Home (theory of the ego death and rebirth experience)
Various Jewish/Old Testament Metaphors
Contents
Only way: sacrifice your firstborn
childself
Sacrifice your first-born child to
enter heaven
True/false sons of Abraham,
true/false Israel
King of Jews: delusion of free-will agency
Jewish pseudo-history & 2-level mystery meaning
The True Solution to Finding Bible
Codes
Paul's "the law" is
system of personal conduct
Saul/David = King Ego/True King
Abraham begat Isaac begat Jesus
Paul's conversion modelled on
Balaam's Ass story
Mythic idea of water from a rock
Levels/center of meaning in
myth-religion, Ult. Jonah meaning
Graven images, Baal worship,
idolatry, evil, sinful body
Ecstatic metaphor: God's
repentance, yet still closed future
Inheritance invers.; last-born
inherits spir. kingdom
Puzzle:
enlightenment is universal, not tribal.
How then can it be true that Jesus is the only way?
Solution:
In
"Jesus is the only way to heaven, the only name by which we are
saved", I proposed "Jesus" is a code-word for determinism (the
realization of iron block universe determinism). A similar equation is that "Jesus" or the "I"
in "I am the only way", or "the son" in "the son is
the only way to the Father", means the willing sacrifice of your firstborn
childself, which is egoic thinking that centers around the freewill
assumption.
To become
conscious of heaven, sacrifice your childish system of thinking that is
centered around the freewill assumption.
That's the only way to become conscious of God's sovereignty over your
every thought at all times past, present, and future; thus we can logically say
that "Jesus is the only way to salvation", where "Jesus" is
a personification of the principle of sacrificing your firstborn
childself.
Follow
Jesus and pick up your cross to offer your childself way of thinking as a
willing sacrifice on the altar -- this is the only way to righteousness, to
become a member of the true Israel, hidden church, offspring of Abraham,
obedient slave of Allah, child of light, member of the chosen race, a member of
the nation of priests.
I was born
from a woman and then I was born from God.
I had to
bind and sacrifice my first-born child, so that I could be born again as an
adult, entering the kingdom of Heaven.
The
archetypal Son of Man (or Child of the Human) is given to each man by God and
must be sacrificed.
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Styx/8676/files/paulgno.htm
The
Gnostic Theology of Paul
Includes
Christ as archetypal man, and Jesus as archetypal son (or child-thinking) of
each human"
Jesus is
the *only* son of God, because each human being has one child-self (to be
sacrificed by letting go of childish freewill thinking). The God figure maps to our higher, adult
self. The Jesus figure -- God's
son-self -- maps to our lower, egoic self.
We are
created in the image of God: we have a higher self, identified with God, and a
lower self, or son (or daughter), identified with God's son. God sacrifices his only son -- that is, his
childish freewill thinking, to manifest truth -- you could say high God
sacrifices the demiurge, his only son.
Abraham
binds -- fastens -- his only son (his childish mental model based around
irrational, freewill thinking) to the sacrificial altar. God nails his only son (his lower virtual
freewillist self) to the cross.
Dionysus is son of Zeus and is sewn into his "thigh". One portrayal of Dionysus is a *marble
pillar* with mask. Prometheus is tied
to a rock. The idea of binding, tying,
attaching the only-child-self to something solid, refers to experiencing one's
stream of mental constructs being frozen into spacetime. One is thus crucified on the spacetime cross
-- time fixity goes with the no-free-will insight, and space fixity here goes
with the no-separate-self insight. If
we picture the cross as time + space axes, that would be no-free-will +
no-separate-self insights.
>>At
this stage I could feel the effects coming like a steam train. I vaguely remember handing the pipe off to
one of the others and laughing madly, then...
I sat there, feeling heavy and vaguely dissappointed that nothing was
happening. I looked at the others and
could see that they were checking to see if anything was going to occur. I stretched out my arms to show them 'look,
I'm fine' but I couldn't seem to get my hands disentangled from the house. I looked along one arm and was amused to see
that about halfway up my forearm, the skin changed colour and texture so that
my hands blended seamlessly into the house.
I sensed that this was perfectly normal. At this point, I said to everyone 'look - my hands are stuck to the
house!' I could hear them all laughing.
I felt like I was in the past, sitting outside a very familiar childhood
home with very familiar people (like really intense deja-vu). I can't really describe this very well, but
I got the distinct impression that I had 'remembered' what it was like to take
this sacrament - Like I had done it thousands of times before, but I had
somehow forgotten those times. Now I
remember (this feeling is still with me now!).
(By the way, to the others, I was lying on my back with my eyes shut and
a grin on my face. My hands were moving
slightly, but otherwise I was completely still throughout the above.)
