Home (theory of the ego death and rebirth experience)
Contents
Sacrifice: genuine vs. imitation
magic
"God told him to kill
himself" - non-genuine experience of divine?
Rabbi "died" and clocks
stopped
Labyrinth, minotaur, and sacrifice
Labyrinth of death. Eucharist forced on us
Labyrinth, Balaam's donkey, Golden
Ass, Damascus
New labyrinth type: the
decreasing-choice labyrinth
Light at end of tunnel equivalent
to Balaam's Labyrinth
Iron Maiden: "Heaven Can
Wait"
Ego donkey is impure and pure;
harlot to virgin
Osiris/Horus, secret/revealed, ministry/ascension
= lower/higher
Real religion transcends moral agency
Cybernetic Meanings of the Crucifixion
Moralist Thinking Is for 'Mortals'
Religion centered on self-control
theory rather than no-separate-self
Socrates and Experiencing
Metaphysical Cybernetic Puppethood
The temple
sacrifice of a lamb to cleanse the impurity that is sin, is always suspect of
becoming a cargo-cult, incomprehending, magic substitute for sacrificing the
pseudo-freewill egoic thinking. When
Abraham (a mythic pseudo-historical figure) sacrificed the God-provided lamb,
*that* was a true and correct and pure and righteous sacrifice, a meaningful
sacrifice in which Abraham formally and ritually rejected his false, egoic
thinking about time, self, and control.
Abraham's
sin (delusion) was not cancelled *because* he sacrificed the lamb; Abraham's
sacrifice of the God-provided lamb was not efficacious via Pelagian-type
works-based salvation. The corruption
of the priests amounts to turning it *into* a profit-driven cargo-cult
monkey-imitation incomprehending magic ritual, or a just plain misguided lower
attempt at religion, rather than real religion.
The
theologians who tried to frame the Jews and practicing righteousness or
salvation through works, were hypocrites who themselves didn't understand
no-free-will and the difference between a righteous and unrighteous sacrifice. Or those accusers were evil liars out to
frame the Jews, or they stupidly fail to recognize in the Jewish scriptures the
emphasis on the difference between a genuine and an illegitimate magic
sacrifice.
Suppose we
have in front of us Abraham and a well-meaning but uncomprehending priest. An uncomprehending priest can be called a
bad priest, unfaithful priest, or wicked priest.
(The
priest may be bad in the sense of being profit-driven, but that criticism seems
out of place in the Old Testament scriptures.
Abraham seemed vulgarly profit-driven too, rather than high-moral driven
like Jesus, but bracket that off.)
Abraham
holds the knife above Isaac, but sacrifices the lamb instead, and his sin is
cleansed -- he becomes righteous with God, his transgressions are cancelled,
and so on. The priest sees this. The priest doesn't understand *why* or *how*
the sacrificing of the lamb is connected to Abraham being declared righteous by
God.
In like
manner, I, trembling, bended the knee to acknowledge the coherent meaning of
the godman savior concept, and my thinking became purified of the egoic
corruption (my egoic demon left me, my child was cast down into Hades, shiva
stood on top of the homunculus, my inner Michael the Archangel pinned my inner
serpent). Now, from the point of view
of an onlooker: was my demon cast out *because* I bended the knee?
By no
means; not at all. Bending the knee is
actually not necessary. No physical
action is necessary; bending the knee was just a way of mentally assisting the
sacrifice of my child thinking.
Suppose
the onlooker sees me bend the knee and accepts that my thinking has been
Reconciled with Truth (saved, or purified, or made righteous in God's eyes, or
be reconciled to Zeus or Isis or the Goddess Matrix or to my Higher Self). That onlooker might incorrectly conclude
that I was Reconciled *because* I bended the knee -- like Abraham sacrificing
the lamb. They would be mistaken.
They might
then bend their own knee like a good magic supernaturalist lower Christian, but
they would not actually be a true follower of the higher Jesus by that
action. We could say they merely follow
the lower Jesus (which isn't saying much - one could say that's following the
Devil), rather than following the higher Christ. To be righteous in God's sight, bending the knee is as
inefficacious as keeping Moses' commands.
Millions
of lower Christians pray and attend church and take the placebo eucharist all
the time, and are still counted among the damned (the lost, the egoic thinkers,
the unrighteous, the unfaithful, the followers of false gods, devil
worshippers, those who are outside, the unforgiven, the sinners, the children
of darkness, the false Israel, the Titans, the evil ones who crucified Christ,
the harlots, the impure race, the sons of perdition, the sons of Ishmael rather
than Isaac, and so on).
The true
Israel does not keep the commands as a method of becoming Righteous; rather,
they do it only as a sign of their understanding no-free-will and therefore
assigning all power to God as puppetmaster.
To assert that the true Israel seeks Righteousness through following
Mosaic law is either framing the Jews or failing, oneself, to understand and be
counted among the Righteous or the Reconciled.
Scotty
wrote:
>after
several years on the Gospel of Thomas list, have seen a bunch of posts from
people making really over the top remarks about angels, gods and the like. There are also posts that one knows came
from people who had genuine experiences.
Of course, your next question would be, "how can you tell the over
the edge remarks weren't genuine?"
Guess the answer is that I can't, but the list members seemed to sense
which ones were not as well.....
>for
example, there was one who seemed to be saying God had told him to kill
himself.
He may
have been the authentic one. In the
mystic climax, the mind's perfected logic says that the lower self must be
killed, as God offered up his Son as a righteous sacrifice in the mythic plane. The mind contains an innate impulse to kill
the lower self to gain transcendent knowledge and self-integrity. This impulse can be directed successfully to
a comprehension of the meaning of the godman's willing death of his lower
kingly self, so that one participates in the godman's death on the mythic plane
as the godman. Or the impulse can fail
and be interpreted literally as killing oneself bodily to gain righteousness
and reconciliation with the transcendent deity.
From
Gnosis issue on death -- obviously this is a mystic metaphor, that when the
rabbi died, the clocks stopped. Always
read "death" first as a mystic death, not as bodily death.
>As an
atheist I wouldn't want to call drugs like LSD "entheogens". I prefer the term "psychedelic",
meaning "soul manifesting", because I see psychedelic experience as a
psychological adventure.
I think
the concept of "soul" serves the purpose of propping up the deluded
mental model of ego as a metaphysically free agent who authors his own future
by acting upon the world independently of the time axis.
Who
supposedly goes to enjoy his heavenly reward or suffer his hellish punishment
for his supposedly metaphysically free moral actions? The soul. Such a soul is
the daemonic lie.
"Soul"
or "the soul" has also been a mysterious word that has no resonance
with me at all. It has no connotation
within my thinking. It is an empty
shell of a term that fails to resonate in any framework of meaning I possess,
just like my grandfather's completely alien explanation that Christ's blood
paid a ransom for our sins.
It just
leaves me with a complete black-box with a question mark on it; I don't even
know what is supposed to be inside.
I have no
idea what people *mean* by the utterance of "soul", but now I have
definitely found an understanding of it that makes sense, fitting perfectly
into the ego-death theory I'm gathering together.
It's
interesting that an atheist translates 'psychedelic' as "soul
manifesting". As a cognitive
theorist, I prefer the translation "mind revealing". 'psyche' minds "mind". 'delos' means "reveal" or
"show".
If I were
to coin a Greek or Latin term for such plants and chemicals, I would create a
translation of the English phrase "cognitive-loosening agents",
because I am interested in what it is that makes these plants "mind
revealing".
These
plants reveal the mind because of their primary action, which is the loosening
of cognition, or the binding intensity within mental construct association
matrixes.
The egoic mind enters the labyrinth of exploring the entheogenic
state. The curious mind that seeks adventure and wants to fully
grasp profundity and the nature of self as controller will be drawn
curiously and inexorably toward the intuited strange attractor
vortex.
Once the mind starts thinking the thoughts involved in the vortex,
the will starts becoming traitorious and starts drawing the mind,
against the will yet by means of the will, into the center. There
are both positive and negative aspects of this labyrinth as a puzzle
that you try to solve that ends in your metaphysical death.
