see and experience the self-contradictions of freewill thinking & its control-thinking, and switch to no-free-will thinking including the puppet/slave relationship of personal control to time. Alex Grey has not represented the discovery of the no-free-will, consistent, beautiful, attractive, threatening model of personal control in relation to time. This is the frozen-puppet-universe perspective.

 

I was surprised that “mere” confirmation of my theory by the layered and clustered branching antler and serpent and tree and “tree’s guarded treasure”, caused some jackpot updating of my cross-linking: adding new insights and giving an *enlightening* confirmation as opposed to mere simple confirmation. Art inspired me to see things even more clearly, simply, starkly: *tree* of knowledge of good & evil; fruit of the tree; golden fleece like pearl of great costly sacrificed price — the snake is the fruit of the tree; the fruit is the product of mentally considering tree vs snake, posssibility branching vs. monocoursal linear nonbranching; Possibilism vs. Eternalism & concomitant personal control power implications.

 

Artworks’ confirmation of my snake vs tree theory, and man riding donkey/horse/panther (or snake-drawn cart), toward branchless tree with snake, caused massive adjustments to the cross-linking in my theory — not negating anything I wrote, but tightening and affirming it, such as confirming my assertion that pre-modern elites understood 4D block time, loosecog, and levels of control. 

 

That’s one example of how daring I’ve been always in my Theory: I had to make an entire set of ideas that each totally conflict with strong dogmatic assumptions. Pre-moderns were stupid, we assume, and yet, we late-moderns were the clueless ones who were incapable until me of reading the simple message encoded by Douris and the pre-modern or early-modern artists: snake vs. tree, fruit reveals no-free-will & its concomitant ramificaitons for personal control morality steering power.

 

Art’s confirmation of my theorizing about branching, of a year ago, only showed me a few truly new insights this week, yet I’m getting a huge reading: my feelings report that the ability to more and more quickly read and decipher these metaphor artworks resolving them into no-free-will, or “Cyb/Heim/Enth” concerns, I detected or “heard the jackpot sound” of linking-updating the cross-linking throughout my Theory of myth & religion. It by today has become clear and feels simple: mystic revelation shows simply no-free-will; map the athiest no-free-will books’ phrases to *esoteric* religion. 

 

Everything Sam Harris asserts in discussing no-free-will maps *directly*, consistently, to religious myth — to higher-order, esoteric religious understanding. It’s only exoteric, lower-order religion that clings to the childish sinful confused self-contradictory freewill idea which posits and includes the feeling of, being a control steering power agent, a kind of control that is precisely the impossible aspect: the power in the present of steering into more than one real possibility branching path — that is the key core central power we assume and that we iniitally take as real, forming our moral control agent identity and its supposeed moral culpability.

 

The adult must cast off both the freewill assumption and the control meta-steering power assumption, but through intense overwhelming experiencing in loosecog, not speculation based only in the tight cognitive binding state — not the model of linear time & linear domino-chain causality. With my main article in hand, and my snake vs. tree revelation of switching from Possibilism moral thinking to Eternalism thinking, It is possible now, without entering the loosecog state, to have a correct and clear 2nd-hand understanding of control seizure and revelation of this specific kind of non-control, and changelessness of your near-future sequence of control-thoughts or control-intentions.

 

Joseph Campbell and Ken Wilber are not wrong so much as grossly massively incomplete. When the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence a la my first mid-1988 article drafts is inserted into Wilber’s system or Campbell’s, their systems are overwhelmed and totally dominated by my system, which is CTET/TK/Egodeath theory / the CHEM (M->E->H&C) model of ego transcendence & religious myth & esotericism-based tropes such as narrow escape in ancient novels.

 

My Egodeath (CHEM or M->EHC) theory:

M->E->H&C

Metaphor describes Enthoegens for experiencing Heimarmene & Cybernetics limits/vulnerability (“noncontrol”).

Cybernetics is the biggest most soul-shattering topic, Metaphor is the least, so imagine each letter font size from small to big: meHC, or CHem.

When I say “Entheogens” as 1 of 4 key topics, ‘Entheogens’ is a condensed term meaning & emphasizing loosecog — that is, loose cognitive association binding of (as worded per my crucial April 1987 thinking-style change) DMCRMs: dynamic mental-construct relationship matrixes — MCs (mental constructs), for short. This is an example of how I have deciphered metaphors describing what’s revealed in loosecog, and have engineered a language that is optimized for discussing efficiently ego-transcendent knowledge.

 

I feel guilty for only really speaking 1 language (English), but to redeem myself, I have fully cracked the mystery encryption code to fully explain what is actually essential in religious myth, and I have formed and shared a highly efficient language to discuss ego-transcendent knowledge. Each brick component of my theory I have customized, modified, and optimized; I have contributed “bricks” in many fields but the value of those bricks is superior because my bricks fit together successfully across fields. identifying analogies others that other investigators didn’t recognize. 20th Century research in myth & religion uses English, French, German, Greek, & Latin, but those are equivalently clueless and really only amount to 1 language. I provide the other language, that of the CHEM model I have created and discovered, rediscovering the essence but putting forth the first efficient systematic useful practical omni-powerful model that explicitly gives the solution to all the mysteries that matter.

 

I deciphered Moses’ seeing the burning bush = the subjectively moving present, seeing illusory unreal virtual possibility branching, like a hanging rope/fuse, with a smalll, localized flame climing up. A possibility branching bush with only the pre-existing branching-path being real; the other possibilities are virtual-only possibilities; they are impossible because not fated; those other, illusory branches are the branches which do not match what is happening in your worldline in your future.

 

Professors who lack my Egodeath theory are clueless and need to know that my theory will accellerate their work ideally and provide the ideal perfect solutions.

 

Researchers of Western ancient religion are doing a reset now, revisiting more carefully their assumptions, shaking off the horrible and confused Christian apologist historians — the equivalent of my desecrating and p*ss*ng on the pathetic worthless books around 1994. Previous books are as much misleading as informative. The field is saying “quit believing the biased presupmtions, the shared wrong assumptions. We must mind our assumptions! We couldn’t understand puzzles in religion, because our assumptions were wrong and careless. We must be careful this time in our foundational assumptions and be ready to change our assumptions.

 

In 2006 when I wrote the main article defining the CHEM model, the Jesus Myth hypothesis was beyond the pale, taboo, and no one heard of it. Now no-Jesus has become mainstream *on the internet* but not in the “real world” (the Establishment media & print-based press), and thank God for the Web, where real people can challenge the confusion of the Establishment position and its slave-scholars it employs and deploys such as the malarkey assumption-laden phrase “entheogens vs. traditional mystic methods”.

 

Back in the print days, the Establishment had a monopololy and effective censorship (of professors and of real people); they could get away with ignoring and dismissing challenges. Now, thank God, real people (critically thinking individuals) are calling the Establishment-collaborationist academics on their nonsense. It’s a war over defining reality: print vs. online, falsity vs truth, Establishement professors with mental shackles (they want you to wear shackles too) vs. actual free thinkers, who follow the evidence and reason, not politiicized status quo dogma and policed boundaries of what views are permited to be considered. If you are an academic, to write truth, you must post online in an area not controlled by the Establishment paradigm-police.

 

In 2006, my theory was far beyond the pale, far outside where academics are permitted to comment and write and think:

o No Jesus/Paul/apostles. That was way taboo but now has become a hot topic online, with real thinkers, un-cowed, shamelessly and brazenly challenging the clueless and self-contradicting Establishment academics.

o No free will. That was way taboo but now has become a hot topic online.

o Reformed theology: was shocking to Evangelicals, was way taboo but now has become a hot topic among thinking Christian young guys who move from perfectly clueless high school Christian groups to college and — a few years after me — discovered Reformed Theology.

o Entheogens: officially this is beyond the pale and unthinkable. But recently this has become a hot topic.

o God is the ultimate author of evil.

o You have no power to steer your future or make your future be anything other than the 1 path that always already exists in your future. You merely implement and discover your steering-direction; you cannot choose which path you will steer into.

 

No-free-will was a serious liability for the Egodeath theory in 2001 (my mythic metaphor deciphering breakthrough year), but suddenly has flipped to be a benefit, a genius insight and commendment for the Theory.

 

Ahistoricity of Jesus/Paul was a serious liability for the Egodeath theory in 2001, but suddenly has flipped to be a benefit, a genius insight and commendment for the Theory.

 

Same w/ entheogens.

 

o  Professors who don’t have my perfect omni-successful key theory are clueless.

o  Professors who have my perfect omni-successful key theory agree with it, but are censored — but they still need to use my Theory fully in their thinking, and (in the ways that these slaves are permitted by their masters) in their writing.

o  Students who don’t have my Theory are cluesss.

o  Students who have my Theory agree with it, but are censored by their Establishment-complicit professors and advisors — they need to use my Theory fully in their thinking, and write as they can get away with.

 

There is no problem of “people who disagree with the Theory”. It’s not possible to understand the Theory and disagree with it, because the Theory works, perfectly and extremely well and no other Theory works at all. The problem is either people don’t have the Theory, or, they have it and therefore agree with it (to understand it is to agree with it) but they are aggressively censored by the Establishment commitments: commitment to historical Jesus/Paul, commitment to generally literalist reading of pre-modern evidence, commitment to underestimating the intelligence (per the Evolutionism ideology) of pre-moderns, commitment to assuming pre-moderns were in the OSC only, commitment to non-entheogenic methods of mysticism throughout *our* culture’s history — white Western European history. Bunk unexamined assumptions a la Schultes’ Golden Book on Psychedelics: if a culture has writing, it doesn’t have entheogens; only if a culture lacks writing, it might have entheogens.

 

My Theory is perfectly cohernet & simple & successful (massive explanatory power & scope), there’s no other theory. The fields need my theory; it is painful to watch authors fail without the Theory. At this point, writers in the fields of myth, religion, psychology, cognitive science, time, entheogens, and agency, just need to discover that my Theory exists and perfectly explains every essential aspect and puzzle in the field. If only they *knew* my theory, they would hasten to leverage it; it is the solution they are in need of. It’s not a matter of some agree and some disagree; it’s a matter of some have this Theory, some lack this Theory. To know the Theory is to agree with it and recognize the genius of it: so butt-simple, so earth-shattering of all we thought we knew, so totally broad and deep in explantory power. Will the lecture audience agree with it?

 

That’s off-base: the lecture audience will be shattered, stunned, I have destroyed the world. Don’t bother thinking about the Establishment, because my Theory changes everything: Armageddon, the end of the world as Academia mis-knew it. Now we will need to instruct young adults in high school & college in sacrificing their childish freewill thinking. Not for the educating State to advocate a particular religion; more like, the State needs to teach (in place of “drug education”) what mental control dynamics result from loose cognition, and how these dynamics have been connected with no-free-will. The State can’t push a particular religion, nor illegalize a particular religion. What is religion? Original, source, higher, esoteric religion is the use of visionary plants to induce loose cognitive binding, to explore personal control power and no-free-will. Religion is the use of loosecog to change from freewill thinking to no-free-will thinking.

 

Should the State, in Education, teach the use of loosecog to change from freewill thinking to no-free-will thinking? That’s not laws pushing one religion or forbidding one religion; it would be educating people in religious cognitive structure transformation. The State should make available to people, in Education, the option of understanding religion in terms of CHEM (Cybernetics, Heimarmene, Entheogens, Metaphor), as a theory/hypothesis, as an alternative to literalist interpretation that’s done only because of ignorance of the CHEM option.

 

— Michael Hoffman, December 1, 2013

Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, Egodeath.com. All Rights Reserved.  Based on original research & idea development since 1985.

Group: egodeath Message: 6341 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Re: Caduceus: mycopercep shows sep ctrl-lev relations/harmony
The coupled-snakes model of fate-locked personal control power:

One’s thought-source is fated, and one’s stream of local control thoughts is fated, so there are two distinct fated snakes that are coupled.

o Your personal local locus of control power is female (helplessly injected with thoughts)

o Your hidden thought-source, which is overwhelmingly powerful like a puppetmaster in relation to your local locus of persona control (and is therefore male).

Both locii of control (personal & transpersonal; “female” and “male”) are governed in frozen time by fatedness (Heimarmene).

You a “female” helpless passive gear-driven puppet have no power to deviate from what your male hidden thought-source forces you to do & steer toward. The “male” hidden thought source — specifically your own transpersonal self involved specifically in *your life* — is also pre-set by fatedness.

The pole, staff, or spear is {the directionality and forceful passage of time}. Time or your near-future potentially fatal control-thought is impossible to steer away from or slow down. This is more specific, technically useful, generally useful, direct, and literal than “The vertical line in mythic art is the world axis on which you climb to the stationary constellation”).

 

— Michael Hoffman, December 1, 2013

Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, Egodeath.com. All Rights Reserved. Based on original research & idea development since 1985.

 

—In egodeath@yahoogroups.com, <mike@…> wrote:

“Kundalini energy” is true, but is not sufficiently useful as a method or explanatory framework. “Truth and revelation is energy.” Ok, but “the snake and spine is spiritual energy” falls short of a useful explanation.
Group: egodeath Message: 6342 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Re: Cancellation of the will

The coupled-snakes model of fate-locked personal control power

 

One’s thought-source is fated, and one’s stream of local control thoughts is fated, so there are two distinct fated snakes that are coupled.

o Your personal local locus of control power is female (helplessly injected with thoughts)

o Your hidden thought-source, which is overwhelmingly powerful like a puppetmaster in relation to your local locus of persona control (and is therefore male).

 

Both locii of control (personal & transpersonal; “female” and “male”) are governed in frozen time by fatedness (Heimarmene).

 

You a “female” helpless passive gear-driven puppet have no power to deviate from what your male hidden thought-source forces you to do & steer toward. The “male” hidden thought source — specifically your own transpersonal self involved specifically in *your life* — is also pre-set by fatedness.

 

The pole, staff, or spear is {the directionality and forceful passage of time}. Time or your near-future potentially fatal control-thought is impossible to steer away from or slow down. This is more specific, technically useful, generally useful, direct, and literal than “The vertical line in mythic art is the world axis on which you climb to the stationary constellation”).

 

A person is a puppet locked in time (future as well as past). If the person is among the elect, that means that the person will be forced to ingest the entheogen and experience no-free-will & non-control over which possibility-branching path the person steers into in the immediate future. All thoughts are forced. The mind of the elect person knows that all thoughts are forced into their mind. Theology is about consistent waffling, consistent inconsistency, principled self-contradiction, calculated illogic. Theology is concerned about controlling the masses of exoteric tithe’ers, so Theology won’t admit simple no-free-will & puppethood & moral non-culpability. Theology is to con the masses.

 

Luther got close to simple consistent no-free-will, and close to coherent honest coverage of the real entheogenic Eucharist, but I perceive social-control politics pushing him away from simple honest clarity, into waffling and muddying and backpedalling. What Luther or Augustine believes, vs. how Luther or Augustine spins it and self-censors. Admitting the plain straightforward no-free-will position was not politically acceptable, so Theology as a project of obfuscation ensued. Every time a Reformed theologian gets close to stating CHEM (Cybernetics, Heimarmene, & Entheogens as the referent of Metaphor), he self-censors and backpedals (or, is censored and killed – like pro-Entheogen academics are censored and demoted).

 

In the bunk world of officially condoned ideas now (prior to my CHEM revolution), there’s no hope for organized Establishment authorities such as fabricate official Establishment Theology.

 

Several dynamics occur; any analysis of a part of the Theory or a part of “loss of control” requires typically several dynamics to be discussed; it’s not enough to do one single simple train of reasoning.

 

Isis made Apuleius get initiated, made him ingest the sacred meal (mushroom wine), made him struggle against the hidden thought-source, made him see the futility of struggling against this thought-source he is helplessly subjected to, made him see that his only option is to submit to his hidden thought-source intimately marrying it and recognizing it as his other uncontrollable distinct half.

 

Isis makes you ingest the entheogen. Isis makes you struggle and battle against your untrustworthy alien thought-source. Isis makes you realize that you must end up either steering toward chaos, illogic, insanity, system-chaos and control instability, or steering toward submissive trust in your hidden thought-source.

 

Which will you choose? If Isis is merciful, you will think “I shall have mercy on myself and quit kicking against the pricks (of stirrups); I have completed testing/battling about my control power and thought-source.” It may be that any mind that sees “I must submit, ecstatically bow to receive divine mercy, and trust this Mystery thought-source that my life depends on — or else, I reject sanity and coherence and choose insanity and cybernetic chaos and perpetual battling against my own thought-source component of my personal control power.”

 

Trusting and submitting brings life, civilization, rules for a viable city/culture, foundation of a truth-realizing society. Choosing to not trust the hidden thought-source leads to non-viability, “death”, continued battle, continued struggle. Once you comprehend and experience the two options clearly, there’s relief because there’s no reason or justification for sticking to the freewill personal power thinking. In a completely unchained state, the mind has no reason to choose life and continued existence, over death, mayhem, chaos, insanity; there’s no reason for steering toward submitting & viable continued life per Abraham’s descendents. The mind is forcefully brought to a choice between {chaos and retaining the freewill power claim or stance} vs. {order, enlightened viable civilization, submitting, formally repudiating your childish/animalistic no-free-will thinking. These are what the two choices are, in terms of cybernetics rather than religious terminology.

 

So the decision or choice in question is this one; this choice when it is presented in its full mature form is clear. We *can* debate over how that choice is made (free or forced). But first we must (in this discussion) clearly accurately understand what the 2 choices *are*, why those are the two choices.

 

There is only one logic-conformant, coherent option: submit and trust the hidden thought-source, affirm esoteric religion, and go on to survive the Holy Encounter with the Transcendent Control-Limit, and live and prosper. The only other choice is plainly not logic-conformant, and in practice, people take this option (they are forced to take this option) when they fear loss-of-control and they fear insanity. Such retreat has the advantage of protecting and preserving egoic control stability and delusion, but the disadvantage of avoiding understanding & making peace with (integrating) no-free-will.

 

Per classic Ken Wilber: eventually the dissonance and discomfort, or torment, of still not having transcendent knowledge though you can smell it so close within attainment, eventually you fear the control-loss chaos serpent monster less than you hate lacking enlightment. Eventually you want enlightenment bad enough to interrogate The Monster (fated loss-of-control) and find how to keep your egoic control intact enough for control stability, while repudiating the specific child-like or demonic beast-like (animal-like) notion of personal freewill power.

 

Logically, there’s no way to choose between the two responses in the peak mystic-state window (ecstatic peak, amazement, trembling, psychotomimetic, terrifyingly ready to do anything, fully open-minded):

 

A. Submitting to no-free-will, and immediately gaining control-stability, the sea-storm cybernetic instability threat vanishes, instantly calm and stable.

 

B. Rejecting what Reason showed you and instead obstinately and foolishly adhering to personal freewill power after it has been proved as impotent and unstable. Insanity, hard to visualize: how could you act-out “I’m out of control”, if you have such precise understanding of what the issue or choice is? The option, here, really, seems to amount to literal insanity, a scrambled and broken mind. But typically, no one chooses this option who understands this option. Typically, choosing this option is a matter of mis-understanding the two options, and running away for egoic self-preservation (or to slow down and return to the Peak loosecog state later).

 

Given a person who clearly understands what the two options are, the person will choose what they are fated to choose. Everyone who is fated to choose continued viable life as a control-agent is fated to submit. Everyone who is fated to reject no-free-will and refuse to submit to their hidden thought-source, either returns to the egoic worldmodel of delusion, or, they become insane — breaking down, as described in the sense of early Ken Wilber. Especially now that this Theory is available, it’s normal to retreat in fear, fearing insanity, returning to stability of control by returning to egoic delusion. Really, B splits into B and C:

 

B. Understand the requirement of trusting no-free-will & thot-source, but reject no-free-will. That’s the bad-choice option per Theology, as held up by Theology, but no one takes this choice-branch.

 

C. Not understanding the requirement of trusting no-free-will & thot-source, and running away in fear to protect self-control stability. This is the option that the Elect takes in the first initiations, and eventually rejects when their understanding is purified enough, after they have burned away mental error by exposing it to loosecog and no-free-will sufficiently. We burn away delusion in our struggle against the alient controller in our Hellish battle series, and then instead, when reconciled and we win *and* lose the battle in the right sense, and we understand and trust and heal our animal sickness of the mind that threw us into dissonance and self-battle, we bathe in the light of Heaven. The situation that produced hellish panic and self-battling (fire of Hell), now becomes the situation that produces relief and integrity, security, calm, self-integrity, a spiritual marriage-harmony (the supernal light of Heaven).

 

Those choice-options are like my Theory reception under the conditions of Prohibition & false Historicity/literalism of Jesus/Paul & modern crude conceptions of “determinism” as linear domino causal-chain: A scary option is that people will understand my Theory and reject it. That’s not happening, and not likely to happen.

 

Anyone who understands my Theory affirms it.

Anyone who rejects my Theory doesn’t understand the Theory.

Anyone who understands my Theory and rejects it… is an empty set, because understanding the Theory inherently contradicts rejecting the Theory.

 

Anyone who understands the Creator’s power over our thoughts & control-intentions affirms that power.

Anyone who rejects Creator’s power over one’s thoughts doesn’t understand control-power.

Anyone who understands Creator’s offer of harmony/salvation/system-coherence and rejects it… is an empty set, because understanding the power-relation of local control-thoughts vs. hidden thought-source inherently contradicts rejecting that understanding of power.

 

‘Creator’ or ‘God’ here refers to that which controls what thoughts arise in your wellspring in your mind’s fate-embedded rock-cave. ‘God’ refers to the hidden source of thoughts. Your hidden male portion, the thot-injector part of you, your personal fraction of God-identity is, the aspect of God which is the hidden source of *your* thoughts & intentions, as distinct from someone else’s thoughts & intentions.

 

Anyone who understands God’s and the Holy Spirit’s overwhelming power over your local personal control-power, accepts no-free-will & accepts the non-autonomy of personal control. The person received Understanding/Grace. The elect puppet is initially frightened away, but is fated to eventually choose A and be saved because of the puppetmaster made the puppet clearly understand the choices. The problem of “understanding TK but rejecting it” doesn’t actually exist, though Theology falsely makes it sound like the non-confused person (sinner, apostate) understands God’s power (or HS’s power) and rejects it.

 

— Michael Hoffman, December 1, 2013

Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, Egodeath.com. All Rights Reserved. Based on original research & idea development since 1985.

Group: egodeath Message: 6343 From: egodeath Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Re: Cancellation of the will

Correction (removed “no-“):

 

The mind is forcefully brought to a choice between {chaos and retaining the freewill power claim or stance} vs. {order, enlightened viable civilization, submitting, formally repudiating your childish/animalistic free-will thinking.



—In egodeath@yahoogroups.com, <egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

The coupled-snakes model of fate-locked personal control power

 

One’s thought-source is fated, and one’s stream of local control thoughts is fated, so there are two distinct fated snakes that are coupled.

o Your personal local locus of control power is female (helplessly injected with thoughts)

o Your hidden thought-source, which is overwhelmingly powerful like a puppetmaster in relation to your local locus of persona control (and is therefore male).