The entire
Bible is all mythic allegory. There is
no exodus, no Abraham, no Isaac, no Eden, no Paul or Apostles. These scriptures are much closer to
hellenistic mystery religion allegory of religious experiencing and
enlightenment than has been realized.
These Old
Testament fantastic mythic allegories for religious experiencing have their
storylines set in a pseudo-historical context instead of in the obviously
mythic realm as Hellenists do -- but the pseudo-history and obviously mythic
backdrops are equivalent: both are domains of metaphor for the phenomena and
insights of primary religious experiencing.
Abraham in
doubt had a son by a slave woman but that is the son of doubt and
incomprehension, not Abraham's true son -- it's Abraham's false son; that line
is Abraham's false sons, the false sons of Israel.
Abraham in
faith had a son by his wife, the son of faith whom Abraham was willing to
sacrifice. This line is the true sons
of Abraham, the true Israel. The true
sons of Abraham are those who realize no-free-will. The false sons of Abraham are freewillists.
Exodus:
I part the
sea, so that I pass from "slavery" of delusion to "freedom"
in metaphysical truth, passing between walls of waves. Just look: are the walls waving, or
not?
This
mental transformation from "slavery" to "freedom" is an
ironic reversal; the mind actually transforms from freewillist thinking to
no-free-will thinking. The Paul figure
is made to talk about the reversal of status in heaven. The Roman Empire had a complex hierarchy of
slave statuses and free statuses, so that some slaves had much higher status
than some free people -- some slaves had the same status as some free people,
making it impossible to simply say "slaves will become free", so
Paul's wording is more general, saying those with higher status will have lower
and vice versa.
Every
thought captive:
During the
peak window of the altered state, every thought is taken captive by the Ground.
Jesus
returning on a cloud:
I travel
in a cloud. Just look: do you see mist
and cloudiness?
When I
researched mystic-state phenomena metaphors in acid lyrics, I reached a point
where I found enough instances of themes that I could formulate thematic
categories and start handling lyric phrases in bulk. I am now at that point with respect to religious metaphors.
A riddle is posed to us: the thorn-crowned man on the cross, judged as guilty of falsely claming to be sovereign/king/powerful. There is a sign at top of this allegorical symbol. The sign provides the clue or solution to the riddle of the meaning. The sign reads:
The King of the Jews
To solve the riddle, one must find the replacement text that reveals the meaning of the phrase "The King of the Jews". Who or what is "the king of the Jews"?
The solution is any of:
The Delusion of Free-Will Agency
Free Will
Delusion of Free Will
The Delusion of Free Will, Moral Agency, Personal Sovereign Power
That is who is looking chastised and humbled -- the one who claimed to be a king and was put down by the powerful actual political ruler. It may be historically true that some Jewish rebel leaders were in fact mocked by not only being crucified, but crowned and crucified to mock and show up their utter failure as would-be kingly rebel leaders.
The Hellenistic mythmakers then saw the similarity of this and Prometheus chained, and other "tied to tree" mythic dying/rising figures and realized what an excellent expression of ego death this is, with the idea of escaping the cross being tied to the wish to transcend Necessity/Fate/determinism.
Wishing to transcend determinism is like an apprehended false claimant to the throne being crucified but escaping the cross. Note that the canon reveals a subtle tradition of Jesus being rescued from the cross while still alive, not dead yet -- such a close call with death was a Homeric action-story theme.
Rising at the end of ego-death is like gratuitous new life, now knowing determinism but still acting somewhat freewillist, we are now risen not back into delusion, but into justification -- now justified in pretending to be freewill moral agents.
2-level mystery meaning and Hellenistic-Jewish allegorical pseudo- history of the Diaspora
Christianity is the ultimate Hellenistic Jewish-styled mystery religion. The Diaspora Jews were essentially Hellenistic but were especially interested in pseudo-history and allegory based on pseudo- history.
Augustine later defined a twofold system of exegesis *for the Old Testament*, in which he accepted the literal, fleshly, historical meaning but looked also for an allegorical, spiritual, mystic meaning in which he looked for references to the New Testament Christ in the Old Testament.
He was wrong in simply accepting the literal historical Old Testament stories as literally true -- they were written as pseudo-history. And he was wrong to imagine seeing references to the New Testament Christ in the Old Testament. I don't know if he applied the same twofold distinction to the New Testament, differentiating between the literal/fleshly/historical and the allegorical/spiritual/mystic layers of meaning in the New Testament.
Even if he did apply his two-layer reading to the New Testament, he probably fumbled the lower level by accepting it as literal history, and fumbled the higher level by failing to understand the higher mythic meaning.