On the one hand, finding the route that leads into the lair of the
Minotaur is joyous successful discovery and solving the great riddle
of self as an imposter controller, an imposter governor-sovereign.
On the other hand, finding the route that leads into the heart
suddenly is revealed as something you maybe don't really want to do
after all, because it means the risk of self-control chaos and the
certainty of a kind of sacrifice.
Congratulations, you have solved the puzzle, now you shall willingly
kill yourself by fully transgressing egoic self-control. The puzzle
then is how can we cheat the immortals' justice and logic? How can
we fulfill the highest spiritual goal of "fully transgress the egoic
self-control delusion" while living and returning to tell about it?
And why, why would this really have to be harmful in any ordinary
sense, when it's all about an extraordinary insight? To "fully
transgress" means to kill, but what does "kill" mean in a relevant
way?
How can we "fully kill the deluded egoic controller" or "fully kill
the deluded false worldmodel?" It means a radical shift of identity,
establishing a barrier to shut out the old egoic identity.
One extreme is the gnostic or philosophical way, of salvation and
redemption through knowledge alone. The ego is strictly a mental
construct, and to kill it most directly and pointedly requires a
purely mental action -- the *thought* of a sacrificial killing of
this phantom.
That is the most fitting and appropriate sacrifice. You could say
physical sacrifice is a sin, in that it misses the mark. How could
physical sacrifice ever be the most appropriate type, for
establishing and securing a mental comprehension of the illusory
nature of the egoic mental construct?
Either the sacrifice is mental, or nothing. It must happen on the
mental realm, or it's a misfire. Gnostics consider the sacrifice of
Jesus to be just an idea, only an event in the mental realm.
Although
nothing stops us, practically, from choosing when and where to meditate in our
exotic spice garden, from the metaphysical point of view, it is not in our
sovereign power to command the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is hidden from us when we suddenly decide to meditate
here, now, using this technique instead of that one. So even before the Holy Spirit *manifests*, it has *already*
secretly steered us onto its cognitive onramp.
We are
already navigating along the crazy rails on our way to the heart of the sun,
center of the labyrinth -- the bull-man of ego death, our deathly double on the
road ahead, is *already* proceeding to meet us at the fatal point of doom in
the future of our stream-of-cognition worldline. The mind is not yet going into overdrive trying to escape from
its own falling doors of logic that drop into place ever faster in a fatal
attraction.
We don't
yet perceive it, but our mind is *already* being pulled along the single-path
labyrinth toward the dread, devouring, bull-man Minotaur at the heart of the
labyrinth...
The
eagle's beak stabbing Prometheus' liver, or the side-piercing sword of the Eagle-standard
Roman army, is the event of being stabbed not just by time, but perhaps more to
the point, one's cybernetic heart and core is "pierced" by one's own
worldline -- the stream of mental constructs, frozen in spacetime, constituting
a person's life, which was created before the foundation of the world, from
outside of all time. It is the piece of
your labyrinth of ego death that stabs the egoic thinking dead.
So I would
say the spear or lightningbolt of Zeus is, cybernetically and explicitly, the
idea of a that sequence of mental constructs lying along the time axis in such
a way that ego's supposed power over the future thought-stream is fatally
overthrown, disproven, compromised, revealed as irrational and fantastic,
deluded, incoherent, impossible, null, impotent, only a dead power this whole
time.
This is
the fatal defeat of egoic thinking; the cybernetic homunculus is cast down into
the land of the shades, into Hades, where it remains active in the mind as
merely a practical convention, a practical impossibility, practical nonsense
and absurdity. You'd have to be the
very creator of time itself, a God over Time, to be able to create your own
train of mental constructs that is laid across time.
The
following is somewhat a report of facts, primary data; and somewhat an
uncertain hypothesis ventured. Your
mileage may vary; it's very early in this paradigm; this is merely a sketch of
possibilities that need research and corroboration by multiple investigators
who are committed to scientific discovery.
My main
concern here is not truth, but rather, to describe the mental dynamics that are
our birthright and potential. The
frozen block-universe model certainly is coherent, for all practical purposes,
even independent of Bohm. Wilber has
written related material saying religious insight of cosmic unity or
no-separate-self is distinct from Bohm's type of physical-realm holistic cosmic
unity.
What is
truth? What is coherence? It is not necessary to push these ideas to
some point of perfection. The point is,
these are extremely potent ideas that are our potential and birthright to
discover: the timeless frozen block-universe idea, and the Greek
mystery-religion idea of a person's entire life of conscious experience as a
frozen thread of mental constructs (which essentially appears in Watts' book
The Way of Zen, too).
Ego death
is not so much a "true proposition", as a *discovery* of certain
mental dynamics that are completely beyond question. Ego death, viewed as a mental potential, is a fact. And the ideas or philosophical propositions
of block universe determinism and of the frozen thread of mental constructs,
successfully explain this fact.
It is a
fundamental data to be explained, not a hypothesis to be proven or disproven,
that *when* you use loose cognition and put egoic self-control on trial in the
courtroom of your mind, using mature and sophisticated rationality that rejects
all magic thinking, and you consider the idea of frozen block-universe
determinism, and consider the idea of the sequence of your mental constructs as
being a thread or worldline frozen into that block universe from start to
finish, you *will* get shocked and your egoic scepter *will* go flying across
the room and *will* "bend the knee to accept the mythic godman concept",
so to speak.
I have no
confidence in anything I say; I'm just reporting the descriptions of dynamic
ideas which seem to hang together. I
would like to hear whether other scientific TechGnostic psychonauts are forced
to the same active -- rather than hypothetical -- conclusion.
Some of
the above strong propositions about what dynamics lurk in the mind can be
considered mere hypotheses, but remember, scientists must be guided by data
interacting with experimental techniques and paradigms and theories, and I
above put forth a paradigm with its own kinds of data, kinds of proof, kinds of
conclusions, kinds of methods.
*Does* the
mind really contain an electrifying egodeath potential? If you think the above thoughts in loose
cognition, *will* you actually be shocked and jolted? I suppose anything, any report, any method, can be questioned --
but in any case, here is the experience-proven paradigm, data, explanation, and
conclusions. Run the experiment
yourself, and we can establish some consensus.
Alas, I
lost faith in the value of "scientific consensus", the moment I saw
how the dominant, popular quantum mechanics scientists -- the Copenhagenists --
deliberately abused semantics, conflating the "collapse" of our
knowledge into a determinate measurement, with the "collapse" of the
particle itself.
It's taken
decades to undo that erroroneous, rationality-hating, psychologically-motivated
move; only now is the good sense of Einstein, Schrodinger, and Bohm being
admitted as legitimate, with their frozen, holistic, timeless-deterministic
model of spacetime, utilizing hidden variables. God does not *necessarily* play dice. Quantum Physics interpretation offers us a choice: either
bafflement, magic, wonderment, joyful throwing up of the hands; or hidden
variables.
I pick
hidden variables, with Einstein and Bohm, even if it should necessitate
accepting action-at-a-distance. At
least it *makes sense* and is designed to be much more visualizable than the
deliberately vague Copenhagen interpretation.
The
following is somewhat a report of facts, primary data; and somewhat an
uncertain hypothesis ventured: From what I can tell, there is an apparent
choice offered you (or a choice carried out in your mind) -- when you are
trapped in the heart of the single-path time-labyrinth: either sacrifice your
freewill thinking, or go insane and lose control (at least, that's one possible
thought that can occur: that the holy spirit shows us "look, I the
puppetmaster can either force you to sacrifice your freewill thinking, or I can
force you to go insane or trans-sane and lose control.
You are
nothing, you are the puppet, your cybernetic self-control is a proven joke and
absurdity.
It is
remarkable how ideas work themselves out through the mind, against your will, of
their own accord. My brain used to
storm me, from late 1985 using a dense shorthand notation and a highly
abbreviated and choppy way of writing -- not publishable or readable.
This need
for shorthand was even more urgent when the Holy Spirit of loose cognition
miraculously descended on me through the spontaneous, inexplicable grace of
Jesus (as happened with some Christian mystics of old who happened to cultivate
exotic gardens). You can't argue with
the Holy Spirit.