 

Both locii of control (personal & transpersonal; “female” and “male”) are governed in frozen time by fatedness (Heimarmene).

 

You a “female” helpless passive gear-driven puppet have no power to deviate from what your male hidden thought-source forces you to do & steer toward. The “male” hidden thought source — specifically your own transpersonal self involved specifically in *your life* — is also pre-set by fatedness.

 

The pole, staff, or spear is {the directionality and forceful passage of time}. Time or your near-future potentially fatal control-thought is impossible to steer away from or slow down. This is more specific, technically useful, generally useful, direct, and literal than “The vertical line in mythic art is the world axis on which you climb to the stationary constellation”).

 

A person is a puppet locked in time (future as well as past). If the person is among the elect, that means that the person will be forced to ingest the entheogen and experience no-free-will & non-control over which possibility-branching path the person steers into in the immediate future. All thoughts are forced. The mind of the elect person knows that all thoughts are forced into their mind. Theology is about consistent waffling, consistent inconsistency, principled self-contradiction, calculated illogic. Theology is concerned about controlling the masses of exoteric tithe’ers, so Theology won’t admit simple no-free-will & puppethood & moral non-culpability. Theology is to con the masses.

 

Luther got close to simple consistent no-free-will, and close to coherent honest coverage of the real entheogenic Eucharist, but I perceive social-control politics pushing him away from simple honest clarity, into waffling and muddying and backpedalling. What Luther or Augustine believes, vs. how Luther or Augustine spins it and self-censors. Admitting the plain straightforward no-free-will position was not politically acceptable, so Theology as a project of obfuscation ensued. Every time a Reformed theologian gets close to stating CHEM (Cybernetics, Heimarmene, & Entheogens as the referent of Metaphor), he self-censors and backpedals (or, is censored and killed – like pro-Entheogen academics are censored and demoted).

 

In the bunk world of officially condoned ideas now (prior to my CHEM revolution), there’s no hope for organized Establishment authorities such as fabricate official Establishment Theology.

 

Several dynamics occur; any analysis of a part of the Theory or a part of “loss of control” requires typically several dynamics to be discussed; it’s not enough to do one single simple train of reasoning.

 

Isis made Apuleius get initiated, made him ingest the sacred meal (mushroom wine), made him struggle against the hidden thought-source, made him see the futility of struggling against this thought-source he is helplessly subjected to, made him see that his only option is to submit to his hidden thought-source intimately marrying it and recognizing it as his other uncontrollable distinct half.

 

Isis makes you ingest the entheogen. Isis makes you struggle and battle against your untrustworthy alien thought-source. Isis makes you realize that you must end up either steering toward chaos, illogic, insanity, system-chaos and control instability, or steering toward submissive trust in your hidden thought-source.

 

Which will you choose? If Isis is merciful, you will think “I shall have mercy on myself and quit kicking against the pricks (of stirrups); I have completed testing/battling about my control power and thought-source.” It may be that any mind that sees “I must submit, ecstatically bow to receive divine mercy, and trust this Mystery thought-source that my life depends on — or else, I reject sanity and coherence and choose insanity and cybernetic chaos and perpetual battling against my own thought-source component of my personal control power.”

 

Trusting and submitting brings life, civilization, rules for a viable city/culture, foundation of a truth-realizing society. Choosing to not trust the hidden thought-source leads to non-viability, “death”, continued battle, continued struggle. Once you comprehend and experience the two options clearly, there’s relief because there’s no reason or justification for sticking to the freewill personal power thinking. In a completely unchained state, the mind has no reason to choose life and continued existence, over death, mayhem, chaos, insanity; there’s no reason for steering toward submitting & viable continued life per Abraham’s descendents. The mind is forcefully brought to a choice between {chaos and retaining the freewill power claim or stance} vs. {order, enlightened viable civilization, submitting, formally repudiating your childish/animalistic no-free-will thinking. These are what the two choices are, in terms of cybernetics rather than religious terminology.

 

So the decision or choice in question is this one; this choice when it is presented in its full mature form is clear. We *can* debate over how that choice is made (free or forced). But first we must (in this discussion) clearly accurately understand what the 2 choices *are*, why those are the two choices.

 

There is only one logic-conformant, coherent option: submit and trust the hidden thought-source, affirm esoteric religion, and go on to survive the Holy Encounter with the Transcendent Control-Limit, and live and prosper. The only other choice is plainly not logic-conformant, and in practice, people take this option (they are forced to take this option) when they fear loss-of-control and they fear insanity. Such retreat has the advantage of protecting and preserving egoic control stability and delusion, but the disadvantage of avoiding understanding & making peace with (integrating) no-free-will.

 

Per classic Ken Wilber: eventually the dissonance and discomfort, or torment, of still not having transcendent knowledge though you can smell it so close within attainment, eventually you fear the control-loss chaos serpent monster less than you hate lacking enlightment. Eventually you want enlightenment bad enough to interrogate The Monster (fated loss-of-control) and find how to keep your egoic control intact enough for control stability, while repudiating the specific child-like or demonic beast-like (animal-like) notion of personal freewill power.

 

Logically, there’s no way to choose between the two responses in the peak mystic-state window (ecstatic peak, amazement, trembling, psychotomimetic, terrifyingly ready to do anything, fully open-minded):

 

A. Submitting to no-free-will, and immediately gaining control-stability, the sea-storm cybernetic instability threat vanishes, instantly calm and stable.

 

B. Rejecting what Reason showed you and instead obstinately and foolishly adhering to personal freewill power after it has been proved as impotent and unstable. Insanity, hard to visualize: how could you act-out “I’m out of control”, if you have such precise understanding of what the issue or choice is? The option, here, really, seems to amount to literal insanity, a scrambled and broken mind. But typically, no one chooses this option who understands this option. Typically, choosing this option is a matter of mis-understanding the two options, and running away for egoic self-preservation (or to slow down and return to the Peak loosecog state later).

 

Given a person who clearly understands what the two options are, the person will choose what they are fated to choose. Everyone who is fated to choose continued viable life as a control-agent is fated to submit. Everyone who is fated to reject no-free-will and refuse to submit to their hidden thought-source, either returns to the egoic worldmodel of delusion, or, they become insane — breaking down, as described in the sense of early Ken Wilber. Especially now that this Theory is available, it’s normal to retreat in fear, fearing insanity, returning to stability of control by returning to egoic delusion. Really, B splits into B and C:

 

B. Understand the requirement of trusting no-free-will & thot-source, but reject no-free-will. That’s the bad-choice option per Theology, as held up by Theology, but no one takes this choice-branch.

 

C. Not understanding the requirement of trusting no-free-will & thot-source, and running away in fear to protect self-control stability. This is the option that the Elect takes in the first initiations, and eventually rejects when their understanding is purified enough, after they have burned away mental error by exposing it to loosecog and no-free-will sufficiently. We burn away delusion in our struggle against the alient controller in our Hellish battle series, and then instead, when reconciled and we win *and* lose the battle in the right sense, and we understand and trust and heal our animal sickness of the mind that threw us into dissonance and self-battle, we bathe in the light of Heaven. The situation that produced hellish panic and self-battling (fire of Hell), now becomes the situation that produces relief and integrity, security, calm, self-integrity, a spiritual marriage-harmony (the supernal light of Heaven).

 

Those choice-options are like my Theory reception under the conditions of Prohibition & false Historicity/literalism of Jesus/Paul & modern crude conceptions of “determinism” as linear domino causal-chain: A scary option is that people will understand my Theory and reject it. That’s not happening, and not likely to happen.

 

Anyone who understands my Theory affirms it.

Anyone who rejects my Theory doesn’t understand the Theory.

Anyone who understands my Theory and rejects it… is an empty set, because understanding the Theory inherently contradicts rejecting the Theory.

 

Anyone who understands the Creator’s power over our thoughts & control-intentions affirms that power.

Anyone who rejects Creator’s power over one’s thoughts doesn’t understand control-power.

Anyone who understands Creator’s offer of harmony/salvation/system-coherence and rejects it… is an empty set, because understanding the power-relation of local control-thoughts vs. hidden thought-source inherently contradicts rejecting that understanding of power.

 

‘Creator’ or ‘God’ here refers to that which controls what thoughts arise in your wellspring in your mind’s fate-embedded rock-cave. ‘God’ refers to the hidden source of thoughts. Your hidden male portion, the thot-injector part of you, your personal fraction of God-identity is, the aspect of God which is the hidden source of *your* thoughts & intentions, as distinct from someone else’s thoughts & intentions.

 

Anyone who understands God’s and the Holy Spirit’s overwhelming power over your local personal control-power, accepts no-free-will & accepts the non-autonomy of personal control. The person received Understanding/Grace. The elect puppet is initially frightened away, but is fated to eventually choose A and be saved because of the puppetmaster made the puppet clearly understand the choices. The problem of “understanding TK but rejecting it” doesn’t actually exist, though Theology falsely makes it sound like the non-confused person (sinner, apostate) understands God’s power (or HS’s power) and rejects it.

 

— Michael Hoffman, December 1, 2013

Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, Egodeath.com. All Rights Reserved. Based on original research & idea development since 1985.

Group: egodeath Message: 6344 From: egodeath Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Re: Paul’s road conversion = Balaam’s donkey conversion

When you set out to get the golden fleece (sending the young upstart throne-claimant Jason) or send the seer Balaam to curse the Israelites, you are the evil godless deluded king.  King = egoic autonomy-claim: “I have the power to steer into this future possibility branch or this other possibility branch.  It’s up to me, that type of power is in my control.”  King Pentheus, King Ego; King Multi-Steerer in the possibility branching tree (the Possibilism model of time *and personal control*).

 

Balaam rides donkey.

Jesus rides donkey entering the city.

Paul rides horse on the road.

Man rides donkey toward broken-off-branches tree trunk, with snake on tree trunk (common art theme on a sarcophagus (a rock/stone coffin)).

 

I need to review all insights since the main article in 2007, and see if there are any other big breakthroughs besides the Eden tree/snake as Philosophy of Time in the Philosophy department, repudiating Possibilism for Eternalism (in the intense loose cognitive binding state, with fireworks).  However, those fireworks are mitigated or moderated — or amplified — by my core Theory (the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence), along with the CHEM model of religious myth (& pre-modern literature & arts). 

 

CHEM:

Cyb/Heim/Enth/Mtph

Cybernetics/Heimarmene/Entheogens/Metaphor

 

Must-read posts; or, important powerful useful touchstone ideas I’ve kept appreciating:

 

Idea/post 1.

My description of a 4-quadrant diagram, ~Feb. 2013 posting:

We change from a mental model of

[upper left:] Autonomy (King) steering in a

[lower left:] possibility-branching tree (Tree; bush; reinforced by motif of Antlers behind & plant-branch in front of Eve’s branching legs — a phallus in contrast is non-branching, snake-shaped; worldline-isomorphic.)

to a mental model of

[upper right] puppet/slave

caught motionlessly in

[lower right] a worldline-tube (of subjective experiences including control-intention thoughts) frozen into the changeless rock universe (Eternalism; Rock motif, snake/serpent/worm)

 

2. Idea/post (~Feb 2013): listing of all objects and their mapping to CHEM (cybernetics, heimarmene, entheogens):

rock

tree

snake

king

cup

well, spring, fountainhead

A hugely important post, the most useful.  The concrete bottom-line key to all reading of non-modern cultural products.

 

3. idea/post ~Feb 2013:

tree vs snake means the Possibilism vs. the Eternalism models of time (Stanford Philosophy page) — ***HUGE*** breakthrough.  10 on a 10 scale.  A *beautiful* capstone.  A post-Article discovery/breakthrough.  This week, confirmed in art.  *Widespread* ramifications.

 

— Michael Hoffman, December 1, 2013

Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, Egodeath.com. All Rights Reserved. Based on original research & idea development since 1985.

 

—In egodeath@yahoogroups.com, <mike@…> wrote:

The Many Faces of Biblical Humor
David Peters
http://amazon.com/o/asin/0761839585

http://news.wustl.edu/news/Pages/13252.aspx
Book review by Tony Fitzpatrick: excerpt condensed by Michael Hoffman

“Peters’ favorite story is Balaam and the Talking Donkey. Someone [the bad king, against Israel] calls on Balaam to prophesy against the children of Israel and Moses for coming out of Egypt. God tells Balaam not to go, but he’s offered a lot of money, so he goes anyway. On the road, the donkey that he’s riding sees an angel of God with a sword [angel of death, you must die ego death to get past the flaming fire gateway, burning off your moral transient failable destructible volatile self-concept; egoic thinking can only last until the mind is exposed to loosecog, then the illusion collapses and can never be taken for reality again -mh], and the donkey stops.”

“Balaam can’t see the angel, and he beats the donkey. Farther down the road, the donkey sees the angel again and stops between two walls, crushing Balaam’s foot. There is no way getting around the angel [pre-set worldline -mh], so the donkey lies down. God enables the donkey to talk: `What did I do to make you beat me these three times? Have I ever done anything like this before?’ God enables Balaam to see the angel, and the donkey says `If I were you, I’d take better stock of the situation.’ When Balaam sees the situation for what it is, he faints.”

Balaam faints (control seizure).
His foot is crushed (the foundation of what he depends on for control-power collapses). See my posts on leg, foot, sitting, carried, riding.

— Michael Hoffman, January 14, 2013, based on theory work since 1985
Group: egodeath Message: 6345 From: egodeath Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Re: Control-loss, panic, urgency; Psychedelic Cog Sci security/safet

According to the end of the New Testament, Cognitive Scientists *will* be able to use loosecog safely, able to enter and leave at will without being killed by God.  These are the cognitive scientists who know the youthful folly of trying to battle against your own thought-source.

 

Cognitive Scientists who don’t understand Cybernetics and Heimarmene, enter a furnace of instruction / futile battle.  Entheogens are dangerous for them, in that way.  Entheogens are not dangerous for those who understand the folly of not trusting your thought-source.  Are you inclined to test and probe whether you are vulnerable?  Then to that extent, your testing will put you in danger.  After you have done the testing, you can  dabble in relative safety.  Are entheogens dangerous?  Yes, but if you understand praying and understand the self-control battle, The Battle, entheogens become as safe as the garden in the end of the Bible; the Bible says so.  Authentic Jewish mystics emphasize fear, trembling, danger (of self-control instability), rightly.  But to the man who is humble *on this point*, not proud, having no hubris *on this point*, is safe because such man is not, when in danger, going to say “throw more egoic-control power at the Heimarmene-monster!”  He is too wise to provoke danger by brandishing his freewill weapon against the Heimarmene monster. 

 

I am a wise man; by definition, I already possess the fruit of the possibility branching tree; I already have Transcendent Knowledge, paid for by sacrificing my freewill child-thinking.  I have already fastened my child-self to the Tree to pay the Gods; I am hardly able to challenge and threaten the dominion of the Gods or Fate.  I am their no-free-will puppet, as far as this particular point, about the nature of personal control power in relation to my role as steersman (now I am a divinely approved steersman) steering among future possibility-branches, all but one of which are illusory, virtual-only possibilities.

 

Copyright (C) 2013, Michael Hoffman, Egodeath.com. All Rights Reserved.



—In egodeath@yahoogroups.com, <mike@…> wrote:

In loose cognition, the transpersonal region of the mind has broken out and managed to escape the domain of innate, animal-like egoic restraints and constraints on thinking. Accessing a new mode of the mind brings, exposes, and reveals new needs per Maslow’s hierarchy, in order to have viable, sustainable stability of personal (or now, trans-personal) control. A new kind of trust in one’s beyond-control, transcendent mind is required: a transcendent, baseless trust.

The first mental dynamic phenomenon that is liable to occur when passing through the barrier from egoic to transpersonal thinking is the control panic seizure vortex, which has positive feedback like a magnet, escalating to a battle of self-testing: the mind’s egoic personal control system tests its ability to resist the now unconstrained thoughts which are experienced as uncontrollable in several distinct ways.


Can Psychedelic Cognitive Scientists be confident and serenely at peace as they take 500 micrograms of LSD and explore various topics while in loosecog? Cognitive Scientists have assurance that they are immune to a serious panic and control seizure, after they have experienced such escalation and studied the Egodeath theory, and have experienced transcendent rescue and reset from the transcendent mind that depends on transcendent recursive control like praying to a compassionate and powerful god to rescue the mind from its practical powerless, seized state.

You have no fear because when you will fully succumb to fear completely and fully realize that you are completely vulnerable to practical loss of control of your mind, you can be assured from experience and religious reports by others that you will receive trust in your transpersonal control source and will therefore receive transcendent rescue, most likely (if Fate and the alien, unknown Controller X are willing).

No activity is guaranteed to be safe; you might walk down the hall and it is possible a trap door will swallow you up; you live by faith. You might die within the hour for any of a variety of reasons: for example, you might be watching through television when a giant tower crane suddenly falls over, crashes through your tall apartment building, and crushes you to death. If you are all paranoid (untrusting), you cannot live. The devil tells Jesus to jump and trust god to catch him, and Jesus replies, Don’t test God.

I guarantee that if you have sufficient panic or full grasp of your situation of need, you will be forced to trust, so you will fully trust, so you will be transcendently rescued. If you go out of control, that proves I was right, because it shows you failed to have full trust, so you didn’t see your neediness clearly enough. So we need not fear that we’ll panic, because when we panic, we will trust and be set at peace. This is the transcendent mind rescuing itself by reaching transcendently, like magic.


A model of the mind then is thus:

The egoic mind is organized as:
o Personal control, which is the source of thoughts and the control-executor.

After a series of initiations and study of the Egodeath theory, the transcendent mind is organized as:
o God, outside the mind and time — pointed to by upward transcendent thinking, per Hofstadter
o Transcendent thinking, in a person’s mind
o Helpless personal control power


In tightcog, you don’t need transcendent reliance on a stabilizing trust ability that points outside of your domain of control-power.
In loosecog, having broken and escaped from egoic control restraints, you encounter quickly a new need, a new principle in your thinking — transcendent reliance on a stabilizing trust ability that points outside of your domain of control-power.

Jesus says to the paralyzed man, “Now get up and walk. Your faith has healed you.”

Are you stabilized and firmly supported by your own effort? Define “your own”. Your transcendent area of your mind forms a model of a vector of dependence outside of any kind of personal control power. Because your trans-personal thinking eventually incorporates a stabilizing transcendent factor that explicitly points outside of any personal control, we can say that the mind saves itself using its own resources, where “its own resources” includes the ability to rely and trust and depend on its stability, with help received from transcendent location outside of the mind.


Thought experiment:

1. There is an android or person in tightcog in a dorm room in an armchair. It is a weekday after class, and the afternoon and evening is free to do classwork and think about control. The person has standard control of their mind. The person is able to freely move around; they are autonomous, independent, and not connected. The person moves through time.

2. The person enters loosecog.

3. Now the person in the dorm room in loosecog in an armchair starts to lose control of their mind and enters a panic attack, and the person says “I had control, but now I am losing control and I am headed toward psychotic loss of control. This is an emergency overriding everything else and I need to be sedated, to save my future life, sanity, control, and safety. I have fear and trembling and I require rescue from outside my personal control power. I fear strongly that I am almost certainly heading for disaster, loss of control, loss of sanity; toward danger and wrecking my future life.”

No armchair philosopher can wave aside or define-away, using the magic power of analytic philosophy, this cognitive phenomenology. We must engage with the real dynamics, the real loss of control, and not be in denial of it, while we analyze what this “usual control” consists of and refers to, and what this actual given “loss of control” consists of and refers to. ‘Control’ and ‘losing control’ have a particular meaning, to the mind that functionally used egoic personal control but didn’t’ analyze or critique it as happens in the loose cognitive state.

This is more interesting, relevant, and profound than other Cognitive Science thought experiments, which were merely preparatory training wheels for this one.

God, Fatedness, or some Controller X factor outside of the domain of my personal control, controls whether I intend to:
o Retain my sanity
o Keep practical control
o Protect my safety
o Have a viable future.
During loosecog, when the mental structures of egoic mental restraints are dissolved, I do not have the kind of power that can control whether I intend in the near future to retain sanity, keep control, stay safe, and have a viable, stable future. This is true whether I am an android or a human, with autonomous self-control programming and the ability to enter an unstable metaprogramming mode. To enter a self-control metaprogramming mode with assurance of stability and safety and viable control, something new is needed, specific to the metaprogramming state: transcendent reset, trust, outside of practical personal control.

The transcendent, transpersonal mind of the person, thus gains personal control power by incorporating transpersonal thinking which includes transcendent thinking that points outside all personal resources. I become my own savior and rescuer of my crashable personal control system, by becoming like a god who transcends Heimarmene (Fatedness), though Hellenistic religion waffles and vacillates on whether Zeus controls Heimarmene, or Heimarmene controls Zeus. Did Fate control Jupiter? One would think that in Roman Imperial ruler cult and its military Mithraism, Jupiter — who adopted Caesar as his son to rule the entire world — must have been portrayed as standing dominant over Fate, using Fate as his tool to control the world. Fate doesn’t control Jupiter, like Heimarmene controlled Zeus.

Through the historical power inflation competitive escalation, our superior religion of course (Judaism and Christianity), has God control everything, leaving no doubt: God controls Fatedness (the world), Fatedness doesn’t control God. The Greeks didn’t need a hyper-transcendent rescuer Zeus, any more than early Christianity needed a literal historical Jesus.

Zeus Meilichios was “easily satisfied” to avert his wrath and receive rescue and be spared from destruction, pictured as a big heimarmene-snake, Fatedness snake. Zeus Meilichios integrated Zeus and Heimarmene, figured as the snake-shaped worldline representing the forced, unchangeable shape of one’s pre-set life. Early Christianity didn’t have a literal historical Jesus. Both religions had some conception or functional equivalent of transcendent rescuer lifting you up from outside your own resources as soon as you see your neediness so clearly that you sacrifice your claim that you are able to stabilize yourself using your own resources of control power.


These forces and dynamics are distinct but mutually reinforcing, like a conspiracy:

o Perceiving the mind’s thought source as residing outside the domain of personal control power. You cannot control what you intend to think; intentions arise unstoppably.

o Seeing, feeling, and thinking about the block universe model of spacetime including one’s near-future worldline as filled with dreadfully untrustworthy and unstoppable content that you are forced to move toward, with no brakes and no ability to turn away, out of one’s destiny tube, tunnel, or rail. Possibilities become seen as illusory; only what is fated in the worldline is actually possible.

o Feeling of powerlessness. There is awareness but thoughts are presented to awareness, without the awareness having a control-handle to steer the thoughts. One’s power is like a puppet or transmission gear, interlocked with a driving gear or hidden, uncontrollable puppetmaster.

o Disengagement and dissolution of the usual reliable egoic control restraint, as mental ruts and blind spots that restrict what the mind can think about and intend.

These are distinct topics for thinking, feeling, and perceiving, but they conspire, they are mutually reinforcing. The result is that the mind is coerced; its thinking is pulled toward constructing the innate transcendent mental model of time, self, and control.