His two-layer approach was in the right ballpark. But the literal historical level of the Old Testament and New Testament should not be taken literally. Allegorically, it's futile to read the Old Testament as a "mystic" prophecy of the New Testament.
All the profound meaning is in the mystic reading of the New Testament, which tells the story of the profit-driven moral-cleansing priests putting to death an ethical entheogen illusionist who reveals that our sense of sin is completely cancelled through the metaphysical experience of determinism. When we believe in "Jesus", we specifically believe in that which the entheogen shows about our moral agency, which is that the freewill-wielding ego is essentially an illusion.
The New Testament was written from the very first to be confusing yet to finally reveal their sly method. The "Paul" character is a fictional Apollonius-type or Simon-Magus type travelling apostle of a mythic temple-undercutting entheogenic savior figure. This fictional Paul was described as battling against people who couldn't keep straight that the story was pseudo-fiction.
The idea of mistakenly taking the pseudo-history of the New Testament as an actual history was deliberately written into the New Testament battles of Paul from the very first. The idea of such confusion is designed into the Christian mystery from the start. These scriptures deliberately are ambiguous and deliberately contradict each other.
The scriptures insist Jesus existed in the flesh, died bodily, and was supernaturally resurrected, along with various miracles, *and* they also -- on the other hand -- reveal that Jesus was removed prematurely from the cross, and was so physically traumatized after his (non-supernatural) recovery that Mary Magdalen didn't recognize him, and the scriptures often talk about parables and hidden meanings.
The scriptures explicitly say that they involve hidden meanings, and they contradict each other. The only rational way to make sense out of the New Testament is to admit that the scriptures present you ultimately with a choice: either take them as literally true, supernatural and all, or else treat them as mostly or even entirely allegorical.
After enough investigation of how Hellenistic myth and mystery religions work, and the nature of Hellenistic Jewish-style allegorical pseudo-history, the rational investigator can conclude that the New Testament is entirely allegorical. The New Testament claims to be or contain a hidden mystery. How is this hidden mystery revealed? Through the Holy Spirit, which gives the initiate eyes to see, and the ability to interpret the meaning.
Hellenistic mystery religions had a two-level approach that was weaker than this ultimate Christian mystery religion. The Greek myths were first told to the beginning initiates *as mythic stories* (not as historical realities) and then the entheogenic sacrament was administered to reveal the experiential higher meaning of the mythic story.
Adding a Jewish element meant intensifying the initial story to present it as a pseudo-history, even claiming it to be true history. And that is exactly what the lower level of the New Testament mystery of Christ was designed to be, from the very start: a false history, a pseudo-history, a deception *meant for early initiates*.
The New Testament taken literally is a deception, just as it was designed to be, in full accordance with mythic mystery religions when combined with the Jewish tradition of pseudo-history as seen in Philo's absurd, whimsical claims of the Greek philosophers having been taught by Moses. I here show the *reason* that the lie of the bodily supernatural Historical Jesus was created.
Once we understand *why* the false story of Jesus was created and put forth as a deliberate deception, we can finally accept that Christian literalism is indeed foolishness -- it was designed to be foolishness from the very start; foolishness was always the whole idea for the lower half of a two-level initiation system in which the pure meaning was only later to be revealed.
For Christianity to be an actual *mystery* religion, a religion of hiding and then revealing, it is required to first hide and then reveal. The Gnostic, obviously mythic systems lacked the initial hiding, the initial deceptive and misleading claim that all the historical and supernatural Jesus tales are literally true.
Ramesh Balsekar's system is not very interesting because it lacks that mystery: it only reveals moral exemption through determinism, without cherishing the benefits of the moral delusion of freewill. He only talks about the disadvantages of freewill morality and the advantages of determinist trans-morality.
True *mystery* Christianity required a sincere lie of Literalism to be first taught, claiming the Jesus story to be non-mythical. *Mystery* Christianity required teaching the Jesus story *as literal history* including some supernatural components, especially the resurrection. After that, the option was presented to switch to an entirely allegorical reading so that the literal history was entirely rejected and replaced by pure allegorical reading.
This Christian mystery was an unstable, dubious system headed for trouble of one sort or another -- but this Christian mystery, switching from absolute literalism to absolute allegory, is the perfect endpoint of the idea of a mythic mystery religion in which you tell people one scheme of meaning but then later tell them the real meaning.
The only
"codes" of prophecy in the scriptures are humorous allegory mixtures
allusing to the domains of the intense mystic altered state and the domain of
socio-political domain, using kingdoms and kingships as allegory for ego death
and rebirth experiences. *That* is the
*true* "hidden code" in the Bible.