If the
Holy Spirit chooses to descend on you while you are tending to the fruits of
the garden, that is not for us to choose the time and circumstances; no, it is
up to the Holy Spirit to inspire us even of what to gaze upon in the garden and
which plants to cultivate. You can't
force Grace, after all; no, the Grace of God is the secret true controller of
all our decisions, including our so-called volitional choice of -- as a random
example -- what to eat.
Can we be
in control of God's grace, and in control of the Holy Spirit, given that we now
have the Holy Spirit on tap at our beck and call while meditating in the
garden? Doesn't this utterly demolish
and bring to ruin everything that's ever been written by Reformed theologians
about our total depravity, our lack of the freewill power needed to put faith
in Jesus, and about our fundamental inability to reach out to accept Jesus'
free offer of grace and salvation?
No; you
see, the catch is -- we don't possess the freewill power to decide,
sovereignly, with metaphysical freedom, when and how to enter the state of
loose cognition. When I, prior to
repentance and transformation of my spiritual orientation, decided to consume
the Eucharistic flesh of Christ, I *thought* in my sin and delusion and spiritual
blindness that *I* commanded the sovereign power of a metaphysically free
decision. But in reality, the whole
time, God was, as always, my hidden puppetmaster.
Even if
someone should do something so evil, immoral, sinful, criminal, and
reprehensible as inhale cannabis -- God forbid! -- *that too* would be, whether
that sinner realizes it or not, an act ultimately under the control of
God. So the insane and reckless,
therefore seemingly freely willed decision of the demon-possessed to lift the
sinful hooka-hose of immorality, that act too, is all part of God's plan and
revealing of his formerly hidden glorious kingship.
This is
the Old Testament equivalent of the conversion on the Road to Damascus. It is the confrontation with the childself-eating
Minotaur in the mental construct sequence in the peak of the mystic
experience. A person's enter worldline
of mental constructs is frozen in spacetime like a thread in a marble slab or
like a snake frozen in ice -- understanding this vividly amounts to the
experience of control-death or cyberdeath.
That's the thought that kills the childself.
Freke and
Gandy emphasize ego as body, but I emphasize ego, more than they do, as a
presumed *controller* -- thus my emphasis on no-free-will, more than on
no-separate-self. A real master-theme
in myth is one creature over another -- that's the higher over lower self. When you use a "rebirth" metaphor,
all sorts of parent/child relations are shown such as mother holding
child. Watts talks about riding an ox
in search of the ox.
In Numbers
22 in the Old Testament, the donkey is the egoic control system that a person's
mind and consciousness rides. Notice
especially how the walls relentlessly close in until there is no cybernetic
steering freedom; when one has no choice but to receive whatever mental
construct has been placed next in your path, the donkey short-circuits and
dies, giving up the demon.
This
"labyrinthine trap of ego-death" passage from Numbers is likely taken
from ancient religious lore and adapted into its OT scriptural context.
The walls
are frozen time, the timeless fixity of one's mental construct sequence. Compare Osbourne: "We're going off the
rails on a crazy train." Notice
the vineyard theme in the second step of one's fearing and turning away from
the holy thought that kills (and fulfills) -- wine = psychoactive mixture.
In the
third step of the spacetime walls closing in on the egoic control system, all
backdrop fades away and the demon comes face to face with its fatal impotence. One's egoic mind finds itself abandoned in
this totally abstract mental arena: the angel of the Lord stood in "a
narrow place where there was no room to turn, either to the right or to the
left".
Balaam
said to the angel of the Lord , "I have sinned [have been a stupid ass]. I
did not realize you were standing in the road to oppose me [egoic control]. Now
if you are displeased, I will go back." [I plead you to not kill my
self-controller self. I will avoid
knowing the awesome, astonishing Truth about my cybernetic self-control heart
and contacting enlightenment.] The
angel of the Lord said to Balaam, "Go with the men, but [now you know the
Truth, that inherently, you can] speak only what I tell you." So Balaam
went with the princes of Balak.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0374505322
The Golden
Ass: The Transformations of Lucius
by Lucius
Apuleius, Graves, Robert Graves (Translator)
Thanks to
the book Lost Goddess for mentioning the chapter "The Golden Ass in a
Labyrinthine World", in Hellenistic Religions, Luther Martin. It reminded me of a dreamlike, surreal
memory of reading about some Old Testament story of the donkey between walls --
in the book Gospel Fictions.
Hellenistic
Religions: An Introduction
by Luther
H. Martin
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/019504391X
Do
scholars recognize the isomorphism between Balaam's Ass, Golden Ass, Road to
Damascus, and Minotaur Labyrinth? I did
a quick Web search, but found no real hits for: balaam labyrinth.
I would
say more (or less) but I must speak only what God puts in my mouth.
http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=NUM+22&language=english&version=NIV-IBS&showfn=on&showxref=on
Balaam's
Donkey
21[The
diviner/seer] Balaam got up in the morning, saddled his donkey and went with
the princes of Moab [intending to curse Israel, as hired]. 22 But God was very
angry when he went, and the angel of the Lord stood in the road to oppose him.
Balaam was riding on his donkey, and his two servants were with him. 23 When
the donkey saw the angel of the Lord standing in the road with a drawn sword in
his hand, she turned off the road into a field. Balaam beat her to get her back
on the road.
24 Then
the angel of the Lord stood in a narrow path between two vineyards, with walls
on both sides. 25 When the donkey saw the angel of the Lord , she pressed close
to the wall, crushing Balaam's foot against it. So he beat her again.
26 Then
the angel of the Lord moved on ahead and stood in a narrow place where there
was no room to turn, either to the right or to the left. 27 When the donkey saw
the angel of the Lord , she lay down under Balaam, and he was angry and beat
her with his staff. 28 Then the Lord opened the donkey's mouth, and she said to
Balaam, "What have I done to you to make you beat me these three times?"
29 Balaam
answered the donkey, "You have made a fool of me! If I had a sword in my
hand, I would kill you right now."
30 The
donkey said to Balaam, "Am I not your own donkey, which you have always
ridden, to this day? Have I been in the habit of doing this to you?"
"No,"
he said.
31 Then
the Lord opened Balaam's eyes, and he saw the angel of the Lord standing in the
road with his sword drawn. So he bowed low and fell facedown.
32 The
angel of the Lord asked him, "Why have you beaten your donkey these three
times? I have come here to oppose you because your path is a reckless one
before me. [3] 33 The donkey saw me and turned away from me these three times.
If she had not turned away, I would certainly have killed you by now, but I
would have spared her."
34 Balaam
said to the angel of the Lord , "I have sinned. I did not realize you were
standing in the road to oppose me. Now if you are displeased, I will go
back."
35 The
angel of the Lord said to Balaam, "Go with the men, but speak only what I
tell you." So Balaam went with the princes of Balak.
36 When
Balak heard that Balaam was coming, he went out to meet him at the Moabite town
on the Arnon border, at the edge of his territory. 37 Balak said to Balaam,
"Did I not send you an urgent summons? Why didn't you come to me? Am I
really not able to reward you?"
38
"Well, I have come to you now," Balaam replied. "But can I say
just anything? I must speak only what God puts in my mouth."
39 Then
Balaam went with Balak to Kiriath Huzoth. 40 Balak sacrificed cattle and sheep,
and gave some to Balaam and the princes who were with him. 41 The next morning
Balak took Balaam up to Bamoth Baal, and from there he saw part of the people.
4/24/02 I
wrote:
>We are
already navigating along the crazy rails on our way to the heart of the sun,
center of the labyrinth -- the bull-man of ego death, our deathly double on the
road ahead, is *already* proceeding to meet us at the fatal point of doom in
the future of our stream-of-cognition worldline. The mind is not yet going into overdrive trying to escape from
its own falling doors of logic that drop into place ever faster in a fatal
attraction.
>We
don't yet perceive it, but our mind is *already* being pulled along the
single-path labyrinth toward the dread, devouring, bull-man Minotaur at the
heart of the labyrinth...