Every direction the mind turns, it is reminded of the loss-of-control vulnerability as a fatal threat, and the practical personal control system, in reaction, pulls back against being reminded, and this also causes mental self-coercion, of different aspects or directions of thinking, that ends up escalating into a compulsive testing and self-challenging of the mind’s ability to envision and resist envisioning the intention to lose control, sanity, future life, and safety. This wrestling, hunting, and testing forms a mental movement pattern like getting caught in a net, or hunting like Dionysus’ panther, like a heat-seeking missile.

The mind in loose cognition encounters its central feature, personal control power, caught in a struggle that escalates into panic and ends up willing to go out of control, and certainly heading in that direction without end, with the predictable outcome being the potential of the mind to construct a loss-of-control scenario in which the effort to test and secure personal control power over the incoming intentions trigger the intention to mentally construct an even more compelling loss-of-control scenario. The mind, being centrally arranged and focused around personal control, is interested in the potential for full transpersonal intention of fully violating and breaking the efforts of egoic personal control.

This positive feedback loop of mental struggling to both exert and evade the mind’s control power is described in mythemes of battle, chaos, cancelled-out or seized kingship, and entrapment.

“Some fought themselves, some fought each other”
“Then all at once the chaos ceased”
— Peart/Rush, Hemispheres

Practical inability to control the source of thoughts; the source of thoughts resides outside the domain of personal control ability.
Perceiving, thinking, and sensation in a new mode that is unconstrained in certain ways, but newly aware of other constraints that weren’t perceived, thought about, or experienced (felt) before.
o Perceiving
o Thinking
o Sensation, feeling, experiencing


Myth is tasked with visually representing the transformation of the mental model from the mind’s innate egoic mental model of control and time, to the mind’s innate transcendent mental model of control and time, including the loosecog experience of noncontrol and Fatedness. In myth, this mental model transformation regarding noncontrol and Fatedness is represented through mythemes of king, snake, cross, wood, plank, pole, stake, stub-branches, cross, crossroads, steering, chariot-driving, donkey riding. Any item in myth means, or participates in the meaning-network of, noncontrol (transformation of control level thinking), and Fatedness, as well as the dissociative cognitive state that causes this mental model transformation. Noncontrol and Fatedness are two distinct yet interlocked, mutually supporting areas of ideas.

The kind of control that the egoic personal control thinking has, and thinks it has, and is structured around having, is that kind of control that is suited for a metaphysical world that is modelled as Possibilism: a really, genuinely open, branching possibility future. The future doesn’t exist in any sense, and what the future ends up being, is controlled by you as the Creator, the controller and author of what your own future will be: it’s not set, and you have or wield the kind of power that brings the future into a definite existence, where before, it didn’t at all exist. When that model of time is replaced by the simple Eternalism model, with a single preexisting preset future, the block universe with your life being a snake- or worm-shaped worldline, the egoic kind of control power dies, becomes impotent.

Ego (as a mental model and mental structure) is a certain kind of controller that is designed specifically for a certain kind of spacetime world. Egoic power rules or has force and apparent practical efficacy only within a world that is Possibilism shaped: having a branching future, with cybernetic possibility-branching. When egoic power gives way to the transcendent control mode, interlocked with that distinct change in one’s mental worldmodel, is another distinct change in aspects of one’s mental worldmodel: the Possibilism model of time, control, and possibility is replaced by the Eternalism (block universe containing worldlines) model of time, control, and possibility. Only the one path or branch is possible: the branch-path which is fated and already always exists.

What the king Pentheus figure of “king caught in tree” is trying to elegantly summarize is the change, in the loosecog state, from egoic control power operating in a Possibilism world, to noncontrol (or transcendently dependent power) operating in an Eternalism (block universe) world. Simple mythemes in several combinations, in many expressions, are needed, to express all that. You can only glimpse a subset of these dynamics in any one mytheme diagram such as the Tauroctony or the figure of the sacrificed king hung on a cross or tree. Ancients had advanced Cognitive Science and diagramming except expressed in the form of metaphor.

We have to — which I have done — extract and map my post-modern explicit, non-metaphor-based Egodeath theory to the messy pre-modern metaphor-expressed Cognitive Science of loosecog. The Egodeath theory is new in its clarity of explicit expression, and yet metaphor remains powerful, but what is the most powerful is my non-metaphor Core theory linked with my metaphor extended theory. Thus I constantly bounce between non-metaphor expression and metaphor expression; the greatest explanatory power is by providing both, distinctly, interlinked: nonmetaphor and metaphor.


Mythemes such as “king hung on tree” represent the two distinct main parts of the transcendent mental model, having switched from the egoic mental model. ‘King’ and ‘tree’ are both a negation of egoic thinking: “not personal control power”, and “not branching future possibilities”. The ‘snake’ analogy is a positive assertion, of a negative fact: reality per the simplest model is a block universe with your life being shaped like a snake, and only like a snake, not branching like a tree. So on the left as starting state, picture the king hung on a tree, and on the right as the end-state, picture a snake on a non-branching tree.

Bad, egoic control-thinking: king and branching tree; king hung on a tree
Good, transcendent control-thinking: snake and branchless tree (pole); snake on a pole

The Old Testament features a God-disapproved king hung on a tree, and a God-given snake on a pole for rescuing people from snake-bite by looking at (perceiving) it.

— Michael Hoffman, original research and idea development, December 20-21, 2012. http://www.egodeath.com
Copyright (C) 2012, Michael Hoffman, Egodeath.com. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6346 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Re: Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism

I am on a week-long Art High because a stag at the Tree of Knowledge confirmed my recognition from a year ago:

tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism (2 models of time and personal control).

This is the biggest breakthrough, because it is the most fundamental.

 

___________

 

Regarding my history, my first superpower, manifesting in 1988 at the peak of the Psychedelic 80s, didn’t involve religious myth..  It was the ability to freshly define ego transcendence in terms of personal control power operating within 4D spacetime, in contrast to Transpersonal Psychology & Integral Theory, which are missing this key piece at their core.  Ken Wilber’s writing about “myth” and “mythic” and western antiquity and Christianity is almost completely wrong.  Changes to Wilber’s history theory are forced by my revelations.  Per book Shame & Necessity (http://amazon.com/o/asin/0520256433), ancients were post-egoic, not pre-egoic — the most disastrous mistake Wilber could make.

 

My 2006 superpower is deciphering religious myth in terms of analogies to Cybernetics/Heimarmene/Entheogens.

 

 

Silenuus old tripper of Dionysus had to be helped — rather, placed — onto horse (passive awareness is carried by animalish egoic freewill steering thinking as time passes) after mushroom-wine symposium; Silenus has more than drunk or tripping, he has a temporary nervous system shutdown or weakening, paralysis.  One would feel like Silenus after a large quantity of mushrooms especially if re-dose.  Silenus before the mushroom-wine symposium already understands egodeath and the spectacular personal-control dynamics that occur in switching from freewill to no-free-will thinking.

 

———

 

My fingers barely work.

 

My magician abilities using freewill vs nofreewill double-meanings.  I raise the dead, heal the sick, and cast out demons, and cancel sins.  You too shall do these things, having no more sin or death, if you Believe in the snake rather than the tree.  Only clueless literalists believe in the tree, idol worshippers, enemies of God, destined for the eternal flames.  To understand the snake is also to understand meaning-shifting.  Snake is frozen worldline embedded in Rock universe.

 

We are all puppets of God, puppet kings put in place by God, therefore ignore the hierarchy of society (one puppet isn’t more honorable than the other), and have equality and justice instead.  Battle the heimarmene serpent monster, have victory not by your own power, switch from accursed freewill thinking (destined only for sacrifice), get victory wreath.

 

— Cybermonk

Group: egodeath Message: 6347 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: Egodeath so simple, Freewill is endangered

Muntzer is going round exuberantly preaching nofreewill.

 

To prevent children and undesirables from understanding nofreewill, we must be reverent and veil our language by double-meanings — one meaning implies childish freewill + literalist childish supernaturalism, the other meaning implies adult no-free-will + purely metaphor (for adults/initiates).  What is youngest age allowed in Eleusis initiation?

 

Do you want your child to know no-free-will and metaphor about it?

 

We now understand — with my Theory — *why* ancient Greece (Athens) not only explored the veiled mystery (of thought-source origination at the fountain behind our thinking in the cave of the mind), but also legislated that children are to be veiled/protected from knowledge of no-free-will.

 

I’m coming to grips with the magnitude of the ramifications of art that masters these metaphors — rather, this massive metaphor/analogy system.  I discovered the double-meaning principle like Mark 4:12, around November 11, 2001 (2 months after 9/11).

 

I have a better, complete feeling for what a closed system, with closure, metaphor about Cybernetics/Heimarmene/Entheogens was, throughout history.  I have a better feel for the ciphering fad of Alchemy, which took meaning-veiling and misdirection to the extreme, to the point of pointlessness. 

 

What will Sam Harris say?  I proved that his call for no-free-will and repudiating religion is (unrealized by Harris) a call for higher, esoteric religion and a call for doing away with exoteric religion, which I point out, the Bible *tries* to misdirect outsiders into literalism — that was fair and amusing back in the Roman empire when the entire culture was ingesting mushroom wine all the time, but that clever misleading turned deadly when the entheogen was removed (1500? 1675?) and everyone, practically, lost the key to meaning-flipping and so the culture at large got sucked into misleading, into literalist supernaturalism, into childish thinking and delusion. 

 

The intent of veiling is to unveil at age 13.  Failing to do that, the entire culture got sucked into the metaphor misleading trap, finally I figured out the systematic misleading (in 2001 and now, I now have a spectacular vantage point such as in art).  Veiling is opposite my philosophy, and the Bible seems to me to suggest that as Michael the Archangel, I am supposed to reveal no-free-will to everyone; all mysteries shall be revealed, even though that means I “kill” egoic children before their time (adolescence).  The Internet prevents — fitting ‘Revelation’ — any veiling from anyone.  I am the greatest hierophant of all time, in terms of the number of ego deaths I cause, because I efficiently explain egodeath to the entire world, in a way that cannot be veiled, cannot mislead people into freewill delusion and dangerous religious literalism that mystic-mode writing in the Bible tries to (only) temporarily imply.

 

— Michael Hoffman, December 2, 2013

Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, Egodeath.com. All Rights Reserved. Based on original research & idea development since 1985.

Group: egodeath Message: 6348 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 02/12/2013
Subject: False religion is freewill religion & anti-drug religion

There are many freewill based systems that purport to provide transcendence.

My Theory is the no-free-will based system, that actually provides a specifiable, definite kind of transcendence: transcending (and retaining as a tool or vehicle (donkey)) freewill thinking and its concomitant autonomous kingship assumption.

 

False religion is anti-drug religion.

 

True religion is centered on Cybernetics, Heimarmene, and Entheogens.

 

— Michael Hoffman, December 2, 2013

Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, Egodeath.com. All Rights Reserved. Based on original research & idea development since 1985.

Group: egodeath Message: 6349 From: egodeath Date: 03/12/2013
Subject: Egodeath diagram and lecture

This is the biggest possible, most-fundamental breakthrough — the tree vs. snake ultra-condensed metaphor system.

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/photos/albums/1651450143

 
The religious myth portion of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence. This photo is proof of my priority of discovery of the following:
 
tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism (2 models of time and personal control power).
 
This is the key to religious myth, which I discovered and figured out. I also have a great 2GB video lecture 17 minutes long explaining this chalkboard, that I will upload. I am emailing key professors and theorists. University of Washington, Loew hall, room 220 (Electrical Engineering).
 
Copyright (C) 2013 Michael S. Hoffman, Egodeath.com.  All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeath Message: 6350 From: egodeath-owner@yahoogroups.com Date: 03/12/2013
Subject: Re: Egodeath diagram and lecture

Photo might be upside-down when try to view.  You can download, view in Windows Photo Viewer, and spin right-side-up and zoom.

Egodeath Yahoo Group – Digest 183: 2019-05-20

Site Map

Contents:


Group: egodeath Message: 10751 From: egodeath Date: 20/05/2019
Subject: Re: Transcendent Knowledge podcast commentary



Group: egodeath Message: 10751 From: egodeath Date: 20/05/2019
Subject: Re: Transcendent Knowledge podcast commentary
Per atheists, forget ‘religion’. Instead of religion, use cognitive metaprogramming in the loosecog state, studying personal control integrity across time.

Study no-free-will and control stability.

Pursue perceiving the frozen-time block universe worldline, per no-free-will, with unchangeable control-thoughts that will come into the mind uncontrollably, and experience personal control in light of no-free-will.

A control seizure, profound dependence on that which is the actual source of control thoughts.

What to call these dynamics? Religion, prayer, sacrifice, resurrection, salvation, eternal life? Or other labels, for the most shocking, profound, transcendent, numinous experiencing?

If ‘religion’ is taken to mean “whether God exists” and religion is literalist supernaturalism, then the terms from Religion cannot be used to describe cognitive dynamics and mental model transformation in the “analogical/ psychedelic/ block universe worldline/ no-free-will” state of consciousness.

Esoteric religious mythology is in fact positioned in contrast to exoteric literalist thinking, the two are contrasted in the New Testament by the Jesus figure.

Avoiding religion and studying personal control power instead, in the block universe no-free-will state of consciousness that results from the metaprogramming agent that loosens cognitive associations, leads to experiential dynamics and a mental model transformation that is described by religious mythology and religious language, when recognized.

The target dynamics must be understood, before religious figuration can be recognized as descriptions of those cognitive dynamics in the religious state of consciousness, which is the loose cognitive association state, which switches from Possibilism to the Eternalism mode of experiencing and mental worldmodel.

Thread:
Summary statements of Egodeath theory

The below posts are from this thread. They were all together in Yahoo Mail; I had to scroll down through it.

May 25, 2019, 9:46 am

the Theory = religious mythology, analogy, psychedelics, loose cognition, frozen block universe, no-free-will, non-control.

The Egodeath theory is that religious mythology is analogy describing psychedelics loosening the mind and causing an experience of the frozen block universe that contains your snake-shaped worldline of future control thoughts, an experience of no-free-will, and the experience of non-control, in contrast to experiencing time and control as a tree of branching possibilities that you steer among to create your future in an open future.

The Theory is becoming extremely simple, yet my summary expressions of it are still too turgid to vocalize, so I must take a speaking-first approach, by reading-aloud the attempted written summary statements, followed by impromptu oral statement of the points.

The statements must include the phrases:
religious mythology
analogy
psychedelics, such as mushrooms
the frozen-time block universe
the snake-shaped worldline
no-free-will
non-control
the feeling of loss of control
tree vs. snake
pre-existing control thoughts
steering among branching possibilities

To improve the plainspoken simplicity of writing, I must literally speak my summary statements rather than write them.

I need to add a speaking-first, writing-second approach. 

The best way to simplify the writing is to stop writing and instead speak, which is to say, bounce between the simplest possible writing and the simplest possible speaking.

Write simple summary sentences, record reading aloud the sentences followed by vocally restating in plainer form those points, then write down those simpler, spontaneously spoken statements and repeat that refinement/simplification cycle. 

I do too much writing of Theory summary statements, and too little speaking of the Theory summary statements. 

I reached the limit — now, like in 2006 — of my simplified-writing ability. 

When I finished the 2006 version of the main article, I saw it was great in its clarity, a first-order breakthrough in clarity of Theory.

I was dismayed to find, upon vocalizing the 2006 main article, that the sentence construction was far from simple and clear. 

In 2013 I discovered a huge missed opportunity to simplify the expression of the theory in terms of tree vs. snake.

I thought in 2006 that the coverage of religious mythology in the main article was incomplete in scope, but was as efficient as possible.

My summary statements fail the vocalization test, as did my initial 2006 version of the main article. 

My slight revision into 2007 was driven by the discovery — when I made a spoken reading of the main article — that many sentences were literally unvocalizable.

In the 2006 sentences in the main article, there was no phrase-boundary where it is possible to inhale.

By writing summary statements, I discovered the extreme simplicity of the Theory, and yet those summary statements are still awkward, turgid, unnatural, not how people speak plainly. 

The Theory is extremely simple, yet my sentences — as proven by reading aloud — are still not plainspoken. 

The summary sentences, overall, remain on the wrong side of the threshold of plain speaking, just as my 2006 main article was only *relatively* clearly expressed. 

The great degree of success of my 2006 summary article hides the shortcomings of that relatively clear, only relatively clear, expression, as revealed when I tried and failed to vocalize the 2006 sentences. 

The 200-character limit on posts, combined with a random audience, helped toward breakthrough in simplicity of expression, but, I’m still self-censoring to withhold uncomfortable aspects, and to conform to the poor venue in that my posts are off-topic or too specialized of a focus. 

I won’t necessarily upload recorded speaking, but I do need to both vocalize and record, to push the expressions — that is, I do too much writing (even if “short summary statement” form is great) and not enough vocalization. 

I need to do short-form writing and short-form vocalization, to achieve being extremely plainspoken. 

The 2006 main article turned out to be *far* from natural and plainspoken in its sentence construction, which forced me to fix the worst, but only the worst, sentences to produce the stopgap fix, as the 2007 slight fix of the main article. 

In November 2013, I discovered the tremendous simplifying effect of contrasting tree vs. snake and recognizing that efficiency having been discovered and used by the most archaic explorers of the two cognitive states. 

Similarly now I need that kind of a jump in efficiency and plain speaking to express how utterly basic and simple the Theory is.

Any short-form statement must include these words, and not evade them or censor these pointed points:
religious mythology
analogy
psychedelics, such as mushrooms
the frozen-time block universe
the snake-shaped worldline
no-free-will
non-control
the feeling of loss of control
tree vs. snake
pre-existing control thoughts

Non-essential terms:

eternalism – no one has heard of this term, except a different usage in Buddhism

entheogens – no one has heard of this term, in contrast to ‘psychedelics’

ahistoricity – puts the focus on the wrong debate, loses the direct-science focus

determinism – connotes in-time domino-chain model with open future, against eternalism

metaphor – more confusing than ‘analogy’

any term that needs to be defined every time it is introduced

May 25, 2019, 9:47 am

Dup post? Corrections? Might be a re-post.

the Theory = religious mythology, analogy, psychedelics, loose cognition, frozen block universe, no-free-will, non-control.

The Egodeath theory is that religious mythology is analogy describing psychedelics loosening the mind and causing an experience of the frozen block universe that contains your snake-shaped worldline of future control thoughts, an experience of no-free-will, and the experience of non-control, in contrast to experiencing time and control as a tree of branching possibilities that you steer among to create your future in an open future.

The Theory is becoming extremely simple, yet my summary expressions of it are still too turgid to vocalize, so I must take a speaking-first approach, by reading-aloud the attempted written summary statements, followed by impromptu oral statement of the points.

The statements must include the phrases:
religious mythology
analogy
psychedelics, such as mushrooms
the frozen-time block universe
the snake-shaped worldline
no-free-will
non-control
the feeling of loss of control
tree vs. snake
pre-existing control thoughts
steering among branching possibilities

To improve the plainspoken simplicity of writing, I must literally speak my summary statements rather than write them.

I need to add a speaking-first, writing-second approach. 

The best way to simplify the writing is to stop writing and instead speak, which is to say, bounce between the simplest possible writing and the simplest possible speaking.

Write simple summary sentences, record reading aloud the sentences followed by vocally restating in plainer form those points, then write down those simpler, spontaneously spoken statements and repeat that refinement/simplification cycle. 

I do too much writing of Theory summary statements, and too little speaking of the Theory summary statements. 

I reached the limit — now, like in 2006 — of my simplified-writing ability. 

When I finished the 2006 version of the main article, I saw it was great in its clarity, a first-order breakthrough in clarity of Theory.

I was dismayed to find, upon vocalizing the 2006 main article, that the sentence construction was far from simple and clear. 

In 2013 I discovered a huge missed opportunity to simplify the expression of the theory in terms of tree vs. snake.

I thought in 2006 that the coverage of religious mythology in the main article was incomplete in scope, but was as efficient as possible.

My summary statements fail the vocalization test, as did my initial 2006 version of the main article. 

My slight revision into 2007 was driven by the discovery — when I made a spoken reading of the main article — that many sentences were literally unvocalizable.

In the 2006 sentences in the main article, there was no phrase-boundary where it is possible to inhale.

By writing summary statements, I discovered the extreme simplicity of the Theory, and yet those summary statements are still awkward, turgid, unnatural, not how people speak plainly. 

The Theory is extremely simple, yet my sentences — as proven by reading aloud — are still not plainspoken. 

The summary sentences, overall, remain on the wrong side of the threshold of plain speaking, just as my 2006 main article was only *relatively* clearly expressed. 

The great degree of success of my 2006 summary article hides the shortcomings of that relatively clear, only relatively clear, expression, as revealed when I tried and failed to vocalize the 2006 sentences. 

The 200-character limit on posts, combined with a random audience, helped toward breakthrough in simplicity of expression, but, I’m still self-censoring to withhold uncomfortable aspects, and to conform to the poor venue in that my posts are off-topic or too specialized of a focus. 

I won’t necessarily upload recorded speaking, but I do need to both vocalize and record, to push the expressions — that is, I do too much writing (even if “short summary statement” form is great) and not enough vocalization. 

I need to do short-form writing and short-form vocalization, to achieve being extremely plainspoken. 

The 2006 main article turned out to be *far* from natural and plainspoken in its sentence construction, which forced me to fix the worst, but only the worst, sentences to produce the stopgap fix, as the 2007 slight fix of the main article. 

In November 2013, I discovered the tremendous simplifying effect of contrasting tree vs. snake and recognizing that efficiency having been discovered and used by the most archaic explorers of the two cognitive states. 

Similarly now I need that kind of a jump in efficiency and plain speaking to express how utterly basic and simple the Theory is.

Any short-form statement must include these words, and not evade them or censor these pointed points:
religious mythology
analogy
psychedelics, such as mushrooms
the frozen-time block universe
the snake-shaped worldline
no-free-will
non-control
the feeling of loss of control
tree vs. snake
pre-existing control thoughts

Non-essential terms:

eternalism – no one has heard of this term, except a different usage in Buddhism

entheogens – no one has heard of this term, in contrast to ‘psychedelics’

ahistoricity – puts the focus on the wrong debate, loses the direct-science focus

determinism – connotes in-time domino-chain model with open future, against eternalism

metaphor – more confusing than ‘analogy’

any term that needs to be defined every time it is introduced

/ end of possible re-post

May 25, 2019 3:56 pm

313-character sentence, from the post:

A mind can lack or have the understanding of what is revealed in the mystic altered state; understanding the two experiential mental models of possibility branching, time, and control, and the dynamics of switching to the later, second innate mode of experiencing and the second mental model of time and control.

Revised as multiple sentences less than 200 characters each:

Ideally, a person has both experience and understanding of what is experienced and revealed in the altered state.

There are two experiential mental models of possibility branching, time, and control.

The mind undergoes characteristic mental and experiential dynamics of switching to the later, second innate mode of experiencing.