Astrology and healing and magic are other included domains of allegory,
involved the same way.
Today I
figured out what "the law" means to the fictional Jewish/Hellenistic
figure Paul. This discovery is part of
a rushing stream of insights from the past few days; all the elements of the
context of the origins of Christianity are falling into place. I don't know if I should continue telling
*when* a connection falls into place.
In most
cases, if I haven't posted about a certain idea before (regarding theory of
origin of Christianity and what the real meaning of myth is), you can assume
that I discovered the meaning in the past couple days. I think I'll just include a brief note stating
what day I discovered the meaning of a mythic element (that is, any aspect of
the canonical Bible scriptures, or Hellenistic mythic/epic/mystery allegory, or
religio-philosophical myth).
Protestant
theology completely distorts the notion of "the law" that is
attributed to the Paul figure. All
elements of Protestant theology are wrong; they all need to be re-indexed and
redefined as a set:
salvation
sin
resurrection
guilt
atonement
the law
What was
"the law" as far as the Paul figure was concerned? Consider a hybrid of Jewish and Hellenistic
ethical thinking and philosophical systems of ethics and personal conduct. In the most general cybernetic sense, what
function does "the law" have for the culture of the time? What did these people do with the law? They used it as a system of personal
guidance and conduct.
I can
exactly and precisely describe what "Paul" meant, about being
condemned under the law, because I followed the same path of torment and
enlightenment described by the Paul figure.
It actually has to do with taking full rational responsibility for one's
conduct -- it's very sober, not "religious" at all, really. To get a grip on one's self control and
master oneself, one must consider abstractly the philosophy of self-guidance,
of *defining* precisely one's goals, one's Intention Set.
If you
look through my notebooks of 1985-1988 and beyond, it is mostly about wrestling
with the questions of personal self-guidance, goal setting, laying out a plan
at a high level and in detail, for both how one should conduct oneself and what
particular goals one shall set for oneself.
What Paul calls "the law", and what philosophy books may file
under "ethical philosophy", today is more exactly called "set of
personal guidance ideas and principles" -- I called this my
"Intention Set (IS)".
Just to
give you a slight example, one of the last terms I used heavily in that era was
"TCP/RIS", which I kept in the foreground of my thinking and which
appears heavily in my self-grappling notebooks around 1989 -- that shorthand
expands to "Transcendent Construct Processing / Realize Intention
Set". I effectively created a
whole system and theory of personal-management cybernetics, as an alcoholic
might eventually do.
I was not
an alcoholic like the enlightened masters Alan Watts and Ozzy Osbourne, but
more like the Paul figure, I was a controllaholic plagued and beset often to
the point of suicidal frustration with the generalized problem of "Why am
I, in practice, unable to define a system of conduct and adhere to
it?"
"Paul"
and I were not the slightest bit concerned with supernaturalist
"salvation", as the Christian Literalist theologians would have it,
but strictly with the practical problem of "How can I secure self-control
so I can define a way of being, and then do it?"
For
"Paul", "the law" had nothing to do with
"religion" or "moral conduct" as we've gotten used to
thinking of it, but much more starkly and practically, exclusively with the
generalized cybernetic self-control problem of, as I most starkly put it, IAE
(Intend And Enact). Why am I unable to
Intend And Enact, or PAD -- Plan And Do?
Such
thinking leads to a furious sustained battle, a Zen sickness of frustration as
described by the alcoholic self-control theorist Watts, that eventually leads
to enlightenment about self-control. It
never leads to some kind of perfect transcendent posi-control, which is
impossible, but the release of Zen includes the relief of understanding why
such posi-control is impossible; the result is like the idea that cessation of
grasping is cessation of clinging to likes and dislikes (Watts).
I agree
with "Paul" that "the law" -- that is, dedication to a
system of personal guidance and conduct -- when attempted to be taken
seriously, amounts to a method of frustration that condemns the egoic control
system and leads to enlightenment or "salvation from the law". God gave us Jews the Torah -- that is, from
a transcendent alien non-logical source we have a set of ideas to answer the
existential practical self-guidance questions "how shall I live, what
shall I do, how shall I conduct myself?"
This is
not about the particular content of the Ten Commandments or the Torah, but the
much more universal and generalized concept of Any System Of Personal Conduct
(SPC).
When a
person tries with all their might and all their heart to adhere to a particular
detailed System of Personal Conduct -- such as "don't think any lustful
thoughts" -- or "don't think any thoughts" -- one will become
frustrated to the point of "cutting off one's arm to gain
enlightenment" as joked about in Watts, or to the point of suicidal
frustration and despair -- and then one will become enlightened.