>The
eagle's beak stabbing Prometheus' liver, or the side-piercing sword of the
Eagle-standard Roman army, is the event of being stabbed not just by time, but
perhaps more to the point, one's cybernetic heart and core is
"pierced" by one's own worldline -- the stream of mental constructs,
frozen in spacetime, constituting a person's life, which was created before the
foundation of the world, from outside of all time. It is the piece of your labyrinth of ego death that stabs the
egoic thinking dead.
>So I
would say the spear or lightningbolt of Zeus is, cybernetically and explicitly,
the idea of a that sequence of mental constructs lying along the time axis in
such a way that ego's supposed power over the future thought-stream is fatally
overthrown, disproven, compromised, revealed as irrational and fantastic,
deluded, incoherent, impossible, null, impotent, only a dead power this whole
time.
>This
is the fatal defeat of egoic thinking; the cybernetic homunculus is cast down
into the land of the shades, into Hades, where it remains active in the mind as
merely a practical convention, a practical impossibility, practical nonsense
and absurdity. You'd have to be the
very creator of time itself, a God over Time, to be able to create your own
train of mental constructs that is laid across time.
Question:
Donkey myths recognized equivalent to labyrinth?
Am I
possibly the first scholar to recognize the equivalence of the religious
riding-donkey stories and the death-in-a-labyrinth myth?
Is it
fairly common knowledge among theologians that Numbers 22:21 -- the story of
Balaam's Ass -- is equivalent to the Minoan myth of the Minotaur in the
labyrinth that eats children? Or am I the first one to recognize this?
The
donkey-in-labyrinth myth expresses the mystic-state experience of the stream of
mental constructs being recognized as fixed in time so that whether you try to
evade ego death by turning left away from the thought or turning right away
from it, every move you mentally make actually only confirms the idea of
inability to escape whatever thought lies ahead on path, in the preexisting
stream of mental constructs.
I
recognized the equivalence when I read the chapter title in the book
Hellenistic Religions, by Luther Martin, "The Golden Ass in a Labyrinthine
World". The rider-on-a-donkey
theme, and the theme of falling-off-the-donkey and dying or becoming
enlightened, is actually very common in myth; the rider is the higher
consciousness or higher self or enlightened post-initiation adult-self, and the
donkey is the stupid, illogical, lower ego-self or child-self including mundane
self-control.
One story
of a church father or mystic has him riding a donkey too fast in a forest and
dying by hanging from a low-hanging tree branch. The book The Religion of Paul the Apostle (about Paul as shaman)
shows an icon of Paul falling off his horse on the road to Damascus, but I am
certain that it should show a donkey instead.
On Paul's
trip to Damascus to persecute the Christians, he instead becomes enlightened
and becomes a convert. On the
diviner-for-pay Balaam's trip to curse the Jews, he encounters the angel, his
eyes are opened, and he confesses sin/harmartia/erroroneous thinking regarding
his donkey-self-ego, and instead of cursing the Jews, he blesses them. Thus Paul's ride to Damascus is the New
Testament equivalent to the story of Balaam's Ass in the Old Testament.
My
question is, have scholars before me recognized the isomorphism among any of
the following myths?
o Balaam's Ass (Numbers 22:21)
o Paul falling while travelling on the road to
Damascus
o The child-eating Minotaur in the Labyrinth
(Minoan/Greek myth from Cnossus/Crete)
o The monk or church father who
"died" by hanging from a low-hanging branch while riding a donkey
o Similar religious mythic stories involving
riding a donkey or encountering an angel of death in a labyrinth
o Jesus riding the donkey into Jerusalem on
Palm Sunday as a sacrificial king
Books
mentioned:
The Golden
Ass: The Transformations of Lucius
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0374505322
Hellenistic
Religions: An Introduction (has a chapter "The Golden Ass in a
Labyrinthine World")
by Luther
H. Martin
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/019504391X
Numbers 22
(Balaam's Ass)
http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=numbers+22&version=NIV-IBS&showfn=yes&showxref=yes&language=english
>Don't
forget Tristram Shandy's encounter with a donkey in Laurence Sterne's novel.
Shandy is fleeing death, and encounters a donkey at the gates of Lyons. He
gives it a macaroon, but it eats his trousers:
>http://www.gifu-u.ac.jp/~masaru/TS/vii.100-119.html#macaroon
>I can
see the links between the different donkey myths (although I think you should
also have a look at Apuleius -
>http://www.eserver.org/books/apuleius/default.html
> which
certainly has a link with the other archetypes you cite) but I can't for the
life of me see why you're roping the minotaur in. Can you explain how you're
making that connection? The minotaur wasn't a donkey, after all - that would
have been a far less scary experience for the sons and daughters of Athens.
Perhaps
that should be "Minoa/Crete/Cnossus", not Athens.
Did you
read the story of Balaam's Ass? It
might be a unique integration of the Minotaur myth and the various
donkey-riding egodeath/enlightenment myths.
My research question amounts to:
Have other
scholars discovered that the Balaam's Ass story integrates the Minotaur myth
with the various donkey-riding egodeath/enlightenment myths?
The
Minotaur is equivalent to the angel that Balaam and his donkey are threatened
by; the angel destroys delusion regarding one's self-control agency. The Minotaur is not equivalent to the
donkey; rather, the Minotaur (which eats children or kills the child-self in the
labyrinth) amounts to enlightenment *about* one's stupid asinine, childish,
lower self, or child-self assumptions about one's nature as a
"self-controller over time".
In the
Minotaur myth, the elements are:
o Labyrinth
o Child entering the labyrinth
o Child eaten by Minotaur
o Minotaur at the center of the labyrinth
o Adult exiting the labyrinth (per my
conception of the myth)
In the
various donkey myths, the elements are:
o Human rider
o Donkey that is ridden
o Rider falls and dies, or hangs
o Possibly the idea of the donkey walking
through *labyrinth* of world (per Golden Ass, especially Martin's chapter title
"The Golden Ass in a Labyrinthian World").
My
discovery, prompted by that chapter title triggering a memory of the surreal
scenario of an Old Testament talking donkey caught between two closing-in
walls, is that the Balaam's Ass story links the Minotaur myth with the various
donkey myths, because it combines the structural elements of both:
o Donkey
o Rider
o Near-death of both the lower donkey and the
higher rider
o Death-dealing entity (angel of enlightenment
about our lower self-control donkey-nature)
o Labyrinth forcing an essentially fatal,
unavoidable collision with the mythic death-dealer
o Enlightenment
I need to
know if I am the first scholar to discover that Balaam's Ass is a connecting
link between the Minotaur myth and the religious donkey-riding myths.
>>I'm
not sure about this "mystic or church father" you mention. Is this
perhaps a garbled reference to the death of Absalom son of the Israelite king
David? See http://www.ccel.org/wwsb/2Samuel/18.html.
Thank you
for pointing out that story. I still
think I read some other mythic-sounding story in a history of Christianity
book, about a monk who died by hanging from a low-hanging branch while riding
his donkey on a -- as I now seem to recall -- *narrow* path.
I don't
understand all the parties and motives in the Absalom story, but here is my
paraphrase. It has something to do with
the ancient theme of sacrificing the king's son to save the king's
kingdom. I read all such religious
stories as more or less opaque stories of the sacrifice of one's lower, donkey
self-identity, in order to awaken to one's higher self.
http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=2+sam+18&version=NIV-IBS&showfn=yes&showxref=yes&language=english
King David
accepted his people's advice and stayed in the city instead of going to the
battle. He commanded "Be gentle
with the young man Absalom (David's son) for my sake." David's men won, killing many. Strangely, "the forest claimed more
lives that day than the sword" (whatever that means).
--> The
king's son Absalom happened to meet David's men. He was riding his mule, and as
the mule went under the thick branches of a large oak, Absalom's head got caught
in the tree. He was left hanging in midair, while the mule he was riding kept
on going. David's men saw this but missed the opportunity to kill Absalom, whom
they were personally against.
The man
who missed the opportunity to kill his personal enemy Absalom said "I
would not lift my hand against the king's son" because of the king's
command "Protect the young man Absalom for my sake."