Multiple sessions of the altered state experience eventually produces a retained second mental model of time and control, even when the ordinary state of experiencing resumes.

4:06 pm

In the best posts in this thread, I will read-aloud each sentence and then say something critically assessing that sentence.  
How good of a sentence?  Length/complexity?
What was the central intended point of the sentence?
Are the terms in the sentence familiar and understandable without explicit definition?
How many distinct points are being made in the sentence?  Can they be separated into dedicated sentences?
How central is the point, to the Egodeath core theory?

4:15 pm

Statement from post 10725 to read aloud and critique:

Dionysus is a major elevated component of high civilization.

How good of a sentence?  Length/complexity?     
Short, simple.

What was the central intended point of the sentence?
The figure of Dionysus is central and lofty in the history of civilization.

Are the terms in the sentence familiar and understandable without explicit definition?
Yes.

How many distinct points are being made in the sentence?  Can they be separated into dedicated sentences?
1

How central is the point, to the Egodeath core theory?
Indirect. 
A statement that is of direct relevance to the core Egodeath theory would be:

The potential and ability of the mind to experience loose cognition and transform the mental model of time and control is, and has been considered, essential to high civilization and culture.

5:23 pm

Sentence to read-aloud and critique: 

Esoteric mysticism is simple to rationally explain as metaphor or analogy describing the psychedelic sacred meal-induced experience of frozen-time noncontrol, no-free-will, and monopossibility.
I couldn’t even read aloud to the midpoint of the sentence before I (mistakenly) exclaimed “What the hell is that junk verbiage inserted after the first two words?!” —
As I read it aloud, I parsed the sentence as:
Esoteric mysticism is [pointless junk words:] simple to rationally explain as [resume the brilliant payload:] metaphor or analogy describing the psychedelic sacred meal-induced experience of frozen-time noncontrol, no-free-will, and monopossibility.
The motivating point to post that text message was *that* explaining esotericism is surprisingly simple (and, secondarily here, that the simple explanation is, esotericism is analogy describing the psychedelic sacred meal-induced experience of frozen-time noncontrol, no-free-will, and monopossibility).

That 2-point sentence is strong in many ways but even so, my initial reaction was that the ‘the explanation is simple’ phrase was pointless junk-words that disrupted the explanation.  Even when you separate out the two points:o  The explanation is simple.   <– non-essential, commentaryo  The explanation is x.   <– essential, payload
there is far more value in stating the explanation, than in assessing the degree of simplicity the explanation has. 
The fact that people think the explanation is hard, and that it is actually easy, is peripheral, far inferior to the explanation itself (which happens to be surprisingly simple instead of hard as people expect).

Core theory:
Esotericism is [simply] x.

Peripheral, non-essential commentary on the core theory:
The explanation is surprisingly simple, not hard as people are accustomed to expecting.

Given that I was trying to cram two points into a <200 character post in a foreign context/venue, the sentence is strong.  But when later reading the sentence with no context, I immediately judged it as an overcomplex definition with needless junk verbiage inserted, breaking the point, as if I wrote:
Esotericism is [this explanation is surprisingly simple] x.
Given what I was trying to communicate in the chat venue, the sentence is strong, and successful.
But the sentence is poor if used as a general model, and in fact when I read the sentence aloud, I was *unable* to continue past midpoint of the sentence before exclaiming that the intrusive junk phrase was not carrying its weight:
[start of high-value statement] [inserted low-value statement] [second half of high-value statement]
even though at the time I wrote the sentence, the main thing motivating the posted sentence was “the explanation is simple”, and the secondary point was “the explanation is x”.  A more useful approach that stands up better when the sentence is read in isolation is, avoid making a point within the middle of a point.
Esoteric mysticism is surprisingly simple to rationally explain: esotericism is analogy describing the psychedelics-induced experience of frozen-time noncontrol, no-free-will, and monopossibility.
The fact that the sacred meal is psychedelics-based is actually a greedy or “efficient” cramming of a third point into the sentence.  
For general use, it is better to break out each point into a standalone sentence:

Esoteric mysticism is simple to rationally explain.
Esoteric mysticism is analogy describing the psychedelics-induced experience of frozen-time noncontrol, no-free-will, and monopossibility.
The sacred meal is psychedelics, such as psilocybin mushrooms.

There is a tradeoff or conflict between low wordcount/ character count, vs. simplicity of expression.
When you achieve simplicity of expression, wordcount increases, unfortunately.
When you achieve low wordcount, expression becomes more complex, unfortunately.
My 2006 main article was not optimized for simplicity of expression, but for cramming as many breakthrough points as possible into a predefined wordcount; the article was designed to be dense, not designed to have extreme simplicity of expression.
When I attempted to read-aloud the article, I began to intensely focus, like around 2011, on simplicity of expression.  
But I only started to *really* hammer on simplicity of expression recently, around late 2018, in the context of <200 character posts in random venues online with unknown audiences.
A historical turning point or milestone in my simplicity of expression is when I started writing all posts in this weblog/discussion group as independent sentences rather than prose multisentence paragraphs.  Part of how I started that, was when I blew apart my main article into sentences around 2012… which I did during composing the 2006 main article.  
That was a technique I started perhaps 1992 or 1989 when working in Word Perfect.  Possibly 1987 – I did these kinds of experiments for a long time.
My idea development in January 1986 had that characteristic of aphorisms – isolated statements, not particularly grouped into multi-sentence paragraphs. 
When did I start posting every post in the form of standalone sentences, one sentence per line?  
When I regularly posted as independent sentences, that marks the practical start of this intent push for simplicity of expression.  
The push for simplicity of expression started after my initial draft of the contrarian article around January 1988.  
My 1988 attempted article got off to a failed start, a counterexample: it starts with a really stupid idea, a prelude, preliminaries, setting the stage.  
I succeeded in 2006-2007 at writing the 1988 article.]
The 1988 article’s point is: “Against Ken Wilber & Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, Transcendent Knowledge is actually the noncontrol experience that results from the block universe experience in the loose cognitive state”.
By 1996 after failing to write a condensed article, I temporarily gave up on the article format, and simply posted the outline of principle summary points at Principia Cybernetica. 
Forget the “article” format; just get to the damned point.

5:47 – Reading Aloud to Drive Simpler Writing

My reading-aloud of the attempted summary sentences, together with critiquing each sentence, reveals that I failed so far to accomplish or reach the goal, of simple explicit summary sentences.
I now *can* record reading-aloud the summary sentences, that is, the main post in the present thread, but I know that I am not satisfied with the result. 
The first post fails to focus on the core theory, fails to have simple sentences.  
The second summary post is not quite as bad, but still I hold out for improvement, in the 3rd post.  That post also is all too easy to improve upon.  
My latest main post in this thread, containing all summary sentences, still remains — as demonstrated in the past few critical posts — insufficiently focused on the core theory, and the sentences are too complex, without each sentence serving a single purpose.
This would be a worthwhile, interesting, improvement-causing recording approach: Read the attempted posts in this thread: read a sentence, then critique the sentence:

Critique each sentence:
How good of a sentence?  Length/complexity?
What was the central intended point of the sentence?
Are the terms in the sentence familiar and understandable without explicit definition?
How many distinct points are being made in the sentence?  Can they be separated into dedicated sentences?
How central is the point, to the Egodeath core theory?

6:39

However I use voice recordings, I do plan to get in the practice of mono smartphone recordings with no accessories, recorded anywhere, using good technique but not using any supplemental gear, such as pop filter, windscreen, dead cat, outboard microphone, headphone monitoring, or treated environment.
I was distracted and completely blocked and sidetracked by the attempt to make perfect recordings, regarding the resulting fidelity.  I was blocked by attempting for perfect fidelity.  To counter that fatal impediment, I need to be comfortable and in the habit of targeting casual fidelity, sacrificing high fidelity in order to concentrate on the payload, content.
I wasn’t blocked by attempting for perfect content.
I wasn’t blocked by attempting for perfect vocalization.

6:51 pm

Summary sentence for critique:

Religion is based on Reason in the Holy Spirit state of consciousness that is conveyed through the Eucharist.

The context that shaped that statement was some online discussion of Logos, atheism, Christianity, paganism, and religion.
It is a busy, overambitious sentence, written in the spirit of trying to cram an impressive amount into a low wordcount.

The phrase “the Holy Spirit state of consciousness” is too complicated and at least needs punctuation.
The “Holy Spirit” state of consciousness is the altered state of consciousness; that is, the psychedelic state of consciousness, which is characterized by loose cognitive association, which brings different experiencing and thinking.
The “Holy Spirit” state of consciousness is induced by ingesting the Eucharist, which is a form of the traditional “sacred meal”, which means psychedelics, most typically psilocybin mushrooms.
Religion is not based on “the non-rational”.
Religion is based on Reason in conjunction with different experiencing and thinking in the altered state of consciousness.
Religion is based on Reason in the altered state, which gives different experiencing and thinking.
Religion is based on reasoning about time and control in the altered state from psychedelics, such as in the Eucharist sacred meal provided by the God to the acolytes who are chosen by God.
God uses the psychedelic sacred meal as the means by which the mind is taught a different mode of experiencing and thinking, about time and control, possibility and moral culpability.  
‘God’ refers to the hidden uncontrollable controller as the normally veiled source of control thoughts.  
The control agent is ultimately helplessly controlled by the hidden uncontrollable source of control-thoughts.

A mostly straight-through reading of each posting, to quickly record on TASCAM DR-05 field recorder

May 26, 2019, 12:12 am

Posting — raw tracking file
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/10725 190525_870.wav
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/10723 190525_871.wav
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/10717 190525_873.wav & 190525_878.wav
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/10715 190525_879.wav
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/10713 190525_882.wav

May 26, 2019 4:52 pm

1 week to download this zip file of mp3 files of reading aloud the summary statements
https://we.tl/t-m2GG7Kj6kM
limited time members-only exclusive for those on the inside

May 27, 2019 8:43 pm

mentalModelTransition.mp32 minutes 9 seconds.  The download URL, for 1 week:  https://we.tl/t-8D1UqKGG2EReading aloud the following text.The text here was written in order to read aloud.The first part was written after seeing the problems with the initial part, shown at bottom.

The dynamics of shifting control-dependency
Moving from the initial model of control to the revised model of control requires a profound shift of control dependency or reliance.  
To change worldmodels, instead of relying on your usual imagined basis of control, you must consciously rely on the actual source of control.
Your actual source of control is the pre-existing rail of control-thoughts that is laid out frozen in the block universe.
The pre-existing rail of control thoughts is frozen and you cannot change or control it.
The shift of control-dependency is the most interesting dynamic of the change from the initial to final worldmodel.
Initially, the mental model of control is based on the assumption and sensation that the person is the originator of control thoughts, with an open future.
In the revised mental model, the mind recognizes, perceives, and experiences the actual basis of personal control, in the loose cognitive state.
______________________
To transcend ordinary thinking, the mind moves from an initial mental worldmodel, through a transition period, to a final mental worldmodel.
Psychedelics produce the experience of the block universe containing a frozen worldline of control-thoughts, the experience of no-free-will and noncontrol, and the experience of helplessly receiving thoughts.
The mind tries to retain control on the basis of the initial worldmodel, but then shifts conscious attribution from the intial purported source of control ability to the later, accurately recognized source of control ability.
The mind dramatically shifts from the initial to the later mental worldmodel of control, time, and possibility.
The shift of worldmodels is driven by testing control ability to the point of full instability to disprove the initial model.
The mind repudiates the initial model of control ability and recognizes the real, now perceptible source of control ability, recognizing that personal control is dependent on a mysterious hidden uncontrollable source.

(In the above sentence: repudiate = {sacrifice}, recognize = {prayer})

May 27 9:46 pm

First I recorded spoken idea development (download below), then I transcribed it, as follows:

______________

Religion is based on the moment of transition, of moving from one leg to the other, the moment of shift, the moment of transition/shift to a new basis, the moment you move from control based on you as initator, to control based on dependence on a pre-given, externally given control source.

Religion is based on and centered around the moment that you move from the familiar basis of control, from the familiar mental conscious assumed and presumed basis of control, to the different external, uncontrollable basis of control.

That moment of shift from the one basis of control to the other is the peak climactic point which is the basis of religion.

Behind that is the whole looming framework of the old mental model and the new mental worldmodel, but the main focus is the moment of transition.

The mind undergoes various dynamics in switching from the old and learning the new model of control.

The mind retains the old model and uses it in mundane life, while adding the new model and relying on the new model in the loose cognitive state.

The central focus in religion is the moment of switching from the old model, particularly with regard to reliance and dependence for the control basis.

The most prominent and celebrated mental dynamic is the change of reliance on control basis, from the old familiar basis to the new, dependent basis.

The conscious shift of the recognized basis of control is the central climactic pivotal point which is the center or foundation of religion.

Hymns are celebrating this particular point: I was failing and you lifted me up, that I’m dependent on something external.

That expression of being dependent on the higher power is the peak experience, the peak dynamic, of switching from the Possibilism worldmodel to the Eternalism worldmodel.

______________

Written summary of phases or components from the transcription above:

Religious mythology = analogy describing
psychedelic loose cognition
starting from the Possibilism mental worldmodel
then MOVING the conscious basis of control
to the Possibilism mental worldmodel.

1. Religious mythology is analogy describing how
2. psychedelics induce loose cognitive binding
3. giving perception and experience of the frozen block universe worldline of your future control-thoughts
4. and concommitant noncontrol, or shift of basis of control, and no-free-will
leading to moving the mental worldmodel from Possibilism
through a MOVING of the attributed basis or source of control power
to the Eternalism mental model, with awareness of dependence on a hidden, uncontrollable source of control thoughts.

______________

mp3: centralMomentOfShift.mp3
download url for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-RQG9VFvZKf
length: 2:18

mic: Shure – SM57
project: e609sm57testReadingTelosPosts.aup
track: mmTransition3

May 27, 2019 9:47 pm

First I recorded spoken idea development (download below), then I transcribed it, as follows:

______________

Religion is based on the moment of transition, of moving from one leg to the other, the moment of shift, the moment of transition/shift to a new basis, the moment you move from control based on you as initator, to control based on dependence on a pre-given, externally given control source.

Religion is based on and centered around the moment that you move from the familiar basis of control, from the familiar mental conscious assumed and presumed basis of control, to the different external, uncontrollable basis of control.

That moment of shift from the one basis of control to the other is the peak climactic point which is the basis of religion.

Behind that is the whole looming framework of the old mental model and the new mental worldmodel, but the main focus is the moment of transition.

The mind undergoes various dynamics in switching from the old and learning the new model of control.

The mind retains the old model and uses it in mundane life, while adding the new model and relying on the new model in the loose cognitive state.

The central focus in religion is the moment of switching from the old model, particularly with regard to reliance and dependence for the control basis.

The most prominent and celebrated mental dynamic is the change of reliance on control basis, from the old familiar basis to the new, dependent basis.

The conscious shift of the recognized basis of control is the central climactic pivotal point which is the center or foundation of religion.

Hymns are celebrating this particular point: I was failing and you lifted me up, that I’m dependent on something external.

That expression of being dependent on the higher power is the peak experience, the peak dynamic, of switching from the Possibilism worldmodel to the Eternalism worldmodel.

______________

Written summary of phases or components from the transcription above:

Religious mythology = analogy describing
psychedelic loose cognition
starting from the Possibilism mental worldmodel
then MOVING the conscious basis of control
to the Eternalism mental worldmodel.

June 1, 2019 7:13 pm

The Egodeath theory explains that mythology describes the effects of eating magic mushrooms.

Normally, when not on mushrooms, the person feels like a king steering in a tree, with the power to make decisions and create their future.

The future feels like it doesn’t exist, and it feels open and can become any of several outcomes.

In Physics, time and space are thought of together as an unchanging block universe.

A person’s sequence of experiencing from birth to death, is shaped like a snake that is embedded into the block universe.

The person’s future thoughts cannot be changed or avoided.

The person doesn’t have the kind of control that lets the person alter their future thoughts.

Magic mushrooms produce an experience of being frozen like a snake in a rock.

On mushrooms, it feels like future thoughts already exist.

It feels like there is no free will, and the person has no ability to control their thoughts.

It feels like something outside of the person is controlling the person’s thoughts.

When the person tries to control their thoughts, they lose the feeling of controlling their thoughts, and the person becomes afraid about what thoughts they will receive next.

The person feels like they are helpless and dependent on a hidden force that controls their thoughts.

When the person realizes that they have no power to control the hidden source of their thoughts, the person has to trust the hidden source of thoughts.

When the person realizes that they have no alternative but to trust the hidden source of thoughts, the person becomes calm and happy to understand higher knowledge and religion.

June 1 7:29 pm

Version 2 is more readable:

The Egodeath theory explains that religion and mythology describe the effects of eating magic mushrooms.

Normally, when not on mushrooms, the person feels like a king steering in a tree, with the power to make decisions and create their future.
The future feels like it doesn’t exist, and it feels open and can become any of several outcomes.

Magic mushrooms produce an experience of being frozen like a statue of a king, or frozen like a snake in a rock.
On mushrooms, it feels like future thoughts already exist.
It feels like there is no free will, and the person has no ability to control their thoughts.

The experience of being frozen without control is like the idea of the block universe in Physics.
In Physics, time and space are thought of together as an unchanging block universe. 
In the block universe idea in Physics, a person’s sequence of experiencing from birth to death is called a “worldline”.
Your sequence of thoughts and experiences is shaped like a snake that is embedded into the block universe.
The person’s future thoughts cannot be changed or avoided.
The person doesn’t have the kind of control that lets the person alter their future thoughts.

After taking magic mushrooms several times, it feels like something outside of the person is controlling the person’s thoughts.
The person tries to control their thoughts, but they lose the feeling of controlling their thoughts.
The person becomes afraid about what thoughts they will receive next.

The person feels like they are helpless and dependent on a hidden force that controls their thoughts.
The person realizes that they have no power to control the hidden source of their thoughts.
The person realizes that they have no alternative but to trust the hidden source of thoughts.
The person becomes calm and happy to understand higher knowledge and religion.

7:48 pm

I recorded reading aloud posting 10797, the (incompletely) simplified summary of the Egodeath theory.
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/10797

download url (for 1 week): https://we.tl/t-ffEN8doNVW
filename: SimplifiedEDIntroTake1.mp3
length: 2:16
mic: Shure – SM57

Open window; background noise.  This is just a practice run and mic check, Take 1. 

I should probably analyze and simplify that text, and then record reading the successful version.

June 1, 2019 8:04 pm

This version (3) of the Egodeath summary reaches the target simplicity. 

___________________

The Egodeath theory explains that religion and mythology describe the effects of eating magic mushrooms.

Normally, when not on mushrooms, the person feels like a king steering in a tree.

It feels like there are many possible actions.

It feels like you have the power to select any of the possible actions and create your future.

The future feels like it doesn’t exist, and it feels open and can become any of several outcomes.

Magic mushrooms produce an experience of being frozen like a statue of a king, or frozen like a snake in a rock.

On mushrooms, it feels like future thoughts already exist.

It feels like there is no free will, and the person has no ability to control their thoughts.

The experience of being frozen without control is like the idea of the block universe in Physics.

In Physics, time and space are thought of together as an unchanging “block universe”.

A person’s sequence of experiencing from birth to death is called a “worldline”.

Your sequence of thoughts and experiences is shaped like a snake that is embedded into the block universe.

The person’s future thoughts cannot be changed or avoided.

The person doesn’t have the kind of control that lets the person alter their future thoughts.

After taking magic mushrooms several times, the person learns to watch how the mind works.

The person learns to think carefully about control while on mushrooms.

It feels like something outside of the person is controlling the person’s thoughts.

The person tries to control their thoughts, but they lose the feeling of controlling their thoughts.

The person becomes afraid about what thoughts they will receive next.

The person feels like they are helpless and dependent on a hidden force that controls their thoughts.

The person realizes that they have no power to control the hidden source of their thoughts.

The person realizes that they have no alternative but to trust the hidden source of thoughts.

The person becomes calm and happy to understand higher knowledge and religion.

_________________________

(The Egodeath theory doesn’t advocate anything except understanding.)

June 1, 2019 8:38 pm – Read-aloud v3.1 of Egodeath Summary Reaches Target Simplicity

I recorded reading aloud the following version 3.1 of the simplified summary of the Egodeath theory.
filename: SimplifiedEDIntroV3.mp3
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/10799
download URL (for 1 week): https://we.tl/t-OxJhAYmtLZ
length: 2:18

This version (3.1) of the Egodeath summary reaches the target simplicity. 

___________________

The Egodeath theory explains that religion and mythology describe the effects of eating magic mushrooms.

Normally, when not on mushrooms, the person feels like a king steering in a tree.

It feels like there are many possible actions.

It feels like you have the power to select any of the possible actions and create your future.

The future feels like it doesn’t exist, and it feels open and can become any of several outcomes.

Magic mushrooms produce an experience of being frozen like a statue of a king, or frozen like a snake in a rock.

On mushrooms, it feels like future thoughts already exist.

It feels like there is no free will, and the person has no ability to control their thoughts.

The experience of being frozen without control is like the idea of the block universe in Physics.

In Physics, time and space are thought of together as an unchanging “block universe”.

A person’s sequence of experiencing from birth to death is called a “worldline”.

Your sequence of thoughts and experiences is shaped like a snake that is embedded into the block universe.

The person’s future thoughts cannot be changed or avoided.

The person doesn’t have the kind of control that lets the person alter their future thoughts.

After taking magic mushrooms several times, the person learns to watch how the mind works.

The person learns to think carefully about control while on mushrooms.

It feels like something outside of the person is controlling the person’s thoughts.

The person tries to control their thoughts, but they lose the feeling of controlling their thoughts.

The person becomes afraid about what thoughts they will receive next.

The person feels like they are helpless and dependent on a hidden force that controls their thoughts.

They have no power to control the hidden source of their thoughts.

They have no alternative but to trust the hidden source of thoughts.

June 20, 2019 2:21 am

“Rain Ego Death.m4a”
download url for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-grpzqAerwN
stereophonicleft channel: Shure – SM57 dynamic mic, cardioid pattern. rumble cut switch. 8:00 12:00 3:00
right channel: CAD – M39 large-diaphragm condenser mic, omni pattern.  rumble cut switch.  10:00 1:30 2:00

June 24, 9:01 pm

Voice recording: Off-the-cuff summary of Egodeath theory, June 24, 2019

Filename: “Summary 2019-06-24 (CAD-M39 AudEq).mp3”

Download URL for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-82BUPyjFgP

____________________

Production notes:

CAD M39 large-diaphragm condenser mic, cardioid pattern, mic’s low-cut switch, recorded dry/flat to DR-05 field recorder in mono, eq’d in laptop, exported as 320 kbps MP3.