Afterwards,
the furious frenzy of the self-control project may die down, with a
take-it-or-leave-it attitude and an acceptance of the in-principle
impossibility of the expected posi-control.
Watts has a term for the technique of the Zen master deliberately
provoking the student to this kind of frustration about self-control, though I
think in practice most koan technique is a dismal degraded mimicry of the true
method of frustration that leads to enlightenment.
The true,
effective koan-like technique that leads to enlightenment is, for example,
"never think of a white elephant".
The bastardized, magical, incomprehending mimicry of that technique,
that leads to only delusion and frustration, and prevents enlightenment, is
"think of one hand clapping".
Impossible perfectionism of self-control that arose under a deluded set
of assumptions about the nature of self-control, time, and the mind, dies out
after enlightenment.
Alcoholics
and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder victims would not necessarily get rid of or
master their conduct by being enlightened about self-control cybernetics, but
they might forgive themselves more and be a little less of a slave-driver over
themselves. The main idea of Alcoholics
Anonymous is the doctrine that you are not in control of yourself; God is in
control of you -- this is very close to Transcendent Knowledge, the Cybernetic
Theory of Ego Transcendence, or "cybernetic transcendence".
In the
night (during initiation), the egoic sovereign self -- the egoic control agent
-- dies as king, becomes impotent, and the higher self could kill that lower
self (does, in a way, sacrifice it).
The higher Self that transcends and gives rise to all actions of all
selves is the true king and the true controller, and during initiation the mind
realizes that the higher Self (the One) has total control over every lower self
and could kill the lower self or do anything to it like a puppetmaster.
The lower
mind could be made to do anything and transgress itself. This is reflected in the allegory of the
first king, Saul, versus the second king, David. Saul is the childself, King Ego.
During initiation in the long night, the higher adult Self, the
Transcendent King, is revealed.
David
could have killed (done anything to) Saul, just as the loosened transcendent
mind during the long night could have done anything to the lower mind -- as a
harmless token of this total dominant position of the transcendent self over
the lower self, David "hiding in the cave" only cuts a piece of
Saul's cloak while Saul is defecating in the cave, ignorant of David's presence
-- and David then reveals the piece of cloak to Saul as evidence of the total
advantageous position David had over Saul during the night.
Same with
another night in which David sneaks into Saul's camp and steals Saul's wine jug
(think "mixed wine") and spear (think eagle-pecked liver, think Eagle
standard, think pierced side/heart/liver of will, and scepter of kingly
control).
There is a
certain risk in a myth theorist studying the Bible. By knowing it in a vague sort of way, I can brainstorm; all
options seem open. Then I go to the
scriptures, and they usually fit my hypothesis only 2/3.
To
indicate how weak my knowledge of the Bible is: I didn't know that Abraham
begat, ultimately, Jesus. This is,
mythically, extremely important for certain relations of symmetry.
When
Abraham was willing to kill his real son, his only son, his last possible son,
a son who had no descendents yet, Abraham was thus prepared to kill off an
entire people: *all* the people constituting the True Israel -- Abraham would
have slain *every one* of God's people.
Abraham was willing to sacrifice and commit to God, *all* people who
discovered and believed no-free-will.
According to mythic logic, all no-free-will people are descendents of
Abraham.
If Abraham
had sacrificed Isaac, there would be no descendents -- no people to correctly
know God's power, no people to discover and acknowledge no-free-will.
To make
the point, while remaining within mythic logic, that spiritual descent from
Abraham is distinct from mere biological descent, God chooses only certain sons
-- not necessarily the firstborn legally legitimate son -- to connect Abraham
to Jesus. There seems to be room here
for making the natural point that, out of all the sons of one man in this
chain, the son should be picked who is faithful to God -- that is, who knows
no-free-will.
This way,
we stay within the mythic framework of supposedly genetic descent, yet preserve
the real point, which is spiritual descent.
Most important to the individual is the idea that when you discover
no-free-will, you should *not* harm or end your life or sacrifice your future
or wellbeing, because that would be the end of your biological line -- or
rather, your own viable life as a legal good citizen, or even more spiritually,
your ability to pass on your discovery to other people (who aren't related to
you).
Recall
that the Jesus figure has been made to say to hate your biological family and,
I suppose, love your spiritual family as your real family. The Bible, unlike Greek myth, is
pseudo-literal or quasi-literalist. It
expresses purely spiritual ideas using an emphatically literalist form.
When Isaac
(a mythic pseudo-historical figure) was released from being bound to the altar
of sacrifice, he went on to have descendents, all of whom were the true
Israel. Although they were all the true
Israel, still the point remains that what matters to get from Abraham to Jesus
is the chain of inheriting faith, or understanding and acknowledging
no-free-will.
