Page all of 2 12>
Topic Options
#116143 - 03/29/18 03:46 PM Satsnism Reenvisioned
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2711
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
Since 1975 it was clear to me [and the rest of the original Priesthood of Mendes] that the entire substance of Satanism as a basis for [or portal into/lens to see] metaphysical reality was obsolete.

This had nothing to do with Anton LaVey's initiatory degree & "priesthood"-selling actopm per se, except insofar that he was certainly intelligent enough to have come to the same realization. His betrayal was thus not in just failing to adventure beyond that impasse personally [as did the rest of the Priesthood], but in turning upon the Church membership who had trusted him to exploit them financially and in any other way.

The rest is history: The Temple of Set took the original Quest to ever-higher levels, while Anton cynically milked the Church's name and reputation for his own profit and advantage for the rest of his life. Thereafter his assistants in this operation - Sharon Densley and the Gilmores - attempted to keep the business going as a posthumous fan club. Unsurprisingly none but the very ignorant or stupid [or both] buy into it.

Hence post-1975 there was a big "hole in the ionosphere" where authentic Saranism was concerned. On the substantial side the Temple of Set had retired it, and on the banal side it was being prostituted.

Was there a venue for those sincerely interested in the "classic" concept while not wanting to take it beyond the Judćo-Christian idol?

There were no books or periodicals or organizations stepping up to this plate. A few wannabe "churches" were attempted [and still are], but all fizzled because they failed to appreciate the two problems above.

When the Internet came along, initial discussions like alt.Satanism were equally futile. The only exception, when it arrived, was 600C. Yes, it's had its share of bozos. But also attracted a number of individuals who were looking for something substantial and practical in the term & concept.

It was this atmosphere which interested me enough to visit. I saw myself as principally a historical resource for the 1966-75 Church, much as I'd done with my tan[/i] in book form. To emphasize this role, I kept my avatar as the blue IV° Baphomet of the pre-1975 Church.

Now in 2018 the 600C is clearly dying. The once-energetic efforts to redefine Satanism as symbolic Atheism could not help but fall flat as just grasps for attention by atheists very much aware of how dull and dead-end unadorned Atheism is. 600C didn't need me to point this out; it was an inevitable exhaustion.

So after "all this" is there anything of active and future value in Satanism, or does it lock as the historical phenomenon and period covered by CoS?

In this thread I'm going to suggest that there is. Consider it "thinking out loud" rather than a coalesced program. Comments welcome and appreciated.

As a potential reconceptualization of Satanism, I'm changing my avatar to V°. If this concept develops to be unworkable, I'll just return it to the IV°. \:\)

Considering some basic parameters for an outing post ...
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#116144 - 03/29/18 04:31 PM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Dark Light 444 Offline
member


Registered: 08/02/17
Posts: 242
The toppling amount of Atheism here and in other places is almost numbing. We can only ever move forward if atheists can start to grock things beyond that mindset.

I appreciate what Sin3 does. I also am bored with it. Concepts outside of hardline Atheism are immediately eschewed and tossed onto the scrap heap, without the realization that they’re snuffing the very essence of immortality in the process.

To me, the atheistic stance is indicative of personal misery. Anyway, it seems that if we keep chipping away at these differences, the same disagreements will continue.

Let me ask everyone here who decides to participate in this discussion a sincere question: what do we agree on? Maybe from there we can uncover more stuff, I don’t know.

SIN3, for example, says I’m mocked by other users here, and not because of my “Aquino fandom”, as she stated it. I’d like to know more about that. I’m not complex. I don’t pretend to be. Why should things be? Let’s put it out all on the table.
_________________________
K.I.S.S.

Top
#116146 - 03/29/18 04:43 PM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Czereda Offline
senior member


Registered: 03/14/11
Posts: 2089
Loc: Poland
You repeat yourself.

The same stuff over and over again.

Like a broken record.
_________________________
Anna Czereda
Crazy Cat Lady

Top
#116148 - 03/29/18 06:12 PM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Dark Light 444]
Kori Houghton Offline
member


Registered: 11/23/15
Posts: 145
Loc: East Coast USA
 Originally Posted By: Dark Light 444
The toppling amount of atheism here and in other places is almost numbing. We can only ever move forward if atheists can start to grock things beyond that mindset.


Dunno about "other places", but I don't see much keyboard pounding on behalf of Atheism here. If you mean that there aren't ongoing discussions of theistic Satanisms here, I agree. Who is the "we" that isn't "moving forward" and why would it matter? The mindsets of others are, like, their business and not mine. Why do you feel differently?