Project files sequence:
190624_0652Orig.wav from DR-05 — raw tracking file; long silences
190624_0652_cadm39direct_trimmedsilence.aup
exported as 190624_0652.wav put back onto the DR-05 32MB microSD card
190624_0652_cadm39direct_trimmedsilence_eq.aup — has eq added
exported as Summary 2019-06-24 (CAD-M39 AudEq).mp3
uploaded

June 24, 2019 10:48 pm

Voice recording with effects: Off-the-cuff summary of Egodeath theory, June 24, 2019

Filename: “Summary 2019-06-24 fx (CAD-M39).mp3”

Download URL for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-xfq6kuIOFO

Length: 39:41 (album-length)

Filesize: 95 MB

____________________

Production notes:
Started with mono direct/dry CAD M39 mic in 190624_0652.wav (5:55 long) which was silence-trimmed like “Summary 2019-06-24 (CAD-M39 AudEq).mp3” but without eq, on a TASCAM DR-05 field recorder.
Treble boost
dbx – 266xs Compressor & Expander/Gate
tc electronic – Flashback delay
tc electronic – Hall of Fame reverb
Recorded in stereo on a TASCAM DR-05 field recorder as file “190624_0961.wav”.
Project file: “Summary 2019-06-24 fx (CAD-M39).aud” – normalized
Exported as 320 kbps MP3

Jun 29 2019 2:48 pm

Short spoken clips from 190624_0652.wav (= recorded on June 24, 2019)

folder name: 190624_0652_wav_extracts
29 .wav files. 
length: 4 minutes

the download url for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-xqKp44vPUT

Adding EQ on playback:
iTunes on iPhone can play these short .wav files. 
These files are direct from the mic with no eq or processing.  They need bright speakers or treble boost.
For iTunes on iPhone, “Settings: Music: EQ” works, but might take about 15 seconds or a couple plays of a given .wav file. 
On Sony 7506 headphones, I use Treble Boost.

_________________________
Production notes:
Mic: CAD – M39 large diaphragm condenser mic, cardioid, no low-cut switch?, recorded in mono with no eq or processing on TASCAM DR-05 field recorder, to create file in 190624_0652.wav which was 5:55 long after trimming silence.
From that file, I copied and exported selected excerpts as .wav files.

Jun 29 8:35pm

Egodeath summary recording, as fx-processed snippets (eq’d) – version 1 of 2

filename: “Egodeath 652 snippets fx (CAD M39).mp3”

download URL for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-DbVFJIPnyz

________________________

Production notes:
Mic: CAD – M39 large diaphragm condenser mic, on cardioid, no eq, as 190624_0652.wav (= tracked June 24, 2019) file.
TASCAM – DR-05 field recorder loaded with that file’s excerpted .wav snippets in laptop folder “190624_0652_wav_extracts”
MXR eq (Mastering monitors: Sony – MDR-7506 studio tracking headphones)
dbx dynamics processor
tc electronics – Flashback stereo delay
tc electronics – Hall of Fame stereo reverb
Recorded to TASCAM – DR-05 field recorder as 190629_0658.wav (= processed June 29, 2019) (that’s version 1)
Loaded and saved as project “190629_0658.aup” — trimmed, norm’d, deleted some, moved tail to middle
Exported as “Egodeath 652 snippets fx (CAD M39).mp3”

Version 2, a separate take, will be cleaned up and exported from 190629_0659.wav and 190629_0660.wav.

8:37pm

Egodeath summary recording, as fx-processed snippets (eq’d) – version 1 of 2

filename: “Egodeath 652 snippets fx (CAD M39).mp3”
length: 10:30

download URL for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-DbVFJIPnyz

filesize: 25MB

9:54 pm

Egodeath summary recording, as fx-processed snippets (eq’d) – version 2 of 2

filename: “Egodeath 652 snippets fx v2 (CAD M39).mp3”
length: 11:57

download URL for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-Jg9LnjHAl2

filesize: 29MB

________________________

Production notes: basically same as for v1.
Mic: CAD – M39 large diaphragm condenser mic, on cardioid, no eq, as 190624_0652.wav (= tracked June 24, 2019) file.
TASCAM – DR-05 field recorder loaded with that file’s excerpted .wav snippets in laptop folder “190624_0652_wav_extracts”
MXR eq (Mastering monitors: Sony – MDR-7506 studio tracking headphones)
dbx dynamics processor
tc electronics – Flashback stereo delay
tc electronics – Hall of Fame stereo reverb
Recorded to TASCAM – DR-05 field recorder as 190629_0659.wav & 190629_0660.wav (= processed June 29, 2019) (those are version 2)
Loaded and saved as project “190629_0659.aup” (190629_0660.aup was folded in) — trimmed, norm’d, deleted some
Exported as “Egodeath 652 snippets fx v2 (CAD M39).mp3”

June 30 11:55pm

voice recording: “Perceiving the Control Source.mp3” (recorded June 23, 2019)

download URL for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-HpTFlkpD0y

lenth: about 1:30

This is a precursor to the excellent but quieter-voiced “190624_0652.wav” source file. 
This is a tribute to the next day’s track 652, but is also noteworthy because of more standard vocalization (louder; fuller).

June 30 11:58 pm

voice recording: “Perceiving the Control Source.mp3” (recorded June 23, 2019)

download URL for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-HpTFlkpD0y

length: about 1:01

This is a precursor to the excellent but quieter-voiced “190624_0652.wav” source file. 
This is a tribute to the next day’s track 652, but is also noteworthy because of more standard vocalization (louder; fuller).

_____________________

Production notes:

Mic: CAD – M39, large diaphragm condenser mic, dry; no EQ in tracking file

tracking file: 190623_0649.wav

project file used to trim down to the excerpt: “190623_0649_wav excerpt.aup”

EQ: applied saved curve “CAD M39 03”, in the box

July 6 9:52pm

Egodeath Theory vocalization practice

Filename: “EDT M39 voc 2019-07-04 _1015 eq.wav”
Length: 12:09
Filesize: 64MB

Download URL for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-yHxRZsmc3e

Production notes:

Mic: CAD – M39 large-diaphragm condenser

Filename pattern:
o  EDT (= Egodeath Theory)
o  Mic model
o  Focus (miking, vocalization, or content)
o  Date originally recorded
o  File number(s) of original recording(s)
o  Signal processing if any
o  Filename extension

Eq: in app, “CAD M39 04”

July 7 4:37 am

Egodeath Theory mic demos

Filename: “EDT M39 mic 2019-07-04 _742 _743 eq.wav”
Length: 2:38
Mic: CAD – M39 large-diaphragm condenser (Pattern: Cardioid, Bass Cut: Off)

Filename: “EDT SM57 mic 2019-07-04 _733 eq.wav”
Length: 1:39
Mic: Shure – SM57 dynamic

Filename: EDT “e609 mic 2019-07-04 _759 _1032 eq.wav”
Length: 8:43
Mic: Sennheiser – e609 dynamic

Download URL for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-SiMUKkZ0Nu
..zip filesize: 56.3MB

Filename pattern:
o  EDT (= Egodeath Theory)
o  Mic model
o  Focus (miking, vocalization, or content)
o  Date originally recorded
o  File number(s) of original recording(s)
o  Signal processing if any
o  Filename extension

Eq: hardware

August 3, 2019 7:59 p.m.

4 new voice recordings.
Raw files, a bit slow-paced

The download URL for 1 week: https://we.tl/t-CCpO7XoNjH

Filename 1: “No chatting name of theory.m4a”
Length: 3:24 (iPhone bottom mic)
In 200-character posts format, it’s all about packing-in good keywords that don’t evoke misleading connotations, but get directly to the central point.  In practice, a set of 200-character posts, each with 4-5 highly summarized ideas.

Filename 2: “Chat post summaries commentary.m4a”
Length: 36:17 (iPhone bottom mic)
Some of the summaries are posted below.

Filename 3: “The religion of the future.m4a”
Length: 12:07 (iPhone bottom mic)
The religion of the future is direct, public summarization of the altered-state experience of no-free-will.

Including preexisting future, block-universe worldline, non-(meta)-control — and instead of a single literalist metaphor-system as a user interface skin that serves to obscure and confuse and prevent accessing the core knowledge, there will be a mapping of the explicit simple core model of time and control, to each extant brand or metaphor system, including technology metaphors like in the Rush songs The Body Electric (from Grace Under Pressure), and Vital Signs (from Moving Pictures). 

Instead of the main emphasis being a particular UI skin (metaphor system), with fewer than 1% of people accessing the core knowledge, the main emphasis will be on the core knowledge, assisted by subservient mapping to all the various analogy and metaphor systems.

Filename 4: “Reducing the size and value of wisdom (budmic).m4a”
Length: 9:57 (iPhone earbud mic, mostly dangling rather than held in position)
The word ‘wisdom’ used in this title means the pearl held by the dragon, the treasure guarded by the serpent monster; transcendent knowledge; enlightenment, mental model augmentation or transformation adding a new model of control, time, and possibility. 

The treasure guarded by the serpent monster, or the pearl held by the dragon, is the Egodeath theory.

{pearl, treasure} = the Egodeath theory = the knowledge mythology is analogy describing mushrooms loosening cognitive associations, giving an experience of frozen-time block-universe and personal control worldline with preexisting future control thoughts, changing the mental worldmodel from free-will control with an open future, to no-free-will with a preexisting future.

The worldmodel of self, time, control, and possibility branching, is sacrificed to gain the treasure of enlightenment and regeneration of self and world.

__________

Summary posts:

No-free-will, preexistence of one’s own future control-thoughts.  Block-universe worldline likened to wise fearsome “snake” demands sacrifice, to gain treasure: wisdom.

Sacred Meal 🍄 in the Mystery Religions including Eucharist.  Loosens mental associations, experience the higher state of experiencing.  Speak the Mysteries, which are to be revealed.

Mystery Religion has been decoded, in clear summary, the greatest achievement of civilization, describing high experiential revelation.

Don’t let your mental world collapse when you hear these 3 revisionist ideas: ahistoricity of Jesus; visionary plants as Eucharist; no-free-will.  These are not necessarily harmful ideas. It’s best to immunize people.

The “sun worship” theory of what religion is about, is secondary, reductionist; physical/literalist.  It can’t explain the intense mystic altered state of experiencing.  There’s nothing of Dionysus in it.

Mature esoteric 2-level religion is *rational* discovery of no-free-will mental model in the altered state.  Only lower, exoteric, beginners’ religion is *irrational*.

“Born again” in esoteric religion means you experienced the feeling of the death of personal control agency in the mystic state, then formed a new model of control and time.

Most theories of religious mythology don’t account for religious experiencing (the intense peak mystic altered state), so are reductionist, ordinary-state based.

Myth describes e.g. battle with serpent demons guarding treasure, then the armchair theorists say myth means observing celestial bodies – mostly wrong; misses the primary referent and origin of myth.

The primary meaning of myth is analogies describing the sacred meal inducing the altered state. The secondary meaning is celestial bodies.

The Greeks with their Mystery Religion would look at us moderns as outsiders, non-initiates, like children or animals.

We have the potential to figure out high ancient Greek culture, myth, Mystery Religion.

This is a golden age for scholars studying ancient religious texts, many translations becoming available, a renaissance.

Scholars are no longer hampered by heavy-handed Christian bias like they were in the early 20th Century. Now scholars are able to be more objective in interpreting ancient texts.

_____________

People liked my clearly-written posts about Calvinism and double-predestination.  I didn’t capture them.  Something like:

Some people are destined to be saved, and other people are destined to not be saved. Their control-thoughts were created not by the person, but by the Creator, before time began.

Skipped 1 Post

todo: get from Yahoo Mail

August 10, 2019 5:41 a.m.

Mythology is primarily analogies that serve to describe the experiential phenomena in the altered state that results from ingesting the psychoactive sacred meal, as in Mystery Religion and the Eucharist with its real presence of the mind-transforming god-figure.

Visionary plants cause loose cognitive association, as in “dissolve and re-coagulate”, causing an experience of frozen-time block-universe no-free-will, with pre-existing control thoughts frozen in rock. The stream of one’s control thoughts frozen in time is snake-shaped; it is the worldline in the unveiled block universe.

Mythology and fiction are both broad, and ancient fiction has mythemes. Key mythemes include king, tree, branching vs. nonbranching, rock, wine, sacrifice of a ruler or child, snake/ serpent/ dragon monster, death, and transformation.

The theory of religious mythology as analogy describing visionary plants causing loose cognition and experiencing block-universe no-free-will, monopossibility, and a kind of non-control and cancelling of personal moral culpability

Psychotomimetics cause loose cognitive association, as in the term ‘psycholytics’ (mind looseners), and mania: sacred madness, frenzy.

The loose cognitive state causes an experience of block universe no-free-will and noncontrol, including the fearsome snake-shaped frozen worldline of one’s control-thoughts.

The Eucharistic sacred meal is given by the god, as in Mystery Religion; carried to the elect, predestined recipients by their snake-shaped worldline.

Consuming the sacred meal transforms the mental model of control agency and time.

The dragon serpent is one’s pre-existing worldline frozen into the rock-like block universe.

The dragon guards the treasure or pearl of wisdom, demanding sacrifice of the king or child in order to gain the treasure of knowledge about control, time, and moral agency.

The “king” or “child” that must be sacrificed is the original freewill-based control assumption and the assumption of the open future.

The original assumptions about controlling and steering among possibilities to create the future must be sacrificed, to restore stable control that can withstand this transformative trial.

Traditional world religious mythology is analogies, key mythemes, that describe the experience of repudiating the original, assumed freewill basis of control power, in order to withstand the vision of pre-existing control thoughts.

The mind has the innate religious capability to have stable control in the intense mystic state, by relying on a new basis and source of control.

Mentally developing this new basis of control through a series of initiation sessions enables gaining and retaining gnosis, bringing the numinous, terrifying and ecstatic vision of the block-universe worldline snake back into mundane life in the ordinary state.

This peak religious experience that deeply transforms thinking about moral agency has been valued most highly.

Traditional world religious mythology such as Jewish, Christian, Greek, Roman, Hellenistic, Ancient Near East, and Northern, engages with the peak experiences and describes transformation of thinking about control, to survive the corrective ordeal while successfully gaining the new mental model of self, world, control, and time.

Assess the value of the Holy Spirit, visionary plants, the loose cognitive association state, the resulting experience of pre-existing thoughts and no-free-will. Critique the world tradition of valuing these things most highly.

Visionary plants were traditionally considered the sacred meal that gives moral transformation, peak experiencing, salvation, gnosis, revelation, purification, exorcism, enlightenment, redemption, regeneration, Transcendent Knowledge.

Poison or medicine, fatal snake bite or looking at Moses’ brass snake on a pole to cure the fatal snake bite, is a matter of positioning, usage, application of the powerful tool.

The revelation of the pre-existence of the future and no-free-will, a kind of non-control, and the illusory nature of possibility branching, could harm or elevate civilization.

9:08pm

Religious mythology is primarily analogy describing visionary plants causing the intense mystic altered state of loose cognitive association, which causes the experience of rock-like frozen-time block-universe no-free-will, confronting the snake-shaped worldline of pre-existing personal control thoughts, leading to a new mental worldmodel of time, self, possibility, and control. 

These analogies that describe the altered-state experiences include tree, snake, rock, king, wine, death, dismemberment, madness, sacrificing a child, storm and then calm, and exorcising an animal-like demon.  (also heaven, hell, afterlife, resurrection, rebirth)

Christianity has lots of great legitimate religious mythemes from the Ancient Near East.

Esoteric, insiders’ Christianity tends to “break” lower, literalist, exoteric Christianity.

Future religion: everyone knows gnosis/ enlightenment/ esoteric wisdom, and knows how it maps to all the mythemes and metaphors from various religions.

Western Esotericism studies are thriving; figured out gnosis, Mystery Religion, the treasure/pearl of wisdom guarded by the dragon; esoteric religion.

In the daily ordinary state, we experience as-if freewill. In the mystic state (as myth describes), underlying no-free-will is experienced/revealed, giving the additional mental model, traditionally considered “higher”.

🍄🐍

Western Esotericism scholarship is suddenly increasing; it’s a golden age/renaissance for the field.

Identifying the *primary* referent of mythology requires studying world mythology, Ancient Near East myth including Jewish/Christian/Greek/Roman, Northern myth, Western Esotericism. Beware partial/secondary solutions.

Aug 10 2019 10:37 pm

The block-universe worldline snake 🐍 guards the treasure: gnosis of no free will, pre-made future.  Mythology is analogy describing sacred 🍄 meal causing loose cognitive association to transform the mental model of time, control, & possibility.

The secret revealed knowledge in peak Western Civilization culture, the dragon-guarded treasure: no-free-will, unveiled in the visionary-plant state.

Shocking heresies in each major area of the Egodeath theory:
o  in Analogy:  No historical Jesus, no literal Heaven or Hell for moral agents
o  in Loosecog:  Religion/eucharist comes from 🍄
o  in Time:  The future is pre-existing and closed
o  in Control:  No-free-will, no meta control

Everyone is innocent of killing Jesus, who was a mythic composite figure – a Jewish-styled Hellenistic mystery cult savior figure.

Insane sophistry preached by exoteric thinkers: Christ is lord of all people, therefore there is no separation, no individuation, no differentiation; we are all the same person, one family, one kin, one nation, spiritually and metaphorically, and therefore literally as well.

At the lower, exoteric, literalist, childish-thinking level, we have perpetual standoff between Christianity, Paganism, and Scientific Atheism.  They can be allied but not integrated, on the lower, exoteric level.  Christianity, Paganism, and Scientific Atheism are not only allied, but integrated, on the esoteric level.

Hyper hyper-Calvinism: everything is God’s fault, the future is closed and pre-existing.  At all points in time, you are forced to think and will what the Creator has made you think and will at that point.  Hell for moral punishment and Heaven for moral reward are metaphorical.

High art describes the sacred meal visionary state, the cognitive changes that it causes, forming the new model of control and time.

The tragedy is the unveiling of no-free-will, inability to change and create the future, which is experienced as closed when in the altered state.

The simple theory of no-free-will is completely offensive to religious preconceptions about moral agency in mundane daily life, and that’s part of what makes the altered state such a radically transformative experience.

Church Fathers before Augustine in 400 asserted freewill. 

Augustine began with no-free-will, asserted freewill, then returned to no-free-will. 

We can expect the Bible to waffle and even highlight waffling – consistently inconsistent – God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, Pharaoh’s heart was hardened by God, Pharaoh hardened his heart against God. 

We can expect the Church Fathers to waffle. 

We can expect Calvinists to waffle, in their impure thinking, except for the hyper hyper-Calvinists who go all the way to consistency.

If you expect to find consistent no-free-will asserted in Hellenistic religion or in the Bible or in historical Theology, that’s naive.  Expect normally to find a wishy-washy, inconsistent jumble.  The best that the Egodeath theory matches this prevarication is modal:

In the ordinary state (tight cognitive binding), the mind experiences freewill, moral agency, open future, multiple branching possibilities. 

In the altered state (loose cognitive binding), the mind experiences no-free-will, frozen-time block-universe worldline, pre-existing control thoughts, closed future, monopossibility.

I don’t “like” Christianity, Atheism, Gnosticism, Mystery Religions, Calvinism, or Catholic Theology, and I don’t agree with them.  They are all poorly organized worldmodels, compared to the Egodeath theory.  They are the old explanatory paradigm to be replaced by this superior explanatory framework.

The most idiotic and unprofitable debate, by complete outsiders, is “Does God exist?”  No one bothers defining ‘God’.  Forget Epistemology; cognitive phenomenology is way more relevant.

Destined to be regenerated by the real presence of esoteric Christ in the Eucharist

If truth is important: Hell is esoteric mythic description of mystic-state experiencing.

If Christianity is truth, at least the esoteric level of Christianity must reveal Jesus as a composite mythic figure.

The 🐍serpent is the #1 mytheme; it means one’s pre-set worldline, frozen in the rock-like block universe, in the altered state from the 🍄sacred meal in mystery religion.  The snake monster guards gnosis.

Immature, exoteric outsider Christians, those on the outside who don’t understand Jesus’ parables, haven’t heard of Richard Carrier, Robert Price, Earl Doherty, or the Jesus Myth theory. 

Traditionalists include esotericists, who know that religion originates from the esoteric, nonliteral level and that the literalist, exoteric level of religion is derivative and untrue.

For those who want it or can benefit from it, esoteric gnosis is available, connecting the factions which are against each other on the lower level: Christianity, Paganism, and Scientific Atheism.

Providing the esoteric gnosis part is now easy, and mapping esoteric gnosis to the lower camps is easy, but how to support each feuding lower camp is unclear. 

The main lower camps are exoteric Christianity, Paganism, and Atheism. 

Even altered-state Atheism can be fundamentalist, exoteric, hostile to Transcendent Knowledge, stuck determinedly in its (false) opposition to Christianity and Paganism.

There is much overlap between Christianity, Paganism, and Scientific Atheism, especially perceptible from within the higher, esoteric level.

“The chosen” are those who are predestined to understand no-free-will.

Exoteric followers of the early Church Fathers prior to later Augustine, form a religion based on (typically) naive freewill, or (ideally) super-cosmic surpassing of high no-free-will, punching through the sphere of fixed stars into the ultra-transcendent heavens.

Religion supports family, but literalist exoteric religion is false.  True religion that supports family values can and must include esoteric religion like that of Paul, the New Testament Jesus, the later Augustine, and hyper hyper-Calvinism.

Swoon theory: Jesus was alive when removed from the cross.

post says “accidentally deleted extra spacing”, maybe below has better:

10:53 pm – has more at bottom, than the above version

The block-universe worldline snake 🐍 guards the treasure: gnosis of no free will, pre-made future.  Mythology is analogy describing sacred 🍄 meal causing loose cognitive association to transform the mental model of time, control, & possibility.

The 🐍serpent is the #1 mytheme; it means one’s pre-set worldline, frozen in the rock-like block universe, in the altered state from the 🍄sacred meal in mystery religion.  The snake monster guards gnosis.

The secret revealed knowledge in peak Western Civilization culture, the dragon-guarded treasure: no-free-will, unveiled in the visionary-plant state.

Shocking heresies in each major area of the Egodeath theory:
o  in Analogy:  No historical Jesus, no literal Heaven or Hell for moral agents
o  in Loosecog:  Religion/eucharist comes from 🍄
o  in Time:  The future is pre-existing and closed
o  in Control:  No-free-will, no meta control

Everyone is innocent of killing Jesus, who was a mythic composite figure — a Jewish-styled Hellenistic mystery cult savior figure.

Insane sophistry preached by exoteric thinkers: Christ is lord of all people, therefore there is no separation, no individuation, no differentiation; we are all the same person, one family, one kin, one nation, spiritually and metaphorically, and therefore literally as well.

At the lower, exoteric, literalist, childish-thinking level, we have perpetual standoff between Christianity, Paganism, and Scientific Atheism.  They can be allied but not integrated, on the lower, exoteric level.  Christianity, Paganism, and Scientific Atheism are not only allied, but integrated, on the esoteric level.

Hyper hyper-Calvinism: everything is God’s fault, the future is closed and pre-existing.  At all points in time, you are forced to think and will what the Creator has made you think and will at that point.  Hell for moral punishment and Heaven for moral reward are metaphorical.