In
Numbers, the seer Balaam is sent by the king to curse Israel. Balaam's donkey sits down (in a
labyrinth-equivalent space), refuses to move forward, and Balaam sees the
lord's angel of death. He then blesses
Israel instead of cursing Israel.
The story
about Paul's fall was deliberately designed as a parallel type. Paul is riding to persecute the Christians,
he falls from his ride (traditionally shown as a horse, but it could well be a
donkey), sees a blinding, transforming light, and proceeds to evangelize for
the Christians.
I'm
looking for a book of Old Testament/New Testament story-parallels. Based on Web pages, I *might* be alone in
pointing out this parallel. Literalist
Christians would dislike comparing Paul, officially a good guy, to Balaam,
officially a bad guy, though they admit Balaam was good in blessing Israel, and
Paul was bad in setting out to persecute Christianity. Such close parallels are embarrassing to
literalism because they show the fictional, purely literary-allegory nature of
the Bible.
Book list:
Jewish Mysticism
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/listmania/list-browse/-/OIC11LPI5PCC
This book
list is intended to cover Jewish mysticism without Kabbala; people should stop
the trendy misuse of language that reduces and narrows Jewish mysticism to only
Kabbalah, or stretches the word 'Kabbalah' out of shape to supposedly cover all
of Jewish mysticism.
Amazon
offers a wide range of information about books, even including Search Inside,
which can show many pages, essentially the entire book online.
One mythic
theme is striking a rock and water flowing forth. Metaphysics interpretation: the block universe is frozen,
including a single pre-existing future.
But a kind of relative change resides within this block, as change
resides in a moving picture (cinema film) that is sitting motionlessly on the
shelf. Rock = block universe, water =
relative change (virtual change, apparent change).
These
mythic ideas all make much more tangible sense when considered from the point
of view of the mythic altered state of cognition -- loose cognition.
Frozen
time, metaphysics, and determinism are key ingredients that are missing from
the new field of entheogen scholarship.
I finished
reading about the differences between Gnostic, Reformed, and Catholic
Christianity -- the 3 main branches. I
feel the pull of Greek religion, but not contemporary entheogen religion which
is ignorant of frozen-time metaphysics and is too formless, too dragged down by
newagism. I can't wait for Wilber's
book Boomeritis about this syndrome. I
expect some entheogen commentary there.
Heinrich
wrote (paraphrased):
>>The
Jonah section in Strange Fruit/Magic Mushrooms specifically refers to the
difficult passage that fly agaric sometimes produces -- the endless and
unbearable fly agaric agony. The Jonah
story refers to the vomiting that saved Jonah: a direct reference to fly
agaric, notorious for making people vomit.
The Jonah tale is specifically about fly agaric consumption: difficult
passage; vomiting that brings relief or salvation (as with the Hindu gods in
the Rudra story earlier in the book); a 'plant' that springs up overnight, only
to wither the next day after being attacked by worms.
In more
recent usage, Mescaline and Ayahuasca are also notorious for making people
vomit. Even such a pure and clean
entheogen as LSD, on odd occasion, sometimes causes a vomiting reaction so that
it is hard to keep the more-valuable-than-gold doses down.
There is
also incomplete, single-level treatment of the Jonah story in Acharya's book
Christ Conspiracy. All revisionist
researchers need to pool and combine their readings of Jonah, one of the very
most important and revered stories in the Bible. Bennett, Acharya, and Heinrich all cover the Bible from front to
back, or can easily be so arranged, making such collation of interpretations
easy. Bennett, Merkur, and Thorne don't
seem to cover Jonah, surprisingly.
Acharya
reveals one aspect of Jonah, and reveals her own disjunction with the esoteric
understanding of the scholars she cites: Barbara Walker writes "Swallowing
by the whale indicates an initiation rite, leading to rebirth. ... the fish was
really a womb" (compare 'cave').
Acharya
mentions and yet ignores or drastically reframes and dissolves away this
pointer to initiation, continuing: "the tale of Jonah is astrological ...
represents the sun in the "womb" of the earth, and supports that
reading by Doane's 1882 book Bible Myths and Their Parallels in Other
Religions, which is probably materialist/lower-level symbology, lacking
recognition of true *experiential* esoteric allusion. We could define multiple levels of symbology:
1. Myth x
means external materialistic thing (vegetative fertility, planets).
2. Myth x
means ordinary-state psyche experiences (pop version of Jungian/Campbellian
symbolism; the lower, ordinary-state aspect of Metzner's transformative
symbology in the book The Unfolding Self).