--> The
other man took three javelins in his hand and plunged them into Absalom's heart
while Absalom was still alive in the oak tree. Ten of Joab's armor-bearers
surrounded Absalom, struck him and killed him. Then David's men stopped
pursuing Israel. They took Absalom,
threw him into a big pit in the forest and piled up a large heap of rocks over
him.
Meanwhile,
all the Israelites fled to their homes. Ahimaaz son of Zadok said, "Let me
run and take the news to the king that the Lord has delivered him from the hand
of his enemies." "You are not the one to take the news today,"
Joab told him. "You may take the news another time, but you must not do so
today, because the king's son is dead." Two runners delivered the news of
victory in the battle. Ahimaaz called
out to the king, "All is well!" He bowed down before the king with
his face to the ground and said, "Praise be to the Lord your God! He has
delivered up the men who lifted their hands against my lord the king."
The king
asked, "Is the young man Absalom safe?" Then the Cushite arrived and
said, "My lord the king, hear the good news! The Lord has delivered you
today from all who rose up against you." The Cushite replied, "May
the enemies of my lord the king and all who rise up to harm you be [dead] like
that young man."
--> The
king was shaken. He went up to the room over the gateway and wept. As he went,
he said: "O my son Absalom! My son, my son Absalom! If only I had died
instead of you-O Absalom, my son, my son!"
So the
"king", always representing the mystery-cult initiate, has managed to
preserve his kingdom and rulership, but only by sacrificing and abandoning his "son"
(his lower, egoic childself and way of thinking regarding self-will and
self-command). Just as the mind can
move past the Minotaur or Lord's angel into maturity but only by letting go of
one's lower way of thinking, allegorized as child or donkey, respectively.
_______________
How the
Balaam's Ass story is like the child-eating Minotaur labyrinth story
To
highlight the Minotaur labyrinth aspect of the Balaam's Ass story again, here
is my paraphrase of the Balaam's Ass story, with an emphasis on the parallels
to the Minotaur/labyrinth child-killing myth:
http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=num+22&version=NIV-IBS&showfn=yes&showxref=yes&language=english
When the
donkey saw the angel of the Lord standing in the road with a drawn sword in his
hand:
Step 1
(road): The angel stood in the road to oppose Balaam. So Balaam's donkey turned off the road into a field.
Step 2
(narrow path with walls): The angel stood in a narrow path between two
vineyards, with walls on both sides. So
Balaam's donkey pressed close to the wall, crushing Balaam's foot against it
(alludes to old "limping king" theme when ego-power is partly
crippled, indicating partial ego-death and partial enlightenment).
Step 3
(narrow place): The angel stood in a narrow place where there was no room to
turn, either to the right or to the left.
Balaam's donkey lay down under Balaam. (ego-power or child-self
collapses; full enlightenment).
Balaam
said to the donkey he was riding (his lower child-self): "You have made a
fool of me! If I had a sword in my hand, I would kill you right now." Then
the Lord opened Balaam's eyes, and he saw the Lord's angel standing in the road
with his sword drawn. So he bowed low and fell facedown. The angel of the Lord
(acting like child-eating Minotaur) said "I have come here to oppose you
because your path is a reckless one before me. I would certainly have killed
you by now."
Balaam
said to the Lord's angel, "I have sinned. I did not realize you were
standing in the road to oppose me. Now if you are displeased, I will go
back." He is permitted to go
forward, now reconciled with both his lower donkey-self and with the Lord's
angel, promising he will only say what the Lord makes him say.
Summary of
the abstract psychology theory that explains both the Minotaur and Balaam's Ass
myths:
In terms
of the Minotaur labyrinth, the mind enters the labyrinth of introspection,
encounters the ego-killing idea (Minotaur bull-man), negotiates with it, and
has to accept the death of the ego delusion of personal self-will and self-command
in order to move past that realization; adult ego-transcendence results.
Statement
of my research question:
o Have other scholars recognized the
equivalence of the Balaam's Ass story and the Minotaur myth?
Minor
adjunct questions to contribute toward that master question are:
o Have other scholars besides me recognized
these types of stories as a sacrifice or abandonment of the lower child-self
(ego) in order to realize the higher adult-self?
o Have other scholars besides me recognized
the equivalence of all these types of religious donkey-and-near-death stories?
o Have other scholars besides me recognized
the donkey-and-near-death theme as a sacrifice or abandonment of the lower
child-self (ego) in order to realize the higher adult-self?
A recent
labyrinth-and-religion book states that there are two kinds of labyrinths:
single-path, and multi-path. This is
incorrect, as far as the cognitive phenomenon of ego-death is concerned. The most important type, the truly
religious-experiencing type of labyrinth, is experienced as a decreasing-choice
labyrinth. It is not as though you
experience entering the labyrinth through a narrow door and the walls are immediately
crushing in on you.
Rather, you
at first enter the seemingly wide-open world itself, which isn't experienced as
a restricted-motion labyrinth at all.
But as you approach the heart of the labyrinth, it's only then that it
starts dawning on you that there are walls, and that they are closing in on
you. More than physical walls, this is
a perception of the walls forming one's frozen-in-time stream of mental
constructs, one's worldline that is timelessly suspended in spacetime.
I would
try to draw this so that initially there are very many alternate (all 1-way)
paths but they always end up leading to the core zone. Near the core zone of the maze, there are
fewer and fewer alternatives, and they all lead to the innermost zone where the
alternatives are reduced to three, two, one, singularity.
Adriadne's
magic ball of thread for Theseus (a king's son) maps to the worldline of mental
constructs, also allegorized as the thread of one's life that is entirely
woven, measured, and cut by the Fates prior to one's incarnation.
Note the
similarity of the names "Adriadne" and "Ariadne" the
web-weaving, soul-snaring spider.
Entering the labyrinth of the mystic altered state is like becoming
increasingly tangled as a controller in the mind's own stream of mental
constructs about self-control, until control is completely killed and
short-circuited, completely escaping its own desperate clutch, so that the only
hope for cosmic order, the only Way out of the trap that threatens total chaos
of self-control, is the descent of a caring god from above, a personal
controller agent from outside time.
The ego
way of thinking experiences being gradually, increasingly caught and tangled in
the trap of introspection of mental constructs regarding time, self, and
control.
http://members.aol.com/maatmandala/mandala.htm#spiralb
- excerpts with my annotations:
>>The
Spirit, as Theseus in Greek Mythology, enters the labyrinth of the lower planes
of manifestation to slay the Minotaur symbolizing the animal desires [the egoic
control system/ kingship-pretense] of the Lower Self. He successfully leaves
the maze by following Adriadne's thread. This is the thread-self or sutr-atma
of consciousness which links the Lower Self of Personality [egoic thinking]
with the Higher Self of the Individuality [transcendent thinking].
>>Achilles
is vulnerable in his heel [the limping, half-enlightened, half-crippled
pseudo-king], which the serpent-Scorpio of the desire-mind in the physical
body. He enters Troy (the Lower Self) [egoic way of thinking] and kills Hector
(the passions of the Lower Self) [delusion about personal sovereign kingship].
This is symbolized by his slaying of the Queen of the Amazons. The dragging of
the body of Hector three times round the walls of Troy relates to the triadic
nature of the Lower Self (mind, emotions and sensations) [victory over delusion
- I would break out the 3 aspects of mental revision into categories such as
discovery of metaperception, discovery about illusory nature of self-control,
and discovery of frozenness of time].
>>>http://members.aol.com/maatmandala/mandala.htm#spiralb
- excerpts with my annotations:
>>>The
Spirit, as Theseus in Greek Mythology, enters the labyrinth of the lower planes
of manifestation to slay the Minotaur symbolizing the animal desires [the egoic
control system/ kingship-pretense] of the Lower Self. He successfully leaves
the maze by following Adriadne's thread. This is the thread-self or sutr-atma
of consciousness which links the Lower Self of Personality [egoic thinking]
with the Higher Self of the Individuality [transcendent thinking].
One should
not primarily think that the Minotaur labyrinth story is about killing the
Minotaur. The primary story is about
the Minotaur killing the child-self.