High art describes the sacred meal visionary state, the cognitive changes that it causes, forming the new model of control and time.

The tragedy is the unveiling of no-free-will, inability to change and create the future, which is experienced as closed when in the altered state.

The simple theory of no-free-will is completely offensive to religious preconceptions about moral agency in mundane daily life, and that’s part of what makes the altered state such a radically transformative experience.

The Church Fathers before Augustine in 400 asserted freewill. 

Augustine began with no-free-will, asserted freewill, then returned to no-free-will. 

We can expect the Bible to waffle and even highlight waffling – consistently inconsistent – God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, Pharaoh’s heart was hardened by God, Pharaoh hardened his heart against God. 

We can expect the Church Fathers to waffle. 

We can expect Calvinists to waffle, in their impure thinking, except for the hyper hyper-Calvinists who go all the way to consistency.

If you expect to find consistent no-free-will asserted in Hellenistic religion or in the Bible or in historical Theology, that’s naive.  Expect normally to find a wishy-washy, inconsistent jumble.

The Egodeath theory has a modal way of providing relevant prevarication, actually experienced:

In the ordinary state (tight cognitive binding), the mind experiences freewill, moral agency, open future, multiple branching possibilities. 

In the altered state (loose cognitive binding), the mind experiences no-free-will, frozen-time block-universe worldline, pre-existing control thoughts, closed future, monopossibility.

I don’t “like” Christianity, Atheism, Gnosticism, Mystery Religions, Calvinism, or Catholic Theology, and I don’t agree with them.  They are all poorly organized worldmodels, compared to the Egodeath theory.  They are the old explanatory paradigm to be replaced by this superior explanatory framework.

The most idiotic and unprofitable debate, by complete outsiders, is “Does God exist?”  No one bothers defining ‘God’.  Forget Epistemology; cognitive phenomenology is way more relevant.

Swoon theory: Jesus was alive when removed from the cross.

Added:

The elect are destined to be regenerated by the real presence of esoteric Christ in the Eucharist.

“The chosen” are those who are predestined to understand no-free-will.

If truth is important: Hell is esoteric mythic description of mystic-state experiencing.

If Christianity is truth, at least the esoteric level of Christianity must reveal Jesus as a composite mythic figure.

Immature, exoteric outsider Christians, those on the outside who don’t understand Jesus’ parables, haven’t heard of Richard Carrier, Robert Price, Earl Doherty, or the Jesus Myth theory. 

Traditionalists include esotericists, who know that religion originates from the esoteric, nonliteral level and that the literalist, exoteric level of religion is derivative and untrue.

For those who want it or can benefit from it, esoteric gnosis is available, connecting the factions which are against each other on the lower level: Christianity, Paganism, and Scientific Atheism.

Providing the esoteric gnosis part is now easy, and mapping esoteric gnosis to the lower camps is easy, but how to support each feuding lower camp is unclear. 

The main lower camps are exoteric Christianity, Paganism, and Atheism. 

Even altered-state Atheism can be fundamentalist, exoteric, hostile to Transcendent Knowledge, stuck determinedly in its (false) opposition to Christianity and Paganism.

There is much overlap between Christianity, Paganism, and Scientific Atheism, especially perceptible from within the higher, esoteric level.

Exoteric followers of the early Church Fathers prior to later Augustine, form a religion based on (typically) naive freewill, or (ideally) super-cosmic surpassing of high no-free-will, punching through the sphere of fixed stars into the ultra-transcendent heavens.

Religion supports family, but literalist exoteric religion is false.  True religion that supports family values can and must include esoteric religion like that of Paul, the New Testament Jesus, the later Augustine, and hyper hyper-Calvinism.

Aug 10 11:02pm

Christianity based on naive freewill thinking is non-transformative, like Job’s incorrect, moralist neighbors, who sin in assuming conventional moral agency thinking. 

Exoteric religion is ordinary-state based; there’s nothing of Dionysus in it, no knowledge of God except in a reductionists, moralizing way. 

Exoteric religion is naive freewill religion; single-level religion. 

Any lunkhead, ordinary-state based, unregenerate, conventional Catholic non-religious outsider will tell you, Christianity is really just about moral conduct. 

There’s nothing of the numinous, nothing shocking, nothing that shakes the mind to its foundations as a control agent.

Exoteric religion only has knowledge of God in a reduced way, the conception of God held by the animal-like freewill moral agent.

Aug 13 9:28 pm

I’m not motivated by moralism or truth; I am motivated by identifying a compact elegant model that describes the phenomenology. Conceptual coherence.

I am not concerned whether someone agrees with the theory; I am concerned that they appreciate and understand its compact potent explanatory power, its clarity as an extremely simple model, its beauty and elegance as a theory.

The extreme compactness or compactibility of the Egodeath theory is one of its greatest merits and contributions.

It’s not so much a matter of agreeing with the theory, as knowing what the theory is. It serves as a perfect, clear, specific, highly specified point of reference for any debates.

You can’t get any simpler than saying “in the ordinary state we experience free will, in the altered state we experience no free will”, and this is the most intense experience, that causes a change of mental world model, or at least presents a surprising intense alternate model.

Religious mythology describes the change from ordinary state free will experiencing to altered state no free will experiencing which is the most intense and remarkable experiencing.

Religion which tries to downplay no free will inevitably eliminates the most intense experiencing. The holy spirit combined with avoiding no free will is disempowered and reduced.

Advocating the Egodeath theory does not mean asserting no free will; advocating the theory means advocating the theory as the most interesting, simple, compact, elegant explanation of the phenomena experienced in the altered state, and advocating this impressively simple explanation of mythology in terms of the altered-state experience of non-kingship per the vision of the person’s block universe worldline.

Start with the simplest explanation, the simplest, most potent theory: the ordinary state experiencing is the possiblism model; the altered state experiencing is the eternalism model. Mythology and theology are less-explicit reflections of this contrast.

ripe wrote: aug 15 1pm (i haven’t read)

> I’m not motivated by moralism or truth; I am motivated by identifying a compact elegant model that describes the phenomenology. Conceptual coherence.

If you turn away from moral and truth, it’s like you are turn away from God.
Sound like, moral and truth (which come from God) is less important compared with what your awesome-human-mind can conceive. Are you losing your soul Michael?

This remind me:

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; (4) And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
– Timothy 4:3-4

Your ego-death theory sound now more like a New Age religion, where SIN is not anymore consider, but the power inside humans: you are teaching that we can become like god?

What is more important to you? Become god on earth and lost your soul or to remain humble and join God after death?

Born-again means change your mind and hearth in-line with God Words, and not become god.

Your own ego-death theory suggest that our thoughts come from outside. If is not from God, from whom you are getting this info?

Good Luck with your research and may God guide you and not your human-mind.

August 24, 2019, 11:15 p.m.

These are increasingly accessible, plain-spoken, direct and blunt, ultra-condensed summaries of the Egodeath theory.

“The Egodeath theory” is a label for a simple, compact set of ideas: the analogy/psychedelics/no-free-will explanation of religious mythology and the nature of primary religious experiencing, and the nature of Transcendent Knowledge.

_______________________
SIMPLICITY OF GNOSIS; HOW EASY IT IS TO SUMMARIZE GNOSIS

Gnosis is merely the altered-state experience of no-free-will, pre-existences of control-thoughts.

Gnosis — the peak achievement of western civilization — is the altered-state experience of no-free-will regenerating the mental model of self, time, and control.

🌳⚡🍄🐍✝ sacred meal -> intense mystic altered state -> experience the frozen block-universe with pre-existing snake-shaped worldline of control thoughts & no-free-will.

The pearl of gnosis guarded by snake dragon monster is experience of no-free-will, the peak experience that transforms, from Eucharistic sacred meal; revelation = alt-state no-free-will.

Gnosis wisdom enlightenment: sacred meal 🍄 altered state experience of no-free-will, block-universe worldline 🐍 of your pre-existing control-thoughts.

Gnosis, peak enlightenment is nothing but merely the experience of no-free-will, which cancels moral culpability.  Religious myth describes altered-state experience of pre-existing control-thoughts.

Here is proof that turgid intellectual writing is B.S.: the highest gnosis revelation is simply the altered-state experience of block-universe no-fee-will, perceiving the uncontrollable pre-existence of control-thoughts; easy to express.

Heidegger: 10,000 turgid pages < Euro-Americans: 120-character text message 🌳⚡🍄🐍✝

Real Philosophy is dirt-simple.  Complexity of expression indicates fake posturing pseudo-Philosophy.

_______________________
UNIVERSAL INNATE NATURE OF RELIGION

The mind has innate ability to deeply revise the mental model of control and time in visionary state, = origin of religion.

World religious mythology is evidence that all minds transform the same way in the altered state; gnosis or esoteric revelation applies universally.

The loose cognitive association state from the Eucharist’s Holy Spirit is the visionary state to regenerate and purify.

_______________________
AUTHENTIC EUCHARIST

🍄 Eucharist flesh of Christ, vehicle of the Holy Spirit to regenerate the mental model of moral agency.

Exoteric Catholics don’t have the authentic effective Eucharist, to change the mind.

Agape Meal = Eucharist = love for God = sacred meal inducing altered-state Holy Spirit in Mystery Religion.

_______________________
SCIENCE ACHIEVEMENTS

The greatest Science achievement is internal, about cognition: decoding mythemes as analogy describing altered-state no-free-will experience & mental model.  We went beyond the sphere of the fixed stars.

_______________________
SACRIFICE

The authentic sacrifice is of one’s freewill mental model in the mystic state, which deeply changes moral agency.  Literalist sacrifice is misguided and ineffective.

_______________________
SERPENT/SNAKE

🐍 = the block universe worldline of fated preexisting control-thoughts revealed by Mystery Religion sacred meal = Wisdom tradition = treasure/pearl guarded by dragon/serpent, won by hero with divine help.

Don’t disparage the snake 🐍🐉, the shape of peak wisdom.  Experiential revelation of worldline of preset control-thoughts frozen into the block universe.

The snake mytheme is bi-valent; positive valued and negative valued.  Highest gnosis is seeing block-universe snake-shaped preset worldline of your preexisting control-thoughts; 🐍 = wisdom, gnosis, regeneration.

Mythemes: dragon 🐉 guards the treasure of gnosis, Transcendent Knowledge.  Dragon is the snake monster to reconcile with, frozen block-universe preset path of your life.

Jesus said as a sign, he must be lifted up like Moses’ brass snake on a pole.  Snake is #1 mytheme, describes preset path of control-thoughts frozen into the block universe experienced in the Holy Spirit.

The Vatican building represents the snake.  Looking at Moses’ rigid brass snake on a pole (a de-branched tree) heals “fatal snake bite”.  Serpent/ snake/ 🐉 dragon monster guards treasure of Transcendent Knowledge, of no-free-will.

🐍 = the block universe worldline of fated pre-existing control-thoughts revealed by Mystery Religion sacred meal = Wisdom tradition = treasure/pearl guarded by dragon/serpent, won by hero with divine help.

_______________________
KING

Jesus on the cross is a king, thus is an instance of the widespread mytheme of {king hung fastened helplessly on a tree}.

Lots of Hellenistic-type mythemes in Christ’s Passion story: mocking the king and Mystery Religion initiates (impotence of freewill agency), king hung helpless in branching tree, reborn from rock cave.

Personal king-like control-power evaporates upon perceiving the pre-existing path of your control-thoughts frozen into the spacetime block.

_______________________
SHOCKING THEORIES

Heresy theories:
The swoon theory
The Christ Myth theory
No-free-will revelation
Chronology revision
🍄 the source of religion

_______________________
TWO TYPES OF CHRISTIANITY

Literalist religion is popular; metaphorical mystic-state religion is less common; primitive cultures sit halfway between.

Most religionists and atheists sound like a fool when characterizing religion.  Need more esotericism awareness.

Restorationist Esoteric Christianity

The true church is esoteric Christians regenerated by the Holy Spirit from the real presence in the sacred meal Eucharist.

Esoteric religion contradicts exoteric, they are somehow “compatible”.  Two meanings of “heaven” & “hell”.

Esoteric Christians love literalist immature outsider exoteric Christians.

Christianity is Hellenistic mystery religion expressed with Jewish elements.

Lower-level religion is moral conduct of life. 
Higher religion is altered-state (Holy Spirit) revision of the mental model of moral control agency.

_______________________
ACCELERATIONIST CHRISTIANITY

The Bible plan: Christians put Antichrist on the throne in the temple and resume animal sacrifice for cleansing of sin – an ineffective religion of literalism that cannot cancel moral culpability and deeply transform the mind like the altered-state experience of timeless no-free-will with pre-existing control-thoughts.

Christians must help put antichrist on the throne in the temple that God tore down twice, and resume animal sacrifice for cleansing sin.

Christian accelerationism: Christians must help put antichrist on the throne in rebuilt template and restore animal sacrifice for cleansing sin.

_______________________
CONFLATION OF ‘UNITY’ WITH LACK OF DIFFERENTIATION

We are all united by Christ, but that doesn’t mean we are undifferentiated; that would be insanity and mental regression in Ken Wilber’s sense.  Christ is lord over all, but that doesn’t mean dissolving all boundaries into an undifferentiated mass.

The Bible doesn’t assert insanity like “never judge, don’t make any distinctions, male is literally the same as female, we are an undifferentiated mass”.  Insanity is dissolving into chaos all boundaries and distinctions. 

Ken Wilber’s concept of the pre/trans fallacy, don’t conflate transcending mental structures, with the failure and chaotic dis-integration and breakdown of mental structures.

_______________________
REINCARNATION MYTHEME

“Reincarnation” is an analogy describing altered-state experiencing: forgetting the temporary vision of the higher model of control & time.

_______________________
ANDRO-GYNE

Mithras, Christ, and Dionysus were given male and female traits, per common mythemes.

Traditional culture includes Herme-Aphrodite in myth; andro-gyne: for example, Dionysus had female traits.

In ancient Athens, men played the women’s roles in plays.

Greeks culture many surprises.  Men played the women roles in platys.  Religious experience via rounds of mushroom wine (wide tradition of sacred meals), andro-gyne Dionysus.

Myth includes andro-gyne; Herme-Aphrodite.  Altered-state experiencing of “inability to control one’s pre-existing control-thoughts” is like “being female”, ie. involuntarily receptive of thoughts from the male source.

_______________________
ATHEISM DECLINE

Religious founder figures are mythic composite figures also incorporating historical individuals.

Atheism fell off a cliff a few years ago.  That is revealed in the dates on YouTube Christ Myth Richard Carrier videos.

Atheism is ignorant of higher mind peak experience (as is exoteric religion, and lower Cognitive Science).

Christ-myth research thrived around 2005-2015, and won, with the pathetic response from Bart Ehrman, and then fell off a cliff a few years ago around 2014-2016.

Atheism sharply plummeted when Richard Carrier pushed Atheism Plus and everyone ran away, a few years after the 4 Atheists wrote their uninformed books that lacked awareness of mysticism or esoteric religion.

Around 2010, it was dominant Christians vs. underdog Atheists.
In 2019, it’s split unclearly between Atheism, Paganism, and Christianity advocates. 

I completely stopped following Christ Myth research around the time Richard Carrier wrote his first book. 

I was a leader within the heart of Christ Myth research, though the JesusMysteries discussion-group moderators overrode people’s asking me for the updated, improved mushroom alternative theory replacing Allegro’s poorly formed, anti-Christian version of the theory.

I provided some better formulations of the ideas such as what does “Historical Jesus” mean instead of conventional ideas that “Jesus was really this particular historical minor figure I latched onto”.

_______________________
MUSIC

Some Metal is truly classic; it describes peak esoteric altered-state experiencing.  mundane conservatives disparage Sabbath and Ozzy, but Bob Daisley’s Ozzy album _Diary of a Madman_ is epic and classic by traditional standards.

Classic Metal includes the altered-state revelation of no-free-will — peak culture.

Rap music probably has few lyrics about the peak-state revelation of mind-transforming block-universe worldline 🐍.

Boomers invented electric Rock ⚡🎸🎹⚡ music including some peak-state classic Dionysian revelation of block-universe no-free-will.

Strangely, in Beatles lyrics, only the early song Help! has solid altered-state classic-type lyrics.

Pink Floyd’s song “Learning to Fly” has solid classic altered-state description lyrics.

Country/Western music suffers the same problem as much conservative culture: it is limited to the mundane daily life, conduct of life, ordinary state of consciousness.

Mundane Country/Western music doesn’t reach up to describe the mind-changing experiences of the intense mystic altered state.

Liberal culture ends up holding the higher goods, inasmuch as it can, lacking the structure of conservative thinking.

The Egodeath theory was born from an outsider, break-the-mold combination of liberal and conservative culture or thought-styles.

Aug 25 2019, 1:25 am – might be typos, which might be fixed in subsequent post

hard to be certain, due to erratic system

These are increasingly accessible, plain-spoken, direct and blunt, ultra-condensed summaries of the Egodeath theory.

“The Egodeath theory” is a label for a simple, compact set of ideas.

The Egodeath theory is the analogy/ psychedelics/ no-free-will explanation of religious mythology and the nature of primary religious experiencing, and the nature of Transcendent Knowledge.

_______________________
SIMPLICITY OF GNOSIS; HOW EASY IT IS TO SUMMARIZE GNOSIS

Gnosis is merely the altered-state experience of no-free-will, perceiving the pre-existence of control-thoughts.

Gnosis — the peak achievement of western civilization — is the altered-state experience of no-free-will regenerating the mental model of self, time, and control.

Gnosis is the peak achievement of Western civilization.

Gnosis is the altered-state experience of no-free-will.

The repeated experience of timeless frozen block-universe no-free-will changes the mental model of self, time, and control.

The intense mystic altered state (loose cognitive association) causes experiencing block-universe no-free-will with pre-existing control-thoughts.

The intense mystic altered state causes experiencing block-universe no-free-will, with pre-existing control-thoughts.

Key mytheme sequence: {king steering tree wine battle die snake rock rebirth}

The king steers in a possibility-branching tree, drinks wine, battles, dies, transforms to a snake frozen in rock, then rebirth from the rock cave.

No-free-will cancels, transforms, and regenerates the mental model of self, time, and control.

The repeated block-universe experience changes the mental model of control and time.

🌳⚡🍄🐍✝ sacred meal -> intense mystic altered state -> experience the frozen block-universe with pre-existing snake-shaped worldline of control thoughts & no-free-will.

The pearl of gnosis guarded by snake dragon monster is experience of no-free-will, the peak experience that transforms, from Eucharistic sacred meal; revelation = alt-state no-free-will.

Gnosis wisdom enlightenment: sacred meal 🍄 altered state experience of no-free-will, block-universe worldline 🐍 of your pre-existing control-thoughts.

Gnosis, peak enlightenment is nothing but merely the experience of no-free-will, which cancels moral culpability.

Religious myth describes altered-state experience of pre-existing control-thoughts.

Here is proof that turgid intellectual writing is B.S.: the highest gnosis revelation is simply the altered-state experience of block-universe no-fee-will, perceiving the uncontrollable pre-existence of control-thoughts; easy to express.

Heidegger: 10,000 turgid pages < Euro-Americans: 120-character text message 🌳⚡🍄🐍✝

Real Philosophy is dirt-simple.  Complexity of expression indicates fake posturing pseudo-Philosophy.

_______________________
UNIVERSAL INNATE NATURE OF RELIGION

The mind has innate ability to deeply revise the mental model of control and time in visionary state, = origin of religion.

World religious mythology is evidence that all minds transform the same way in the altered state; gnosis or esoteric revelation applies universally.

The loose cognitive association state, from the Eucharist’s Holy Spirit, is the visionary state, to regenerate and purify.

_______________________
AUTHENTIC EUCHARIST

🍄 Eucharist flesh of Christ, vehicle of the Holy Spirit to regenerate the mental model of moral agency.

Exoteric Catholics don’t have the authentic effective Eucharist, to change the mind.

Agape Meal = Eucharist = love for God = sacred meal inducing altered-state Holy Spirit in Mystery Religion.

_______________________
SCIENCE ACHIEVEMENTS

The greatest Science achievement is internal, about cognition: decoding mythemes as analogy describing altered-state no-free-will experience & mental model of time and control. 

We went beyond the sphere of the fixed stars.

The greatest Science achievement is internal, about cognition. 

The greatest Science achievement is decoding mythemes as analogy that describes altered-state no-free-will experience & transforming the mental model of time and control.

_______________________
SACRIFICE

The authentic sacrifice is of one’s freewill mental model in the mystic state, which deeply changes moral agency.

Literalist sacrifice is misguided and ineffective.

_______________________
SERPENT/SNAKE

🐍 = the block universe worldline of fated preexisting control-thoughts revealed by the Mystery Religion sacred meal = the Wisdom tradition = the treasure/pearl guarded by the dragon or serpent, won by the hero, with divine help.

The snake frozen in rock is like the block universe worldline of fated preexisting control-thoughts.

The pre-existence of control-thoughts is revealed by the Mystery Religion sacred meal.

The Wisdom tradition = the treasure or pearl guarded by the dragon or serpent.

The treasure of gnosis is obtained from the dragon, won by the hero and reconciled, with divine help.

Don’t disparage the snake 🐍🐉, the shape of peak wisdom.

Experiential revelation of worldline of preset control-thoughts frozen into the block universe.

The snake mytheme is bi-valent; positive valued and negative valued.

Highest gnosis is seeing the block-universe snake-shaped preset worldline of your preexisting control-thoughts.

🐍 = wisdom, gnosis, regeneration

Mythemes: dragon 🐉 guards the treasure of gnosis, Transcendent Knowledge.

The dragon is the snake monster to reconcile with, frozen block-universe preset path of your life.

Jesus said as a sign, he must be lifted up like Moses’ brass snake on a pole.

The snake is the #1 mytheme, because it describes the pre-set path of control-thoughts frozen into the block universe, experienced in the Holy Spirit.

The Vatican building represents the snake.

Looking at Moses’ rigid brass snake on a pole (a de-branched tree) heals “fatal snake bite”.

Serpent/ snake/ 🐉 dragon monster guards treasure of Transcendent Knowledge, of no-free-will.

🐍 = the block universe worldline of fated pre-existing control-thoughts revealed by Mystery Religion sacred meal = Wisdom tradition = treasure/pearl guarded by dragon/serpent, won by hero with divine help.

_______________________
KING

Jesus on the cross is a king, thus is an instance of the widespread mytheme of {king hung fastened helplessly on a tree}.

Lots of Hellenistic-type mythemes in Christ’s Passion story: mocking the king and Mystery Religion initiates (impotence of freewill agency), king hung helpless in branching tree, reborn from rock cave.

There are many Hellenistic-type mythemes in Christ’s Passion story.

Mocking the king and the Mystery Religion initiates means pointing out the impotence of freewill agency.

The king is hung and fastened helpless like a rigid snake in the branching tree, then is reborn from the rock cave.

Personal king-like control-power evaporates upon perceiving the pre-existing path of your control-thoughts frozen into the spacetime block.