3. Myth x
means physical experiences caused by visionary plants.
4. Myth x
means psyche experiences and experiential insights caused by visionary plants.
I
specialize in recognizing allusions describing classic cognitive dynamics that
occur in the psyche during the mystic state peak window, as opposed to
allusions to visionary plants themselves or to the bodily effects of visionary
plants. What is revealed in
explanations of myth-religion texts falls into categories; the text can be
explained as meaning:
Materialist
or intellectual things other than plants and plant-induced experiences:
sociopolitical
relations
astrological
bodies
vegetative
cycles
sex and
reproduction
morality
Visionary
plants themselves:
Amanita
shape and lifecycle
Ergot
Cannabis
Datura
Bodily
effects:
vomiting
falling
asleep
sweating
Perceptual
effects:
visual
distortion
Metaphysical
and philosophical experiential insights:
Disappearance
of sense of self-control agency
Experience
of no-free-will, and timeless cosmic determinism
Experience
of timelessness
Experience
of no-separate-self, and of bodymind unity with others, esp. other initiates
Calming
effect of prayer to a desperately postulated compassionate uncontrollable
transcendent controller to abruptly end the looming, discovered, unleashed
threat of control-chaos and self-destruction of personal responsible agency
Jonah is a
conversion allegory, describing an intense experience classically produced by
the entheogenic mystic state. At first
one is against and ignorant of God as uncontrollable transcendent controller,
thinking of oneself as primary control agent -- Balaam setting out to curse the
Israelites, Jonah setting out to go as far as possible from God's intended
destination of preaching to Ninevah, Paul setting out to persecute the
Christians.
Jonah
being thrown overboard to pacify the threatening turbulence is a variation of a
classic theme of transcendent prayer ending self-control chaos. He willingly is thrown overboard, describing
how the initiate must toss overboard the egoic freewill self-oriented
worldmodel in order to attain to a worldmodel that can stand in the face of
mystic experiential insight.
The
turbulent sea, threat of shipwreck, and prayer is a standard major Hellenistic
theme alluding to entheogenic self-control breakdown during initiation.
The moment
one realizes one's puppethood with respect to cosmic
determinism/heimarmene/Fate/Necessity, and realizes one's utter dependence on
an utterly hidden source of one's thoughts (perceiving logically but not
directly the black-box apophatic god standing over or under one's realm of
controllership), the chaos-threatening self-control turbulence immediately
subsides, even more quickly than it loomed up like a sudden demonic storm.
This
highest aspect of mythic meaning is usually unrecognized: myth is, more than
anything, a description of self-control dynamics in the psyche during the peak
window of the entheogenic intense mystic altered state. Myth also means various lower meanings such
as planetary bodies, but the central hub of meaning reference is dynamic
phenomena in the psyche during the peak window.
Explanations
that present the lower meanings without addressing the description of intense
mystic-state psyche experiential phenomena are reductionistic and more
elementary.
Many
people can recognize the allusion to the plant or to lower psychobody effects
(perceptual distortion, vomiting) or mid-level psyche effects (sense of
timelessness), but the final destination for myth-religion writings is the
highest effects in the psyche: the mental conversion or being-turned from a
worldmodel based on ego as prime mover and creator of one's destiny, to a
worldmodel based on the apophatic alien hidden logically intuited god or
mysteriously uncontrollable god-level as revealed prime mover and creator of
one's destiny.
The hidden
divine uncontrollable control level is also often framed as savior -- that is,
dolphinesque rescuer and arbitrary generous benefactor. Jonah's big fish is comparable to a dolphin;
he gets rescued while praying inside the big fish. Entheogen scholarship decoding needs to be centered around this
domain of meaning, or lead up to it, to truly understand the meaning of
myth-religion allegorical esoteric writings.
For
example, danger -- standard in esotericism -- is not the danger of vomiting,
but rather, of destructive loss of practical self-control, followed by
conversion and prayerful right dependent relation on the hidden Ground, which
is the ultimate peak experience and is rightly central in myth-religion
allegory.
All
explanations of mythic meaning are correct and incomplete and reductionist, if
not centered around this meaning-domain of self-control breakdown and resetting
through some type of transcendent prayer of dependence on mysterious generous
divine compassion.
What is
really sacrificed is one's lower self, the naive freewillist way of thinking,
in which the mind's mental worldmodel is centered around and based on the
assumption and experience of oneself as metaphysically free moral agency and
prime mover and creator of one's fate, destiny, and future.