The above is a fine epic hero story, as the mind does in some way
overcome or move past the Minotaur (or the angel of the Lord blocking Balaam's
path), but one must remember that this is a heroic-style telling of the story
that is layered on top of the central idea and more basic myth, which is that
children do enter the labyrinth and do get killed by the Minotaur.
It is
implicitly understood by initiates that adults come out of the labyrinth, most
likely by level-jumping out of the system -- that is, by being lifted by a
god-outside-the-system that one's own parent-self is identified with. One must remember that the idea that comes
first is that the Minotaur kills the children, not that the king's son kills
the Minotaur.
A single
initiate enters the labyrinth and dies one time only. (It's true that the egodeath experience is actually broken into
multiple sessions, but I'm talking of an ideal single initiation that results
in full mystery-religion salvation/enlightenment.) So as far as the ideal initiated person is concerned, the
Minotaur dies in that he has done has work of eating the initiate's one and
only firstborn child-self. For that
initiate, the Minotaur is no longer relevant, in the theoretical ideal
case.
The
child-self enters, the child-self and Minotaur battle and they both die, and
the adult exits with a god's help -- perhaps better, a "god-man" or a
"god-adult" exits. Admittedly
the whole point is that the child dies; it makes no sense to talk of the
Minotaur dying. However, it might make
sense to talk of the Minotaur ceasing to exist, or becoming eternally safely
caged... but by the same token, we might as well talk of the whole labyrinth
collapsing.
Another
reading of the Minotaur myth that would fit the traditions is that to prevent
lots of children from being eaten, the king's son slays the Minotaur but is
himself slain, so that the king's lower child-self has been sacrificed to bring
salvation to his kingdom.
Mithras
slays the bull of cosmic determinism, divine Necessity, Fate, or heimarmene,
and does so by postulating and personally identifying with rulership above
time. The bull maps to the Minotaur in
the labyrinth. Ego death is like the
most powerful beast that fully overpowers egoic self-control thinking.
Ego death
is an overpowering mental construct, the idea of time-stabbed control-loss,
that lurks as a potential in the mind awaiting the mind's discovery of it.
To
encounter this absolutely ego-overpowering bull-man in the labyrinth, coming
face to face with it, and yet escape the labyrinth alive and with a sane and
coherently ordered mind, the mind must adopt the Mithras godman configuration,
which is the only way to preserve the mind's integrity and avoid destructive
control-chaos. The mind must identify
with Mithras and have the mind of Mithras.
To rely on
Mithras as savior is to rely on the transcendent assumptions and mental
worldmodel of self, time, and control that are represented by the Mithras
figure. The only way to retain mental
order during the encounter with the overpowering bull discovered lurking in the
self-control subsystem of the mind, is to construct transcendent faith and
identify with the higher Mithras identity and rely on that mental pattern as
your only hope of escape and preserving mental order.
Is this
all true? There is a clear consensus
about these dynamics among the mystery-religion initiates, mystics, and
acid-rock lyricists. Based on human
knowledge to date, I think the only people who wouldn't concur with this way of
seeing things is the uninitiated, such as exoteric religionists and
non-Experienced humanists.
In the near-death experience, the
experience of moving through a tunnel toward a bright light is a common
standard theme. While listening to Iron
Maiden's Heavy Rock song Heaven Can Wait, I noticed the line "I see a
tunnel, I stand amazed". The
entire song is highly mystic. The
following lines map directly to the story of Balaam's Ass in the labyrinth-like
space confronting the angel of death:
Is it now could it be that the
angel of death has come for me?
I snatch a glimpse of the light's
eternal rays
I see a tunnel, I stand amazed
Into the paths of rightness I'll be
led
Take my hand, I'll lead you to the
promised land
To see the truth, the path for you
is decided
The idea of the tunnel expresses
experiential awareness, in the mystic altered state, of one's life and sequence
of thoughts, or river of consciousness, as a worldline frozen into the timeless
spacetime block universe. The lyrics of
"Crazy Train" by Bob Daisley of The Ozzy Osbourne Band similarly allude
to the experience of one's stream of thoughts as a rail, thread, or
1-dimensional channel that leads inexorably and inevitably, of necessity, to a
personal control-crash singularity.
Supernal light in ancient mystic
cosmology such as in Mithraism is correlated with a transcendent
death-and-rebirth experience. These
themes support a generalized model of mystic peak experience as a
narrowing-option labyrinth leading to an egoic controllership death-and-reset
experience along with the experience of supernal light such as through
meta-awareness, hyper-consciousness, or meta-perception feedback.
Artist: Iron Maiden
Song: Heaven Can Wait
Album: Somewhere In Time
Can't understand what is happening
to me,
This isn't real, this is only a
dream,
But I never have felt, no I never
have felt this way before,
I'm looking down on my body below,
I lie asleep in the midst of a
dream,
Is it now could it be that the
angel of death has come for me?
I can't believe that really my time
has come,
I don't feel ready, there's so much
left undone,
And it's my soul and I'm not gonna
let it get away.
Chorus:
Heaven can wait,
Heaven can wait,
Heaven can wait,
Heaven can wait til another day.
I have a lust for the Earth below
And Hell itself is my only foe,
'Cause I've no fear of dying,
I'll go when I'm good and ready,
I snatch a glimpse of the light's
eternal rays,
I see a tunnel, I stand amazed,
At all of the people standing there
in front of me,
Into the paths of rightness I'll be
led,
Is this the place where the living
join the dead?
I wish I knew this was only just a
nightmare.
Take my hand, I'll lead you to the
promised land,
Take my hand, I'll give you
immortality,
Eternal youth, I'll take you to the
other side,
To see the truth, the path for you
is decided.
My body tingles, I feel so strange,
I feel so tired, I feel so drained,
And I'm wondering if I'll ever be
the same again,
Is this in limbo or in Heaven or
Hell?
Maybe I'm going down there as well,
I can't accept my soul will drift
forever.
I feel myself floating back down to
Earth,
So could this be the hour of my
rebirth?
Or have I died or will I wake from
dreaming?
The mind
is filled with delusion while it walks the labyrinth to enlightenment. It says "I-ego am walking toward
enlightenment, as an empowered freewillist separate-self." That mind is impure, corrupted by a
chaos-demon or three. Upon reaching enlightenment,
the mind says "Lord, I've been a dumb ass! How could I have been so dense and stupid as to consider myself a
power-wielding, sovereign, freewillist separate-self?
I've been
guilty of delusion and pride of the most foolish and asinine sort; my thinking
has been corrupted and contaminated with a logical monstrosity; I've been a prostitute
to delusion in all my interactions with the world." (No offense to sex workers or donkeys
intended.)
But by the
same token, upon reaching the angel of death, when the donkey has successfully
carried the mind to that point, it's apparent that no one is metaphysically
guilty of anything; the donkey never had any metaphysically free opportunity to
think any differently than how it was designed to -- and the delusion did
achieve the goal.
So the
donkey and the whole world cleared of any possibility of metaphysical guilt and
wrongdoing; all actions are now recognized as being owned by Isis (or God), and
the mind can't criticize the donkey any more than criticizing Isis. So this is one sense in which the prostitute
Mary Magdalene becomes Virgin Mary: the donkey mind is recognized as being
guilty of delusion but is by the same token cleared of any blame; the impure is
purified.
The demon
of self-will leaves the mind, and the mind switches from being impure to pure.
jas wrote:
>>Osiris
does NOT come back from the dead, the perfected Horus does, so the mainspring
of Christianity - resurrection - is nowhere to be found in Osirianism. Osiris-to-Horus seems always to have been
more a spiritual transformation than a return from the dead.
Scotty
wrote:
>Actually,
though, the idea is the same.....the God figure coming back after the earthly
version is dead.
The
underlying point, referent, dynamic, and meaning is the same: first the
individual exists in the lower form (egoic consciousness, based on the egoic
worldmodel), then, during the series of mystery-initiations, the lower
self-conception is put to death, and the higher self-conception replaces it
(transcendent consciousness, based on the transcendent worldmodel).