_______________________
SHOCKING THEORIES

Heresy theories:
The swoon theory
The Christ Myth theory
No-free-will revelation
Chronology revision
🍄 the source of religion

_______________________
TWO TYPES OF CHRISTIANITY

Literalist religion is popular; metaphorical mystic-state religion is less common; primitive cultures sit halfway between.

Most religionists and atheists sound like a fool when characterizing religion.

More awareness of esotericism is needed, including Western Esotericism.

Restorationist Esoteric Christianity

The true church is esoteric Christians regenerated by the Holy Spirit from the real presence in the god’s sacred meal, the Eucharist.

Esoteric religion contradicts exoteric, they are somehow “compatible”.

There are two meanings of “heaven” & “hell”.

Esoteric Christians love literalist immature outsider exoteric Christians.

Christianity is Hellenistic mystery religion expressed with Jewish elements.

Lower-level religion is moral conduct of life. 

Higher religion is altered-state (Holy Spirit) revision of the mental model of moral control agency.

_______________________
ACCELERATIONIST CHRISTIANITY

The Bible plan: Christians put Antichrist on the throne in the temple and resume animal sacrifice for cleansing of sin.

Christians must help put Antichrist on the throne in the temple that God tore down twice, and resume animal sacrifice for cleansing sin.

Christian accelerationism: Christians must help put Antichrist on the throne in rebuilt template and restore animal sacrifice for cleansing sin.

The actual, specific sacrifice is repudiating relying on the “branching open-future” model of time and control.

Animal sacrifice is an ineffective religion of literalism that cannot cancel moral culpability and deeply transform the mind like the altered-state experience of timeless no-free-will with pre-existing control-thoughts.

Animal sacrifice is an ineffective religion of literalism.

Sacrifice the “branching open-future” model of time and control.

Experiencing block-universe no-free-will cancels moral culpability and deeply transforms the mind.

Experiencing timeless frozen pre-existing control-thoughts cancels and transforms moral agency.

The mind is deeply transformed by the altered-state experience of timeless no-free-will with pre-existing control-thoughts.

_______________________
CONFLATION OF ‘UNITY’ WITH LACK OF DIFFERENTIATION

We are all united by Christ, but that doesn’t mean we are undifferentiated; that would be insanity and mental regression in Ken Wilber’s sense.

Christ is lord over all, but that doesn’t mean dissolving all boundaries into an undifferentiated mass.

The Bible doesn’t assert insanity like “never judge, don’t make any distinctions, male is literally the same as female, we are an undifferentiated mass”.

Insanity is dissolving into chaos all boundaries and distinctions. 

Ken Wilber’s concept of the pre/trans fallacy, don’t conflate transcending mental structures, with the failure and chaotic dis-integration and breakdown of mental structures.

_______________________
REINCARNATION MYTHEME

“Reincarnation” is an analogy describing altered-state experiencing: forgetting the temporary vision of the higher model of control & time.

_______________________
ANDRO-GYNE

Mithras, Christ, and Dionysus were given male and female traits, per common mythemes.

Traditional culture includes Herme-Aphrodite in myth; andro-gyne: for example, Dionysus had female traits.

In ancient Athens, men played the women’s roles in plays.

Greeks culture many surprises.  Men played the women roles in platys.  Religious experience via rounds of mushroom wine (wide tradition of sacred meals), andro-gyne Dionysus.

Myth includes andro-gyne; Herme-Aphrodite.

The altered-state experiencing of “inability to control one’s pre-existing control-thoughts” is like “being female”.

The altered-state experience is like “being female”.

The person is the female-like receiver of control-thoughts, which are input by the male-like source of control-thoughts.

_______________________
ATHEISM DECLINE

Religious founder figures are mythic composite figures also incorporating historical individuals.

Atheism fell off a cliff a few years ago.  That is revealed in the dates on YouTube Christ Myth Richard Carrier videos.

Atheism is ignorant of higher mind peak experience (as is exoteric religion, and lower Cognitive Science).

Christ-myth research thrived around 2005-2015, and won, with the pathetic response from Bart Ehrman, and then fell off a cliff a few years ago around 2014-2016.

Atheism sharply plummeted when Richard Carrier pushed Atheism Plus and everyone ran away, a few years after the 4 Atheists wrote their uninformed books that lacked awareness of mysticism or esoteric religion.

Atheism sharply plummeted when Richard Carrier pushed Atheism Plus and everyone ran away.

Atheism dropped sharply, a few years after the 4 Atheists wrote their uninformed books that lacked awareness of mysticism or esoteric religion.

Athiests wrote uninformed books that lacked awareness of mysticism or esoteric religion.

Around 2010, it was dominant Christians vs. underdog Atheists.
In 2019, it’s split unclearly between Atheism, Paganism, and Christianity advocates.

Paganism is religion and spirituality avoiding the liabilities of Christianity.

I completely stopped following Christ Myth research around the time Richard Carrier wrote his first book. 

I was a leader within the heart of Christ Myth research.

In the JesusMysteries discussion group, people were interested in the mind-changing Eucharist.

The JesusMysteries discussion-group moderators overrode people’s interest in the mind-changing Eucharist.

People asked me for the updated, improved mushroom alternative theory.

The new model replaces Allegro’s poorly formed, anti-Christian version of the theory.

Allegro has a poorly formed, anti-Christian version of the mushroom Christ Myth theory.

I provided some better formulations of the ideas such as what does “Historical Jesus” mean, how it should be most relevantly defined.

“Historical Jesus” must mean a single unique identifiable man without whom Christianity wouldn’t have started.

A common fallacy is to identify Jesus arbitrariliy with a minor single particular historical figure.

_______________________
MUSIC

Some Metal is truly classic; it describes peak esoteric altered-state experiencing.

Mundane conservatives disparage Sabbath and Ozzy, but Bob Daisley’s Ozzy album _Diary of a Madman_ is epic and classic by traditional standards.

Classic Metal includes the altered-state revelation of no-free-will — peak culture.

Rap music probably has few lyrics about the peak-state revelation of mind-transforming block-universe worldline 🐍.

Boomers invented electric Rock ⚡🎸🎹⚡ music including some peak-state classic Dionysian revelation of block-universe no-free-will.

Strangely, in Beatles lyrics, only the early song Help! has solid altered-state classic-type lyrics.

Pink Floyd’s song “Learning to Fly” has solid classic altered-state description lyrics.

Country/Western music is limited to the mundane ordinary state.

Country/Western music suffers the same problem as most mundane culture: it lacks altered-state transformation into the no-free-will mental model.

Country/Western music lacks altered-state transformation into the no-free-will mental model.

Elevated music describes altered-state transformation into the no-free-will mental model.

Country/Western music is limited to the mundane daily life, conduct of life, ordinary state of consciousness.

August 25, 2019 , 2:04 a.m.

These are increasingly accessible, plain-spoken, direct and blunt, ultra-condensed summaries of the Egodeath theory.

“The Egodeath theory” is a label for a simple, compact set of ideas.

The Egodeath theory is the analogy/ psychedelics/ no-free-will explanation of religious mythology and the nature of primary religious experiencing, and the nature of Transcendent Knowledge.

_______________________
SIMPLICITY OF GNOSIS; HOW EASY IT IS TO SUMMARIZE GNOSIS

Gnosis is merely the altered-state experience of no-free-will, perceiving the pre-existence of control-thoughts.

Gnosis — the peak achievement of western civilization — is the altered-state experience of no-free-will regenerating the mental model of self, time, and control.

Gnosis is the peak achievement of Western civilization.

Gnosis is the altered-state experience of no-free-will.

The repeated experience of timeless frozen block-universe no-free-will changes the mental model of self, time, and control.

The intense mystic altered state (loose cognitive association) causes experiencing block-universe no-free-will with pre-existing control-thoughts.

The intense mystic altered state causes experiencing block-universe no-free-will, with pre-existing control-thoughts.

Key mytheme sequence: {king steering tree wine battle die snake rock rebirth}

The king steers in a possibility-branching tree, drinks wine, battles, dies, transforms to a snake frozen in rock, then rebirth from the rock cave.

No-free-will cancels, transforms, and regenerates the mental model of self, time, and control.

The repeated block-universe experience changes the mental model of control and time.

🌳⚡🍄🐍✝ sacred meal -> intense mystic altered state -> experience the frozen block-universe with pre-existing snake-shaped worldline of control thoughts & no-free-will.

The pearl of gnosis guarded by the snake dragon monster is the experience of no-free-will, the peak experience that transforms, from the Eucharistic sacred meal.

Revelation is the altered-state experience of no-free-will.

Gnosis wisdom enlightenment: sacred meal 🍄 altered state experience of no-free-will, block-universe worldline 🐍 of your pre-existing control-thoughts.

Gnosis, peak enlightenment is nothing but merely the experience of no-free-will, which cancels moral culpability.

Gnosis is the experience of no-free-will, which cancels moral culpability.

Religious myth describes altered-state experience of pre-existing control-thoughts.

Here is proof that turgid intellectual writing is B.S.: the highest gnosis revelation is simply the altered-state experience of block-universe no-free-will, perceiving the uncontrollable pre-existence of control-thoughts; easy to express.

Turgid intellectual writing is B.S.

Gnosis is the altered-state experience of block-universe no-free-will, perceiving the uncontrollable pre-existence of control-thoughts.

Heidegger writes in a thousand turgid pages less content than Euro-Americans write in a 120-character text message 🌳⚡🍄🐍✝

Real Philosophy is dirt-simple.

Complexity of expression indicates fake posturing pseudo-Philosophy.

_______________________
UNIVERSAL INNATE NATURE OF RELIGION

The mind has innate ability to deeply revise the mental model of control and time in visionary state, = origin of religion.

World religious mythology is evidence that all minds transform the same way in the altered state; gnosis or esoteric revelation applies universally.

The loose cognitive association state, from the Eucharist’s Holy Spirit, is the visionary state, to regenerate and purify.

_______________________
AUTHENTIC EUCHARIST

🍄 Eucharist flesh of Christ, vehicle of the Holy Spirit to regenerate the mental model of moral agency.

Exoteric Catholics don’t have the authentic effective Eucharist, to change the mind.

Agape Meal = Eucharist = love for God = sacred meal inducing altered-state Holy Spirit in Mystery Religion.

_______________________
SCIENCE ACHIEVEMENTS

The greatest Science achievement is internal, about cognition: decoding mythemes as analogy describing altered-state no-free-will experience & mental model of time and control. 

We went beyond the sphere of the fixed stars.

The greatest Science achievement is internal, about cognition. 

The greatest Science achievement is decoding mythemes as analogy that describes altered-state no-free-will experience & transforming the mental model of time and control.

_______________________
SACRIFICE

The authentic sacrifice is of one’s freewill mental model in the mystic state, which deeply changes moral agency.

Literalist sacrifice is misguided and ineffective.

_______________________
SERPENT/SNAKE

🐍 = the block universe worldline of fated preexisting control-thoughts revealed by the Mystery Religion sacred meal = the Wisdom tradition = the treasure/pearl guarded by the dragon or serpent, won by the hero, with divine help.

The snake frozen in rock is like the block universe worldline of fated preexisting control-thoughts.

The pre-existence of control-thoughts is revealed by the Mystery Religion sacred meal.

The Wisdom tradition = the treasure or pearl guarded by the dragon or serpent.

The treasure of gnosis is obtained from the dragon, won by the hero and reconciled, with divine help.

Don’t disparage the snake 🐍🐉, the shape of peak wisdom.

Experiential revelation of worldline of preset control-thoughts frozen into the block universe.

The snake mytheme is bi-valent; positive valued and negative valued.

Highest gnosis is seeing the block-universe snake-shaped preset worldline of your preexisting control-thoughts.

🐍 = wisdom, gnosis, regeneration

Mythemes: dragon 🐉 guards the treasure of gnosis, Transcendent Knowledge.

The dragon is the snake monster to reconcile with, frozen block-universe preset path of your life.

Jesus said as a sign, he must be lifted up like Moses’ brass snake on a pole.

The snake is the #1 mytheme, because it describes the pre-set path of control-thoughts frozen into the block universe, experienced in the Holy Spirit.

The Vatican building represents the snake.

Looking at Moses’ rigid brass snake on a pole (a de-branched tree) heals “fatal snake bite”.

Serpent/ snake/ 🐉 dragon monster guards treasure of Transcendent Knowledge, of no-free-will.

🐍 = the block universe worldline of fated pre-existing control-thoughts revealed by Mystery Religion sacred meal = Wisdom tradition = treasure/pearl guarded by dragon/serpent, won by hero with divine help.

_______________________
KING

Jesus on the cross is a king, thus is an instance of the widespread mytheme of {king hung fastened helplessly on a tree}.

Lots of Hellenistic-type mythemes in Christ’s Passion story: mocking the king and Mystery Religion initiates (impotence of freewill agency), king hung helpless in branching tree, reborn from rock cave.

There are many Hellenistic-type mythemes in Christ’s Passion story.

Mocking the king and the Mystery Religion initiates means pointing out the impotence of freewill agency.

The king is hung and fastened helpless like a rigid snake in the branching tree, then is reborn from the rock cave.

Personal king-like control-power evaporates upon perceiving the pre-existing path of your control-thoughts frozen into the spacetime block.

_______________________
SHOCKING THEORIES

Heresy theories:
The swoon theory
The Christ Myth theory
No-free-will revelation
Chronology revision
🍄 the source of religion

_______________________
TWO TYPES OF CHRISTIANITY

Literalist religion is popular; metaphorical mystic-state religion is less common; primitive cultures sit halfway between.

Most religionists and atheists sound like a fool when characterizing religion.

More awareness of esotericism is needed, including Western Esotericism.

Restorationist Esoteric Christianity

The true church is esoteric Christians regenerated by the Holy Spirit from the real presence in the god’s sacred meal, the Eucharist.

Esoteric religion contradicts exoteric, they are somehow “compatible”.

There are two meanings of “heaven” & “hell”.

Esoteric Christians love literalist immature outsider exoteric Christians.

Christianity is Hellenistic mystery religion expressed with Jewish elements.

Lower-level religion is moral conduct of life. 

Higher religion is altered-state (Holy Spirit) revision of the mental model of moral control agency.

_______________________
ACCELERATIONIST CHRISTIANITY

The Bible plan: Christians put Antichrist on the throne in the temple and resume animal sacrifice for cleansing of sin.

Christians must help put Antichrist on the throne in the temple that God tore down twice, and resume animal sacrifice for cleansing sin.

Christian accelerationism: Christians must help put Antichrist on the throne in rebuilt temple and restore animal sacrifice for cleansing sin.

The actual, specific sacrifice is repudiating relying on the “branching open-future” model of time and control.

Animal sacrifice is an ineffective religion of literalism that cannot cancel moral culpability and deeply transform the mind like the altered-state experience of timeless no-free-will with pre-existing control-thoughts.

Animal sacrifice is an ineffective religion of literalism.

Sacrifice the “branching open-future” model of time and control.

Experiencing block-universe no-free-will cancels moral culpability and deeply transforms the mind.

Experiencing timeless frozen pre-existing control-thoughts cancels and transforms moral agency.

The mind is deeply transformed by the altered-state experience of timeless no-free-will with pre-existing control-thoughts.

_______________________
CONFLATION OF ‘UNITY’ WITH LACK OF DIFFERENTIATION

We are all united by Christ, but that doesn’t mean we are undifferentiated; that would be insanity and mental regression in Ken Wilber’s sense.

Christ is lord over all, but that doesn’t mean dissolving all boundaries into an undifferentiated mass.

The Bible doesn’t assert insanity like “never judge, don’t make any distinctions, male is literally the same as female, we are an undifferentiated mass”.

Insanity is dissolving into chaos all boundaries and distinctions. 

Ken Wilber’s concept of the pre/trans fallacy, don’t conflate transcending mental structures, with the failure and chaotic dis-integration and breakdown of mental structures.

_______________________
REINCARNATION MYTHEME

“Reincarnation” is an analogy describing altered-state experiencing: forgetting the temporary vision of the higher model of control & time.

_______________________
ANDRO-GYNE

Mithras, Christ, and Dionysus were given male and female traits, per common mythemes.

Traditional culture includes Herme-Aphrodite in myth; andro-gyne: for example, Dionysus had female traits.

In ancient Athens, men played the women’s roles in plays.

Greeks culture many surprises.  Men played the women roles in plays.  Religious experience via rounds of mushroom wine (wide tradition of sacred meals), andro-gyne Dionysus.

Compact, plain-language summaries
September 1, 2019, 9:02 p.m.

Probably reorg’d and cleaned up vs. the prev post.

Compact, plain-language summaries

___________________________________
GNOSIS

Gnosis is the altered-state experience of block-universe no-free-will with preexisting control-thoughts ☸🤔, reconciled with the creator of all thoughts.

Snake or dragon = gnosis wisdom = experiencing block-universe no-free-will in Holy Spirit state from Eucharist, frozen worldline of pre-existing control-thoughts ☸🤔.

Enlightenment 🔥🔦 = 🍄 experiencing pre-existing control-thoughts frozen in a snake-shaped worldline embedded in the block universe.

Gnosis is the altered-state experience of block-universe no-free-will and reconciling with pre-existing control-thoughts ☸🤔.

Gnosis is the altered-state experience of no-free-will, changing the mental model 🤔 of control and time ⏳🕰, learning to trust the hidden source of control-thoughts.

Metaphysical enlightenment 🔥🔦 is reflected in world religious mythology, including Western Esotericism.

__________________________________
NO-FREE-WILL

We already travelled *beyond* the stars, per Ptolemaic Astral Ascent Mysticism – an advanced level is “penetrating the sphere of Saturn and the fixed stars” into the higher heavens.

Moral culpability reverts to the Creator; no-free-will cancels culpability.

The first Church Fathers & mid-period Augustine assert freewill, but late Augustine asserts no-free-will. 

Atheism (such as Sam Harris), Stoicism, Gnosticism, and Calvinism assert no-free-will.

The key issue and the center of theology is no-free-will, and ways to combine moral culpability with no-free-will.

People severely object to no-free-will, because no-free-will completely kills ego and moral agency culpability, and renders Heaven and Hell for moral reward and punishment inapplicable.

In the ordinary state, is experienced free will; in the altered state, is experienced no-free-will.

It makes sense that freewill is the central focus of theology and religion and mystic-state experiencing, and mental transformation.

The fact of severe objections to no-free-will confirms how totally central, relevant, and potent the no-free-will experience and proposition is.

No-free-will completely undermines the assumption of self-determination and moral culpability.

The best type of Compatibilism is experiential, phenomenological, cognitive psychology: the ordinary state gives the experience of freewill, and the altered state gives the experience of no-free-will.

Freewill arguments are convincing only to people who believe in free will.

Freewill justifications are unconvincing to people who believe no-free-will.

The no-free-will position takes into account rationality and interpersonal emotions.

The no-free-will position explains how moral culpability can be done away with, as in, believing in “the king 👑 fastened helplessly to the 🌳” clears moral sin.

“Objection: If there is no-free-will, our moral culpability is done away with, and that’s bad.” Yet “Believing in Jesus clears our sin, and that’s good.”

Freewill arguments are completely weak and ineffectual.

___________________________________
MORAL AGENCY BUT NOT EGO?

Spiritualists advocate no-ego.

No-free-will is total negation of ego power. 

Spiritualists reject no-free-will, to preserve moral culpability = ego.

___________________________________
HEAVEN & HELL

Hell describes trying in vain to rely on freewill power while in the mystic state of experiencing no-free-will.

Hell is the bedeviled personal control system.

In hyper-Calvinism, everything is God’s fault; the future exists and is closed, including future control-thoughts, and Heaven and Hell are analogies for transformative experience.

Heaven and Hell are mythic analogies describing the futile attempt to retain control using the presumed freewill basis of control.

__________________________________
2-LEVEL RELIGION

{little children 👶} means exoteric religionists.  Awakened esotericists should not be a stumbling block to exoteric religionists.

The “chosen race” means the set of individuals predestined to receive the 🍄 sacred meal and experience no-free-will and mentally shift moral culpability to the hidden source of thoughts, the Creator.

Winnowing the wheat from the chaff is key to reading nonfiction books, and how to approach everything: movies, Rock, Art, Comics, Religion, mysticism/esotericism, etc.

Pray for us on Sunday mornings to rightly divide the scriptures, when in church.  Spiritual network of saints.

Don’t blanket-demonize Rock, Christianity, Paganism, movies, art, comics, or videogames — reject the harmful version and develop the healthy version of any part of culture.

___________________________________
MYTH AS ANALOGY

Mythemes are shared across religions including Persian, Jewish, Greek, Christian, Roman, & Pagan.

To the esotericist, there’s less substantial differences between brands of religion.

Myth explanation must include the altered state.

Theories of religious mythology are weak because they fail to account for intense altered-state experiencing; they don’t engage with the subject matter.

Paul’s Christ was a spiritual figure; early Christians before the biographical Gospels were written didn’t need a historical Jesus.

Mythology is analogy describing intense mystic altered state, such as the Holy Spirit from the 🍄sacred meal Eucharist.

Bunk theories of myth assume the ordinary state, so fail to engage religious experience.

Bunk reductionist theories fail to explain intense experience.

In the Bible, an encounter with an angel 👼 causes numinous ⚡ terror 😱 and awe and fear, falling down trembling in terror.

Religious myth describes metaphysical enlightenment 🔥🔦 from the altered-state experience of no-free-will.

Myth is analogy describing ingesting visionary plants, the sacred meal 🍄, causing the altered state of loose cognitive association.

Myth is analogy describing ingesting the sacred meal 🍄 and experiencing frozen-time ❄⏳🕰 non-control, receiving control-thoughts from an uncontrollable source.

Mythemes describe mental transformation about time ⏳🕰 & control in the altered state.

___________________________________
SACRED MEAL

Psil 🍄is most traditional & representative of Western Esotericism.

🍄 are shown heavily throughout Christian art, proving that they were *not* restricted only to greeks, but have been a major Western religious tradition.

The altered state is the Holy Spirit from ingesting the Eucharist.

The sacred meal 🍄 gives the experience of block-universe worldline, described like a rock containing a snake 🐍.

Unforgivable sin, don’t blaspheme the 🍄Holy Spirit.

The flesh of Christ 🍄 sacred meal Eucharist gives Holy Spirit altered state, experience of no-free-will frozen in rock.

The sacred meal 🍄 induces Holy Spirit altered state, experience no-free-will, mind is reformed to trust hidden source of control-thoughts.

The ancient 🍄 sacred meal tradition was ubiquitous and standard.

___________________________
ART

Art and myth describe the peak altered-state experiencing of no-free-will.

Integrate Dionysus, music, higher consciousness in a well-formed version.

Authentic traditional high art describes the peak mystic state of consciousness, per Alex Grey but add mythemes.

Art expresses & conveys full 2-level religion & Philosophy.

For any book, such as The Mystery of the Cathedrals: and the Esoteric Interpretation of the Hermetic Symbols of the Great Work (1926): check for mystic state giving experience of no-free-will/ non-control.