A goat or
sheep makes sense as a sacrifice in that these two animals form a pair
highlighting the will as the central concern of religious enlightenment and
center of religious experiencing. In
the "goat vs. sheep" mythic pair, the goat represents naive childish
freewill thinking, while the sheep represents comprehension, in the mystic
altered state, of no-free-will -- the illusory nature of free will and
metaphysical freedom, and the primacy of timeless frozen block-universe
determinism.
Sacrificing
a goat or ram is a symbol of one's sacrifice of one's own lower mode of
thinking, which is the freewill and "create your own future"
assumption. Sacrificing a pig is
sacrificing an animal that has a heart like a human's; the pig's heart is a
symbol of one's own heart as a symbol of sacrificing one's own naive freewill
assumption.
'Graven
images' is a metaphor for Literalism.
'Baal
worship' is literal sacrifice of one's literal first-born child instead of
one's childself part of one's psyche.
'Idolatry'
is on the same order, taking ego and egoic thinking and separate-self as
reality, and represents Literalist thinking.
'Evil' and
'disorder' and 'chaos' are used as metaphors for egoic pre-logical or illogical
thinking.
The
'sinful body' is a metaphor for lower, egoic thinking. The 'mind of Christ', or the 'spirit of
God', is a metaphor for higher, transcendent thinking.
"God's
repentance" is the biblical story pattern: God says "I'm going to
destroy idolaters." The idolaters
repent. As a result, God repents and
says ok, I won't destroy them.
Freewill
or open-future theologians think that God's repentance throughout the Old
Testament indicates that he doesn't know the future; the future is open (not
yet established or visible) to God.
That is incorrect. In reading
religious texts, remember to always consider each idea first as a description
of an intense mystic-altered state phenomenon.
1. When
the mystic starts to discover that control-thoughts are mysteriously given to
the mind timelessly, and are frozen into the timeless spacetime block, there is
commonly a sense of increasing doom; a felt pull inward toward a control
vortex; a dimly remembered (so it feels) terrible holy transgression awaiting
ahead on the worldline; self-reinforcing out-of-control feedback buildup of
some virtually remembered fatal doom, a tragic future lying in store like a
monster poised over a railroad track -- a monster that draws you toward it
through controlling your memories and control-thoughts, a devouring strange
attractor steering the mind's train of thought towards it.
The mind
virtually remembers that it is to be coerced into willing the cancellation of
the will, a dreadful sense of coerced will and the forceful truth of having to
"must" do something tremendous, some essential generalized
transcendent crime that breaks law itself, tears the very legal fabric of
society itself, some type of fearsome sacrifice. This state is metaphorically described as "God has decided
to destroy you as an idolater."
2. As soon
as the mind coherently realizes its situation and control dynamics correctly,
that conceptual grasp is the logos given to the mind -- the divine reasoning
about personal controllership and then about having to receive transcendent
resetting of the personal controllership delusion, now qualified and
purified. It may take some seven
"purification" sessions to gradually conform the mind's mental
worldmodel to this dynamic relationship about control agency.
When the
mind is finally brought into the holy of holies, brought to an understanding of
its vulnerable dependence on a completely mysterious uncontrollable
transcendent controller, this is "repenting" and
"converting" -- that is, the mind is made to acknowledge or credit or
praise God.
3. When
the mind is brought to credit the critical role of the mysterious
uncontrollable transcendent controller as the very source of the mind's
control-thoughts, normally or formerly completely hidden, God repents, and the
risk of being forced to do some horrible coerced willful crime against the
moral fabric itself vanishes. One has
been brought into the true Israel and into the promised land.
The above
frightening realization and insight is premised on a no-free-will, preexisting
future model of spacetime and control.
The fact of being given a new mental model and being reprieved from what
you could have been made to do through coercion of your will by the
transcendent mysterious will, in no way implies an open future, or
metaphysically free will.
One can
spiritually be caught up into the mysterious transcendent controller outside
the spacetime block, but the spacetime block remains the foundation for this
mystic experience.
Official
theologians who have no experience with the mystic altered state can hardly
contribute much of any great insight regarding the nature of personal
responsible agency and its relation to God's sovereignty.
A common
Biblical mythic theme is the last-born (or second-born) rather than the
firstborn gains the inheritance of the spiritual kingdom. A person is born first as a lower thinker,
then is born as a higher thinker during mythic death/rebirth. The earlier, egoic self-concept dies, and
the new, transcendent self-concept now stands instead; the second-born inherits
the kingdom of righteousness and knowledge of God's sovereignty.
The
1st-born is a mere idol worshipper; the firstborn child is not in the direct
line of spiritual descent. The youngest
son is the one chosen by God as righteous spiritual leader.
Home (theory of the ego death and rebirth experience)