The
first-born son is not chosen by God; the second-born son or the last-born son
is chosen by God. First we are born
through flesh, the literal womb -- but we are not pleasing to God, not
transcendent, not enlightened, not divinized, not reconciled with transcendent
truth. Then we die spiritually and are
born spiritually -- then, we are pleasing to God, transcendent, enlightened,
divinized, reconciled with transcendent truth.
Osiris is
the lower self; his death is fecund and enables the higher birth. The deluded ego is here portrayed as
necessary rich fertilizer to enable growth of the new, better crop -- the
transcendent self-conception. The king
must die to bring fertility -- Frazer was misguided in his interpretation of this,
or he was only aware of the conception the noninitiates have of the meaning of
the sacrificial king.
The
important thing is the driving idea behind the logic of the sacrificial king --
which is, the description and idea of, in the mystic state, the sacrifice and
necessary killing of the lower self concept, in order to gain the essentially
incompatible higher self concept: "Oh, I perceive now that I am *not*
that, but I *am* this instead."
>>And
the idea of Isis conceiving after intercourse with the dead Osiris is a hell of
an idea.
Death of
Osiris, birth of Horus -- brought about not simply by self-willed activity, but
rather, from a divine point of view, the rebirth is brought about by Isis,
transcendent ruler over cosmic destiny and Fate (whereas Osiris is defined as,
above all, the assumption that Osiris rather than Isis is the determiner of
Osiris' destiny). The evil godless king
must die, he who put himself on the throne, so that the divinely approved and
holy king can be put on the throne by God, by Isis, by the transcendent
benevolent determiner of our destiny.
First
Jesus is the secret king, not revealed as king, then he willingly is put to
death, then he ascends to reign from the heavens beyond the deterministic
sphere of the fixed stars. Jesus before
crucifixion is like Osiris; Jesus after dying and being reborn in the cave and
ascending to heaven is like Horus, and is then recognized and revealed as the
secret ruler over cosmic determinism.
Is the
pre-ascension Jesus evil? No, he is the
lower self that is predestined for salvation, redemption, regeneration, just as
the Jews can be seen as the good originators leading toward the Jesus
figure. "The Jews" is a
shifting allegorical construction which can represent the lower self concept or
the higher self concept, depending on which framework.
Each
mythic item must be evaluated within the "higher-vs-lower"
framework. This polarity can be
expressed in an unlimited number of ways.
It's theoretically possible to put the snake on top and God on the
bottom, or Jesus on the bottom and Lucifer on the top; these are all just
symbolic pointers pluggable into the same fundamental main religious fact: we
begin life in delusion of ego, then during the mystic state, we rise to the
transcendent mental worldmodel.
That
encapsulation of the essence of religion (doing away with the lower
self-concept during the mystic state, resulting in the higher self-concept) can
be allegorically described in an unlimited number of ways, including a mixture
of socio-political-military allegory, healing, exorcism, magic, and astrology
-- as in the Jesus figure.
johnmoon
wrote:
>But in
Judaism there are two separate lines: the king may be absent but the high
priest makes the atonement. See Hebrews
(the arguably earliest letter in the Christian canon), which compares Jesus to
the great high priest Melchizedic (the one king priest that Abram gave a tenth
to). It is not the king that must die,
but the sacrificial lamb sacrificed by the High priest.
>In
Hebrews, this becomes one and the same; the agent of sacrifice becomes the
sacrificed. There is no need for
resurrection, because according to the letter to the Hebrews, Jesus was made
(for a time) a little lower than the angels.
This idea is not from Egyptian or Greek religion; it is from Hebrew or
paleo-Hebrew religion. There is no
Horus (representative), only the angelos and high priest -- it is thus a more
perfect sacrifice. Then this is an
intercessor (intermediary) rather than the god himself.
We need
valuable analyses such as this -- true comparative religion. It's a good idea that the sacrificer and
sacrificed should be represented symbolically as the same figure.
But it's
still all equivalent symbology; all the symbols represent aspects and dynamics
of one's own single, mystic-state mind, regardless of whether symbolized by
different characters or a single character.
The king, priest, and lamb all are symbols representing oneself or
dynamic aspects of each individual's psyche, so it is arbitrary and not really an
improvement when you symbolize spiritual regeneration and reconciliation with
divinity by using a single character, Jesus, rather than a separate king,
priest, and sacrificial victim.
King,
lamb, priest, resurrection, sacrifice -- these are all just various humorous
combinations of symbols and symbol systems describing the same underlying
thing. We need to compare these systems
from the basis of recognizing that they are different schemes and thematic
systems that all have the same underlying referent and ultimate meaning. They are different ways of saying the same
thing; they are different on the surface level, and they are the same on the
underlying level.
The Christ-myth theorists are better scholars and critical thinkers than the historical Jesus researchers. What explanation rings true, and which one sounds forced: an entheogenic-only Christ, or a sober moralist as the foundation of this religion?
Religions are not usually founded by default-state conventional moralists, but rather, by entheogenic visions in which morality itself is rendered deeply problematic.
In accord with Reform theologians, I maintain that false religion is that of the preconceptions of conventional morality. Conventional morality-based religion is false religion. Religion that transcends moral agency altogether is true and profound (and also scriptural).
Reformed theology transcends morality altogether -- that is the essence of its war against the orthodox theology, which is, above all, based on preconceived expectations based within conventional ideas about moral agency.
Real religion, including Reformed and Gnostic theology, transcends moral agency altogether, and the most effective way to call into question moral agency, to put it on trial in an even higher court than the lower court of conventional morality, is via entheogens.
There are two judgements: the lower judgement in terms of conventional egoic moral agency, and the higher judgement in terms of transcendence of moral agency altogether.
Lower religion seeks to avoid sin or moral wrongdoing. Higher religion denies the category of sin and moral wrongdoing. This is not to make an ordinary-mode assertion that one may as well act badly or kindly. Rather, it is a higher-mode assertion that one cannot take ordinary sovereign credit for any of one's actions.
The only sin is believing in sin (in the ordinary way). The only way out of sin is to see the unreality of sin (or the deluded aspect of the conventional conception of moral agency).
The crucifixion is a complex multifaceted symbol of the virtual exchange of sovereign power between puppetmaster and puppets, author and characters, creator and creatures, programmer and virtually autonomous agents. There are several main ways the transcendent mind can view the crucifixion:
o In the Holy Spirit, God admits that he is guilty for the deluded rebellion he forced upon us, and he atones for his own rebellion- through-us by crucifying himself.
o The arrest of the ego as moral agent, its judgement, willing crucifixion, and the mind's resurrection, as an expression of what we experience in egodeath in the mystic altered state.
o A deliberate way of artificially handing us the burden of guilt- agency to give us the gift of (virtual) ego, which requires God to reject or seemingly restrict his sovereign power.
Merker wrote (paraphrased):
>>Morals are related to Mortal. 'Mortal' is a metaphor for having fully realized and (thereby transcended) Fate. Upon that one rises beyond the Realm of Mortality to the Transcended Realm of Immortality. Morals only make true sense in a free-will world, in a fated world there are morals but they are understood as being only there because of Necessity. Such is explained the mystery of the immoral-yet-holy man.
>>Zen poems explained: the run-of-the-mill vagabond is described as being the holiest creature: you need only to realize Fate to become god-like/a God. Thus "Gods" (actually meaning holy men) don't need to adhere to morals; morals are only meaningful to mere Mortals. "Gods" doesn't refer to some creatures you've never seen, but rather, to enlightened people, who have experienced and transcended Fate.
>>The Gods of Ancient Greek are laughed about by "enlightened" people today who are so educated that they think they know that there are and never were gods -- but actually, the gods are among you. Jesus is the story of a, or the, man-god. God vs. gods is not a problematic issue; 'god' can mean a single god (and people being generally different) but it can also subsume all earth-walking gods.
>>One could also think in terms of 'god' being used by unholy people and "Gods" being used by holy men-gods who know that God can divide himself in some sense. The unholy men don't know that. "Either you are with God or you are against him" means either your thinking is consciously aligned with Fate, or your thinking is configured as a would-be rebel, unconscious of the rule of Necessity over your thoughts.