 Originally Posted By: Dark Light 444
I appreciate what Sin3 does. I also am bored with it. Concepts outside of hardline atheism are immediately eschewed and tossed onto the scrap heap, without the realization that they’re snuffing the very essence of immortality in the process.


Why are you invoking SIN3 into this discussion?

 Originally Posted By: Dark Light 444
Let me ask everyone here who decides to participate in this discussion a sincere question: what do we agree on? Maybe from there we can uncover more stuff, I don’t know.


I have no idea what your own views are about anything related to Satanism or metaphysics. What I've been reading in your posts are reworded, watered down, versions of something Aquino recently posted. Are you saying that you want to have a discussion only with those who say they agree with you? Is that part of the "we" "moving forward"? If so, what does that have to do with Satanism? I think of Satanism as "I am moving" toward my own goals, direction variable, companions optional.

 Originally Posted By: Dark Light 444
SIN3, for example, says I’m mocked by other users here, and not because of my “Aquino fandom”, as she stated it. I’d like to know more about that. I’m not complex. I don’t pretend to be. Why should things be? Let’s put it out all on the table.


Dunno about "complex" but your posts (not just in discussions with SIN3, either) suggest an urge to misunderstand other participants by being unwilling (or unable? again, dunno) to respond to what has actually been posted. Such as rudely correcting what you perceive to be errors of speech, or going on the attack against something that was never in the posted message.

For someone suggesting you value the importance of agreement among individuals, your actual postings show you repeatedly reacting to conflicts that are simply not there...until you create them. What's up with that?
_________________________
Only Man cares for Man; the Universe doesn't give a shit. -- Marcelo Ramos Motta

Top
#116149 - 03/29/18 06:26 PM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Czereda]
Kori Houghton Offline
member


Registered: 11/23/15
Posts: 145
Loc: East Coast USA
 Originally Posted By: Czereda
You repeat yourself.

The same stuff over and over again.

Like a broken record.


Exactly my thoughts when I saw the thread title and who the original poster was. Reading the OP was confirmation.

But I have to admit this...

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
As a potential reconceptualization of Satanism, I'm changing my avatar to V°. If this concept develops to be unworkable, I'll just return it to the IV°.


...was funny. Pompous bullshitte is pompous bullshitte, regardless of the occultnik grade of the arse it comes out of.
_________________________
Only Man cares for Man; the Universe doesn't give a shit. -- Marcelo Ramos Motta

Top
#116150 - 03/30/18 03:16 AM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
CanisMachina42 Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/10/13
Posts: 1335
Loc: CA
 Quote:
So after "all this" is there anything of active and future value in Satanism, or does it lock as the historical phenomenon and period covered by CoS?


Fuck yeah. It holds future value in all my endeavors, whether beneficial or not. The things that make my Satanism are fueled by every day stimuli and other situational things.

If I understood what you meant.

When you speak of a Satanism that should be approached like some exoteric common theistic dogma I am not quite sure from which viewpoint I should answer.

 Quote:
Now in 2018 the 600C is clearly dying. The once-energetic efforts to redefine Satanism as symbolic Atheism could not help but fall flat as just grasps for attention by atheists very much aware of how dull and dead-end unadorned Atheism is. 600C didn't need me to point this out; it was an inevitable exhaustion.


It was twitching when I joined 5 years ago.
This assumes the initial definition is your definition.

You are choking on confirmation bias IMO.

There is no way to substantiate that an erosion of the user base and subsequent death throes are related to Atheism any more than any other reason one could throw out, apathy for one.

I find comfort in the "dead end". While I most assuredly don't want to die, and slothfully waste the time I have, I see nothing enticing or logically valid in an afterlife. It holds no value. Things that exist only because I think they do provide no comfort. Not in my wiring.

I was not domesticated with an everlasting soul. I was domesticated with Carl Sagan. I grew up listening to my parents point out exactly why every Unsolved Mystery was total bullshit.

I can't help how I was raised and it is discouraging that it means I cant be a for real satanist now. \:\(
_________________________
...from all the unborn chicken voices in my head.

Top
#116151 - 03/30/18 03:54 AM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2711
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
I have a bit more thinking to do before I "run this up the flagpole to see if anyone saletes it" ...

The germ of the idea comes from another of Anton's pet aphorisms: the "pendulum swing". This refers to Satanism as a counterbalance to prevalent social trends, particularly those of a destructive nature. Hence in the Countercultural anarchy and anti-Americanism of the late 1960s, he was sending me jingoistic letters in Vietnam and putting a Sousa march at the end of his "Book of Satan" recitation on the Satanic Mass record, including my Fort Knox boss General Patton in the SR dedications, and etc.