___________________________
MENTAL MODEL TRANSFORMATION

The word ‘death’ has two important meanings: the mystic-state death experience in initiation, & literal physical death.

Youths have an innate initiation drive, for death, transformation, & rebirth.

Being an adult is equated with being initiated in Mystery Religion, which means ingesting the sacred meal and experiencing the intense mind-changing altered state.

The mind has an innate hunger for mental transformation, thus the initiation tradition.

The intense mystic altered state changes the mental model 🤔 of control and time 🕰.

Instead of depending on the presumed freewill basis of personal control power, the mind consciously depends on and trusts in the hidden source of control-thoughts.

The initial model of control ☸ is sacrificed like a childish 👶 or animal-like 👹 way of thinking.

The control model changes from a king 👑 steering ☸ in a branching possibility 🌳 into an open future, to a 🐍 frozen in rock.

The new mental model is born from the block-universe rock, and the mind is released from the experience of no-free-will.

In the ordinary state, the freewill experience and mental model returns.

After the altered state, the freewill model is qualified and supplemented by the no-free-will model, with trust in the revealed hidden source of thoughts 🤔, the Creator of the block universe.

The altered state gives the experience of the block universe with embedded, preexisting, 🐍-shaped worldline of your control-thoughts ☸🤔.

___________________________________
SNAKE, DRAGON

Apollo sh*t arrows at the dragon, was victorious, earned the laurel wreath victory crown: analogies for transcending the lower, freewill-based mental model of self, control agency, & time 🕰.

Poisonous snake 🐍: Jesus said a sign is, he must be lifted up like Moses’ rigid brass serpent on a pole for healing fatal snake-bite.

The dragon is the most powerful esoteric mytheme; a snake monster 🐉 guarding treasure of higher revealed wisdom, of the worldline of control-thoughts frozen into the block universe.

In altered-state analogy, the snake 🐍 is neutrally your pre-existing fixed worldline of control-thoughts frozen into the block universe.

The dragon 🐉 is the fearsome, dreaded, monstrous ramifications of the no-free-will, 🐍snake-shaped worldline, having no control over what control-thoughts are about to be forced into the mind in the next few minutes.

The dragon 🐉 is the threatening aspect of the snake 🐍, that demands sacrificing the presumed freewill basis of personal control-power.

The transformed mind is reconciled with the serpent monster 🐉 that guards the treasure of gnosis.

#1 mytheme: 🐉 dragon (snake monster) guards the treasure of gnosis wisdom.

The serpent monster, the dragon 🐉, is the perceiving of the frozen pre-existing worldline of your control-thoughts.

The dragon 🐉 (block-universe worldline) guards the treasure of this metaphysical enlightenment 🔥🔦, and causes sacrifice of the childish 👶 king-like 👑 idea of personal control.

{tree 🌳 vs. snake 🐍} means Possibilism vs. Eternalism — the two models of control & time 🕰, per the two states of consciousness.

__________________________________
KING ON CROSS ✝

The cross ✝ is a sign, a king 👑 fastened to the tree 🌳 is like a snake 🐍 frozen in rock, and like a brass snake 🐍 on a pole made by de-branching a tree 🌳.

Mythology decoding: Jesus is a dying sacrificed king 👑 fastened to a tree 🌳 (and then born from a rock).

The Jesus figure is analogy describing altered-state experience of no-free-will, new mental model of control and time 🕰, made to put trust in the hidden source of control-thoughts.

The altered-state experience of being a king 👑 fastened helpless in a tree 🌳.

The cross ✝ means a king 👑 drinking sacred wine 🍄 fastened helplessly to a branching 🌳.

King hung from a tree 🌳, experiencing block-universe no-free-will.

Lifted up like Moses’ brass 🐍 (worldline) on a pole (a de-branched 🌳).

__________________________________
MALE & FEMALE

In Mithraism, soldiers at one initiation level wore a bridal dress and married Mithras.

Mythemes include male thought-source, female thought-receiver, herme-aphrodite, andro-gyne. Dionysus and Mithras have female traits.

__________________________________
UNITY AND BOUNDARIES

Don’t conflate Jesus’ universal salvation with dissolving all distinctions; losing differentiation, distinctions, and boundaries is insanity.

__________________________________
TIME 🕰; FUTURE EXISTS

The future already exists, as the Creator made it.

We discover what the timeline is, including each person’s frozen pre-existing worldline 🐍.

___________________________
SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION

The scientific style of explicit explanation enables summarizing and communicating metaphysical enlightenment 🔥🔦 better than was done before the late-modern era.

Scientific explanation is now possible, clearly and simply explaining the numinous 😱 intense experience described by religious myth.

__________________________________
ATHEISM

The Atheism vs. Christianity debate is worthless, irrelevant, off-base fixation on Epistemology, but religion comes from altered-state cognitive *Phenomenology*.

Richard Carrier disproved historical Jesus, but then he combined politics with Atheism, causing everyone to disavow Atheism and run away.  Atheism fell of a cliff a few years ago.

Thread:
Sea serpent, nautical mythemes

Oct. 19, 2019 10:05 pm

Sea serpent, nautical mythemes

o Jonah’s shade-plant is a vine, isomorphic with the ketos (sea serpent).

o Andromeda, princess to be sacrificed to ketos/ sea serpent/ dragon, is *chained* to a *rock*.

o ‘ketos’ means sea serpent, not “whale”.

Click the search-links below; too many interesting ancient artworks to link to.

_________________________________

My previous posts about ketos, Jonah, hippocamp, sea mythology:

“Jonah’s prayer”:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/7161

“Deciphered: tree vs. snake means Possibilism vs. Eternalism”:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/9678

“Mytheme: Chariot steersman”:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/egodeath/conversations/messages/5469

_________________________________

Vocabulary mythology challenge:
Poseidon
Neptune
Amphitrite
sea thiasos
Andromeda
Triton
Nereids
ketos
hippocamp
sirens

Sea thiasos – Nereid on a hippocamp, bringing a present

Sea thiasos for the wedding of Poseidon and Amphitrite, 2nd half of the 2nd century BC. Detail: Nereid on a hippocampus, bringing a present; Erotes (front panel).

Sea thiasos – Nereid on a hippocampus, bringing a present
https://www.flickr.com/photos/28433765@N07/6282975858
Sea thiasos [procession] for the wedding of Poseidon and Amphitrite
2nd half of the 2nd century B.C.
with Erotes
“Altar of Domitius Ahenobarbus” or “Statue Base of Marcus Antonius”, (relief frieze). [= sculpted of rock; depicts snake frozen into block universe]

_____________________

Decoding “Jonah and the Whale and the shade-Gourd”

Riddle:
How is a Whale and a Gourd isomorphic?
How are they isomorphic with the frozen block-universe worldline

Illustration (containing hints on both sides of the question) https://www.flickr.com/photos/profzucker/31527615296

It’s a double trick question.  Not-whale ~= not-gourd.  A specific thing that’s not a whale, has the same shape as a specific thing that’s not a gourd.

Solution:
“whale” is a mis-translation of sea *serpent*.
Gourd is the produce of a *vine* plant.
sea serpent is isomorphic with vine.  Q.E.D.

serpent and vine are non-branching — vine is primarily non-branching, like worldline or worm theory, in block universe spacetime physics.  https://www.google.com/search?q=“worldline”+”worm+theory”+”block+universe”

Ketos and Jonah (in Endymion pose) with a ketos (sea monster) below an arbor
https://www.flickr.com/photos/profzucker/31527615296
[arbor = “a shady garden alcove with sides and a roof formed by trees or climbing plants [vines] trained over a wooden framework”]
Santa Maria Antiqua Sarcophgus [rock coffin]
275 A.D.
white veined marble

A gourd is the produce of a vine.  snake gourd: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trichosanthes_cucumerina

worldline = in the loose cognitive association state, experiencing & perceiving the givenness, presetness, uncontrollability, unavoidability of your near-future control-thoughts.

Jonah’s shade-plant is a gourd vine (snake-shaped worldline frozen in block universe). Not a grape vine.  Not an ivy vine. 
The important thing isn’t grapes or gourd, nor psychoactive effect per Ruck’s speculation, but rather, *vine* — snake shaped — which is to say, *worldline-shaped*.
https://google.com/search?q=jonah+vine&tbm=isch

gourd:
o  A fleshy, typically large fruit with a hard skin, some varieties of which are edible. 
o  A climbing or trailing plant which bears gourds.
o  “Out of one’s gourd” — out of one’s mind; crazy.
From Oxford dictionary UI at https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/gourd

gourd:
Tendril-bearing vines including the cucumber, melon, squash, and pumpkin.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gourd

________________________

Wedding sea-processions:
https://google.com/search?q=sea+thiasos&tbm=isch

What is the name of the billowing cloth behind the head, indicating loosecog/ pneumos/ holy spirit?

Andromeda is chained to a rock.  A chain gives limited freedom, like the freewill experience in the ordinary state (tight cognitive association binding).

Female = passive.  Don’t think she is steering controlling commanding the serpent.  Rather she is being carried by the sea serpent/ ketos or hippocamp. 

Andromeda is princess to be sacrificed to the sea-serpent, chained to a rock, sometimes shown with one foot standing on the rock as foundation. 

Rescued, by a sacred power outside of her power, Perseus riding Pegasus – flying horse, carrying head of Medusa with snakes. 

Perseus shows Medusa attractive snake hair head to kill the marriage rival, Andromeda’s uncle, who is a ruler — the brother of the king. 

{Chained to the rock}, helpless female young ruler (of initiation age, ready to marry and be initated, “abducted”, sacrificed. 

Dragon monster demands sacrifice of initial mental worldmodel of self, control, time, and possibility.

Andromeda has a story conjunction with Medusa snake head that turns rulers into helpless rock statues; apply same family of myth-decodings. 

The dragon monster demanding sacrifice of Andromeda is a ketos; a sea serpent monster.

Triton is human torso/head, snake body. sometimes split into two legs/snakes, variant from the main idea of snake below, human torso and head above.

Nereid with Hippokamp and two dolphins
https://www.akg-images.co.uk/archive/-2UMDHU3UA26I.html
Roman mosaic 3rd Century.
dolphins = theme of ‘rescue’
billowing cloth = ASC

Nereid on Ketos
https://www.art.com/products/p14187211-sa-i2935920/roman-nereid-on-ketos-from-the-lid-of-a-pyxis-found-at-canosa-di-puglia-c-130-bc.htm?upi=P5426F0
130 B.C.
from the Lid of a Pyxis

Sea monster Ketos (Cetus)
https://www.ancient.eu/image/3363/sea-monster-ketos-cetus/
compare head to horse (as in hippocamp)
compare front fins to horse front legs (as in hippocamp)
“Monsters. Fantastic Creatures of Fear and Myth” exhibition

Heracles fighting the Ketos
https://www.flickr.com/photos/28433765@N07/3411670893
Caeretan black-figure clay vase from Stavros S. Niarchos collection Athens.

Nov 28, 2019 2:17pm

The story of Jonah and the “Whale” (sea serpent) includes the following worldline-shaped elements:

o  ketos (sea serpent)

o  seaweed wraps around his head in one translation of the prayer inside the sea serpent

o  gourd (vine plant like pumpkin)

o  worm eats gourd shade-plant

Nov 30 2019 1:59 am

With the Yahoo Groups website UI going away, with the Egodeath Yahoo Group moving to email-only, it might be nice to temporarily open up the Egodeath Yahoo Group for other people to post.  This could help keep the “community” intact while the platform changes.  
The factors have changed, factors which led to only permitting the Admin (me) to post. 

I haven’t decided which email address and email software or interface to use.  I’m uncertain whether this Yahoo Email web-based UI will remain.  Time will tell.

I want to gather and post another batch of short-form summary posts.  

The substance of the Egodeath theory is done; the period of Revolutionary Science is past, and I’m entering into the period of Normal Science.  (Per Thomas Kuhn’s theory in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.) [yeah but I hadn’t solved the the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image with the trained, self-threatening Psalter reader. – mh dec 30 2020]

The Egodeath Yahoo Group Web UI, I used from 2008-2019.  

Around 2014 I had a major breakthrough and completed the substance of the Theory (mostly re: analogy, also some influence on strengthening the Core Theory).  

2018-2019, I worked on plain-language short-form summaries of the Egodeath theory.  

As the Yahoo Groups web-based UI ends, I have finished the substance of the Egodeath theory, and the ways of expressing the Egodeath theory.

Private Email Sent Nov 30 2019 207pm

typically i sent such to the Egodeath Yahoo Group too.

Per Thomas Kuhn’s famous theory of science progress:
There is a short period of “revolutionary science” where a new paradigm framework with better potential is introduced.  A new skeleton.

Followed by a long period of “normal science” where the new paradigm framework is filled-in, or fleshed-out, with details.

I hold that the whole idea of revolutionary breakthrough comes from the mystic-state experience in which the mental model transforms.  The Egodeath theory is a modern systematization of that key original “paradigm shift”. 


Kuhn generalizes how a revolutionary paradigm shift works – but the original master version of “paradigm shift” is the cognitive change during the Holy Spirit experience, which is systematized in the Egodeath theory.

Private email sent Nov 30 224pm

The original paradigmatic instance and master model of “paradigm shifts” is, altered-state mind transformation induced by ingesting the sacred meal.

The best instance and paradigmatic model of “scientific explanation” is the Egodeath theory, which clearly and directly explains the master paradigmatic instance of “paradigm shifts”, that is, altered-state mind transformation.  And also decodes and maps analogies from religious mythology to this direct explanation.

w wrote: dec 14 2019 9:36 am

The Caduceus, the Staff of Asclepius and Serpents
https://misfitsandheroes.wordpress.com/2016/06/06/the-caduceus-the-staff-of-asclepius-and-other-serpents/ 

“The pictures are great and show the serpent in different mythological cultures in addition to Greek, such as the Chinese, Egyptian, North African, india’s Kundalini yoga and pre-Christian Ireland. 

It would be better for the doubting Thomases to look into historical evidence such as this, rather than reading such things as athiest author’s writings to understand the Egodeath Theory.   

 The author does mention in a few spots some mis-understanding ( in my opinion) about the two historical Caduceus’, one being the twin snakes moving up the staff toward the wings of Hermes and the other with Asclepius, one snake on the staff. 

The author states that the staff or rod with one snake may have been a better choice to represent medicine because Asclepius was a more righteous character than Hermes. 

Hermes, he mentions, has a “mixed reputation being a messenger of the gods, guide of the dead, and protector of merchants, shepherds, athletes, liars and thieves.” 

 The author forgets or doesn’t realize the true meaning of the Caduceus, and doesn’t see that the Jesus figure was on the cross next to thieves and  embraced them by saying,  ‘I say to you today, you will be in paradise  with me.”   

The author also states that yin and yang, female and male, is an “older and far more universal concept than the Greek God Hermes.”

The problem with some authors is that they take a snippet, a concept, and separate it from the whole of religious mythology, which has been a major cause of religious division. 

 Hermes is carried through time and boundaries as the mythology lives on within the Caduceus.  The ‘healing’  within the  message of the Caduceus as told in the Egodeath theory regarding ‘madness’  is inclusive of yin and yang, not separate from it.

[person’s] Caduceus was that of twin snakes with the wings of Hermes.  

My Reply Feb 3 2020 8:16pm

I likely read that article among others, and it may have been the best, or one of the best. 

I have a bunch of little points to make even if they repeat what I posted. 

Greek evidence clearly shows that it’s a debranched tree or debranched branch (staff of A.). 

Hope you caught my post a couple months ago about the Cup of Hygeia – which appears in my main article, as a snake drinking from chalice.  todo: try to find that post and copy to WordPress.

I don’t have a satisfying decoding of Hermes’ twin serpents. They are male and female.  [lol – i re-figured it out late 2020, then found my dec 2 2013 vid lecture explained it. two worldlines: that of the control-thought inserter/injector, the control-thought receiver/receptacle. ]

I have a great, fully satisfying decoding of snake around debranched tree, which connects directly to how the snake on Eden tree is normally depicted: wound around trunk, the snake head is right at where the tree branching starts (top of trunk). 

tree vs snake *contrast* (= Possibilism vs. Eternalism, to use two technical terms).

People use the epithet “snake” to disparage a bad person.  I then counter that; I explain the positive meaning, the good reason why the shape of the snake is like gnosis, enlightenment.

w wrote Oct 13 2020

I listened a bit to that author Brian Muraresku  being interviewed by a Simon Drew. 

The author ends the interview by saying there is no before and there is no after.

To be here now is the key to immortality.

It’s a New Age sweep by a snake charmer attempting to control psychedelics.

my reply dec 30 2020

Any time a spiritual salesman starts sentence w/ “There is no….”, hold onto wallet.

  • There is no time
  • There is no self
  • There is no ego
  • There is no control
  • There is no doer

yeah, thanks for your: 
“There is no insight”. 

And I have a message for you:

There is no money

Oct 30 2019 10:39 am
subject: Re: email vs. Yahoo Web UI

Yahoo is cancelling all Yahoo Groups.  This email address will become inoperable Dec. 10, 2020.

See my recent blog posts at WordPress: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/

At some point I’ll update the website, egodeath.com –  Ego Death and Self-Control Cybernetics
Ego Death and Self-Control Cyberneticscontemporary metaphysics, self-control cybernetics, ego death, Eleusinian mysteries, fatalism, mental models, vi…

Oct 30 2019 10:43 am
Sub: All Yahoo Groups cancelled Dec. 10, 2020

[Dec 15th actually]

Yahoo is cancelling all Yahoo Groups.  This email address will become inoperable Dec. 10, 2020.

See my recent blog posts at WordPress: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/

You can post replies there; it’s a good layout that elevates my posts over the replies instead of jumbling them together.

At some point I’d like to update the website to add 2008(?)-2020 Yahoo Groups post.  egodeath.com –  Ego Death and Self-Control Cybernetics

Love to you all and thank you Yahoo!!! 

The Egodeath Yahoo Group worked well since 2001.

— Michael Hoffman, Egodeath.com

Farewell Yahoo Groups, thx for following, see you on the Web
oct 30 2019 1044am

Farewell Yahoo Groups, thx for following, see you on the Web
Yahoo is cancelling all Yahoo Groups.  This email address will become inoperable Dec. 10, 2020.
See my recent blog posts at WordPress: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/
You can post replies there; it’s a good layout that elevates my posts over the replies instead of jumbling them together.
At some point I’d like to update the website to add 2008(?)-2020 Yahoo Groups post.  egodeath.com –  Ego Death and Self-Control Cybernetics
Love to you all and thank you Yahoo!!!  The Egodeath Yahoo Group worked well since 2001.
— Michael Hoffman, Egodeath.com

dup repost?
Farewell Yahoo Groups, thx for following, see you on the Web
10:53 am – adds Triumph mosaic

Farewell Yahoo Groups, thx for following, see you on the Web

Yahoo is cancelling all Yahoo Groups.  This email address will become inoperable Dec. 10, 2020.

See my recent blog posts at WordPress: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/
You can post replies there; it’s a good layout that elevates my posts over the replies instead of jumbling them together.

At some point I’d like to update the website to add Yahoo Groups posts from Feb. 14, 2004 – Oct. 2020.  Website: http://egodeath.com –  Ego Death and Self-Control Cybernetics

The Egodeath Yahoo Group worked well since 2001.

Thank you for those who contributed posts with valuable content eg. the awesome Dionysus Procession with mushroom tigers at the end of the Egodeath article.

Love to you all and thank you Yahoo!!!  
— Michael Hoffman, Egodeath.com

oct 30 2019 1057 am

Caption: 

Dionysus rides with the abducted and married soul, Ariadne, in Dionysus’ victory procession, in a chariot drawn by four mushroom-tigers.

The Entheogen Theory of Religion and Ego Death
Section: The Sacred Marriage
http://www.egodeath.com/EntheogenTheoryOfReligion.htm#_Toc177337640

1:07 pm

I don’t have any ideas for email forum, but WordPress comments at bottom of a weblog post seem good. 

I don’t think you have to be a WordPress member/account.  

Cyberdisciple’s WordPress is cross-linked.  
https://cyberdisciple.wordpress.com/

Be sure to see all the latest YT content:

Max YT ch 
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwJ_O4EgF61AuLRuoI0S4qw

Cyb YT ch
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVrwl3M_yZw9p3V4B2km23A

Dec 1 2020 – snapshot of new WordPress Site Map page

Last I heard, end-of-life for Yahoo Groups is December 15, 2020.

New articles – book review (abstractly) of Way of Zen.
New nav page (site map).
New Nav bar.
Mytheme List + Dictionary of Egodeath/Altered State phenomena, cross-linking the entries now.

Max provided Yahoo Group postings as a set of long HTML files, ready-to-upload eg to Egodeath.com, in numerical order, which is pretty good.

Site Map

Contents
Flagship Articles
Key Reference Pages
Good Pages
Idea Development pages
Particular Mythemes
Books, Articles, Videos, & Comics
New Old Religion
Utility pages
Scientific Theory Methodology

Flagship Articles

Table of contents, bibliography & see also; publishable quality.

Key Reference Pages
Good Pages

Wikipedia-like, but not publishable quality.

Idea Development pages

Realtime latest breakthroughs and thinking. Messy by design.

Particular Mythemes

Each page focused on elaborating connections around a particular mytheme.

Books, Articles, Videos, & Comics
New Old Religion
Utility pages
Scientific Theory Methodology

Dec 13 2020 629pm –

HO-HO-HOLY SPIRIT!  

🎄🍄🦌🦌🦌🦌🛷🎅🎁

IF YOU ARE GOOD, THE NATIVE CHRISTMAS SHAMANS WILL INITIATE YOU IN THE SACRED MEAL THAT WAS USED IN ALL THE HELLENISTIC MYSTERY RELIGIONS (SECRET AMANITA CULTS)

“They also drank wine at these Mithraeum communion banquets, and the wine was laced with Amanita muscaria mushrooms, which were intended to produce a kind of out-of-body experience.” 2:20
Video:
Mithraism with Jason Reza Jorjani
YT ch: New Thinking Allowed with Jeffrey Mishlove
OF COURSE HE CHOOSES THE MALFORMED STATUE WHERE MITHRAS FAILS TO REMEMBER TO TURN, CONVERT, AND LOOK BACK BEHIND HIM TO THE RIGHT, TO PERCEIVE SOL, THE MIND’S UNCONTROLLABLE SOURCE OF CONTROL-THOUGHTS
Mithraism with Jason Reza Jorjani
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIQ0i_1eoJ8&t=135s

RECENT POSTS

(etc.)

w wrote:

So glad the Egodeath Theory is thriving in it’s new home and that you’ve been able to reach your followers before Yahoo Groups is completely gone. 

You’re helping so many people.  Truly a blessing!

Dec 15 2020
Re: Announcement: End of Yahoo Groups

wrmspirit wrote:

Rest in peace Yahoo Groups. 

You worked so hard. 

You can rest now.  Please know that you are loved for all the many gifts that came through you.  

So Close your eyes and go to sleep.. and .. love will lead the way…