A person becomes basically enlightened when they realize consciously and experientially that all the world and their own thoughts and movements of will are ruled by timeless determinism -- Fate, Necessity, Heimarmene. A person then goes on to become divine when they realize fully how problematic the conscious rational realization of determinism can be, causing self-control seizure and instability, needing to be rescued by transcendent thinking which explicitly includes a mysterious fudge-factor, metaphorized as high magic, high supernaturalism, and miracle.
One is deterministically rescued by the divine, by the higher part of oneself that is one with the divine, by divine type of thinking, by thinking that is aligned with the divine. There is no rational justification, in any familiar sense of rationality; only a transcendent type of what could be called rationality, or trans-rationality, suffices to enable practical control stability to be returned.
First we awaken to find ourselves in prison, and then this state becomes stormy and turbulent, then by transrational miracle and transcendent thinking one's higher self lifts one up out of rationalistic determinism. One is not guaranteed to revive practical control stability, except by miraculously mysteriously originating faith that one can and will be brought back to stability. This one-foot-in-the-air trans-logic eludes any ordinary logic.
There is no *logical* basis in any ordinary determinate sense of 'logic', upon which to build one's house confidently. Only those who go beyond the bounds of ordinary logic can move from the deterministic hellish prison of self-control seizure into the trans-deterministic realm, regaining practical stability while retaining full enlightenment that according to rationality and the mystic state of experiencing, one is an utterly helpless puppet, nothing but an empty pattern, frozen into spacetime.
In religious metaphorical language, a 'mortal' is one who is still subject to ego death or a series of ego death initiations. An immortal is one who has gained imperishability by burning away their perishable, mortal self. The mortal self is subject to freewill moral agency injunctions. The immortal self has transcended freewill morality, and follows the transcendent law of Love, having been rescued by one's own anchoring in divine transcendent compassion when all possible resources of rationality have failed and led only to their own powerless demise on the spacetime cross.
Most pop Zen and New Age religion is moralist: they assume that the enlightened person is subject to the rules that apply to freewill-shaped moral agents.
The mythic
limping king maps to the single-footed mushroom as well as the half-brokenness
of the egoic control system, but in myth I'm slightly more interested in
cybernetic self-control theory, which other researchers have overlooked though
it's the main realm of meaning.
Entheogen
myth researchers focus on the plants and stop there, with only a naive, crude,
unrefined, undeveloped view of religious experiencing; they don't even try to
make sense of religious experiencing or review the theory of religious
experiencing; their theory of religious experiencing doesn't extend beyond
"The hidden secret is that religions were originally all about entheogenic
plants -- that's how they gave the mystic death and rebirth
experience."
Sure,
fine, so far as it goes, but what I wanted to know was how does self-control
work, and what exactly is mystic death and rebirth such that it is some
profound insight having something to do with personal controllership?
Dan Merkur
is positioned better than the entheogen-focused researchers because he's
written about religious experiencing aside from entheogens, but he uses a
psychology paradigm, which has little potential to fully understand the essence
of religious experiencing. He's written
about religious experiencing from a psychology perspective, and about
entheogens in Jewish mysticism.
My theory
is that the heart of religious experiencing is about self-control agency, even
more so that unity consciousness or discovering no-separate-self. Religious revelation is more about the
nature of self-control than the nature of separate-self. Most pop religion that is focused on
religious experiencing focuses too much on no-separate-self, and translative
(rather than transformative) self-improvement, thus avoiding the main point,
which is truth (wisdom) about personal self-control cybernetics.
>i'd
like to know where the "thunderbolt through skull" motive
>you
have used on your website belongs to.
>i'd
like to have a poster with this motive, it's got that certain
>something,
a reminder of that magic moment.
http://www.eurodead.net/deals/graphics/stealyourface.jpg
http://www.accessplace.com/gdtc/1023.htm
-- the album was released 1976, the same year as the album 2112
(http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=Ai6ke4j170way) with its
circle-star (inverted pentagram) motif
There is a
t-shirt with the LSD molecule instead of a lightning bolt in the skull --
there's another version with a dancing skeleton with top hat and cane inside
the skull. Probably visible online if
you search persistently.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000002H2H
-- Ride the Lightning by Metallica
(http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=Aq9txlfwe5cqi has interesting
commentary reminding me of the sudden unexplainable explosion onto the scene of
Hendrix. This was Metallica's first
LSD-informed album: "exhibiting staggering musical growth and boldly
charting new directions that would affect heavy metal for years to come.
Incredibly ambitious for a one-year-later sophomore effort, Ride the Lightning
finds Metallica aggressively expanding their compositional technique and range
of expression. Every track tries something new, and every musical experiment
succeeds mightily. The lyrics push into new territory as well — more personal,
more socially conscious, less metal posturing. But the true heart of Ride the
Lightning lies in its rich musical imagination."
That
review's emphasis on the unexpected, inexplicable high innovation also reminds
me of the album Caress of Steel, which I consider as Rush's first significantly
LSD-informed album. I also consider
Iron Maiden's Somewhere In Time to be their first and most significant
LSD-informed album. This same character
of an initial explosion of novelty is reflected in Hendrix' first album. I'm particularly interested in what happens
when you take a somewhat experienced young band just past their initial growth
phase and hungrily looking for the muse, and introduce awareness of LSD.
Led
Zeppelin - Physical Grafitti - 1975
http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=Aeb7uak3k5m3b
Led Zeppelin
- The Song Remains the Same (live) - 1976
>>
Mystery-initiation secrecy brought down the Roman Empire
>>
http://www.egodeath.com/paganpuppethoodsecret.htm
>
>This
whole concept of the marionette seems farfetched. Is this not
>just
more 'shock-relief' or just another argument from authority?
>What
is your source for "Socrates administered the cognitive
>loosening
agents"?
That is a
somewhat old page and I possibly should rewrite it to update it. Lately I assume that Socrates didn't exist,
in any significant sense; he seems like an ideal constructed figure. Socrates' death in jail from drinking
hemlock is deliberately isomorphic with ingesting entheogens; it is
suspiciously or conspicuously easy to compare the Socrates life and death with
that of Jesus.
I haven't
done the research I'd like to on the fated marionette theme, though Cicero
mentions that idea. Robert Crumb has a
cartoon panel portraying this sense of being a marionette of God during an LSD
session.
I need to
order Michael Rinella's dissertation about mystery secrecy and Greek
inebriation. The entheogen chapter fits
well with and generally confirms my hypotheses about the nature of mystery
secrecy and death penalty for profaning or revealing the mysteries, corrupting
the youth.
http://www.umi.com
http://wwwlib.umi.com/dxweb/search
-- enter 9733831
returns
http://wwwlib.umi.com/dxweb/details?doc_no=2001650
Plato,
Ecstasy, and Identity
Michael A.
Rinella
State
University of New York at Albany
457 pp.
1997
UMI order
number 9733831
$34
UMI
Dissertation Services
300 North
Zeeb Road
P.O. Box
1346
Ann Arbor,
Michigan 48106-1346
1-800-521-0600
or 734-761-4700
I operate
from within the paradigm that visionary plants were the continuous abundant
wellspring for Greek culture and Greco-Roman myth-religion in general
(including Christianity and Judaism), just as one should start with the
assumption of drug-based religion in Classic Rock music (Muse-ic), treating the
presence of psychotomimetic hallucinogenic drugs as the norm, rather than as
special cases. The presence of
visionary plants in myth-religion-philosophy is the norm, not a few deviant,
isolated, special-case instances as even the entheogen scholars too often
imply.
I advocate
a maximal entheogenic interpretive framework; the goal here is to see
entheogens everywhere in order to discover most fully their extent.
-- Michael
Hoffman, saintly helpless puppet of god, cleansed and purified of all moral
blemish, my moral culpability having been nailed to the timeless spacetime
cross, washed away by the blood of the bull which I have drunk, thus becoming
sober and no longer inebriated. I am
prevented from explaining any more; the remainder is the hidden oral teaching.
Home (theory of the ego death and rebirth experience)