At this present point of time, we're surrounded by an unprecedented amount of sociopolitical sordidness and corruption, leading to an epidemic of popular antipathy and cynicism. 2016 was the first Presidential election decided by who couldn't stand the other candidate more. Grace Slick once said to me that "everyday it seems like something else falls apart."

The percolating question is whether Satanism is a viable vehicle to offer a correction to this. And here we're not talking about GBM/metaphysical Satanism, but just a social code, ethic, rallying point.

For instance read through the Redbeard "Might is Right" that Anton used to kick off the SB. It's a sort of Conan the Barbarian rant deploring social degeneracy. [As I've noted here, Anton conspicuously omitted the chapter with RR's caveman attitude about women, proving he didn't want to sleep on the Purple Room couch that night. \:D

Exactly what all of the above might translate to in 2018 is what I'm kicking around.

Another example of the shock effect of the pendulum: The movie Cabaret was a bath in the overwhelming decadence and sleaze of Weimar Germany, and particularly Berlin. Another depiction was the movie Bent, in which Mick Jagger in drag \:o presides over an anything-goes nightclub.

So in Cabaret there is a scene in which a cafe of discouraged, hopeless Berliners is stunned by a Hitler Youth who is almost supernaturally Aryan and belts out a song of the same type, 180° away from what Joel Gray and Liza Minneli sing elsewhere. The cafe is mesmerized and transformed: an ominous foretaste of the Third Reich to come. That's the power of the pendulum swing.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#116152 - 03/30/18 10:17 AM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Kori Houghton Offline
member


Registered: 11/23/15
Posts: 145
Loc: East Coast USA
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
The germ of the idea comes from another of Anton's pet aphorisms: the "pendulum swing".


Wow. Now, that's impressive. My Mum referenced the same aphorism to me in the late 60s when I became concerned that the rich kid college protesters would still be at it when it was time for me to go off to college in the mid 70s, and interfere with me attending classes I would be borrowing money to pay for. As it turned out, all that craziness had vanished by the time I got there, and been replaced by Christian fundamentalist larvae who would go on after graduation to infest the US military/industrial complex. The pendulum, as it turned out, had a very fast swing.

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
This refers to Satanism as a counterbalance to prevalent social trends, particularly those of a destructive nature. Hence in the Countercultural anarchy and anti-Americanism of the late 1960s, he was sending me jingoistic letters in Vietnam and putting a Sousa march at the end of his "Book of Satan" recitation on the Satanic Mass record, including my Fort Knox boss General Patton in the SR dedications, and etc.


That is so amazing and cool (shakes head NO). So, what branch of service did Anton serve in? He was the right age for the Korean War.

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
At this present point of time, we're surrounded by an unprecedented amount of sociopolitical sordidness and corruption, leading to an epidemic of popular antipathy and cynicism. 2016 was the first Presidential election decided by who couldn't stand the other candidate more. Grace Slick once said to me that "everyday it seems like something else falls apart."


Yeah, Gracie knows that for real whenever she looks in the mirror. Another deep thinker. Anyone who actually believes that the present manifests "unprecedented" corruption hasn't read much history, or is very young.

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
The percolating question is whether Satanism is a viable vehicle to offer a correction to this. And here we're not talking about GBM/metaphysical Satanism, but just a social code, ethic, rallying point.


Who wants to be "rallied" around some phony "social code"?

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
For instance read through the Redbeard "Might is Right" that Anton used to kick off the SB. It's a sort of Conan the Barbarian rant deploring social degeneracy. [As I've noted here, Anton conspicuously omitted the chapter with RR's caveman attitude about women, proving he didn't want to sleep on the Purple Room couch that night. \:D

Exactly what all of the above might translate to in 2018 is what I'm kicking around.


Gee, Officer Krupke!

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
Another example of the shock effect of the pendulum: The movie Cabaret was a bath in the overwhelming decadence and sleaze of Weimar Germany, and particularly Berlin. Another depiction was the movie Bent, in which Mick Jagger in drag \:o presides over an anything-goes nightclub.

So in Cabaret there is a scene in which a cafe of discouraged, hopeless Berliners is stunned by a Hitler Youth who is almost supernaturally Aryan and belts out a song of the same type, 180° away from what Joel Gray and Liza Minneli sing elsewhere. The cafe is mesmerized and transformed: an ominous foretaste of the Third Reich to come. That's the power of the pendulum swing.


That scene from Cabaret was another one of my Mum's favorite references. However, it was created long after the end of WWII, so it comes across as more self-justification by the victors. There are dozens of musical films that predate September 1939. Some of the bits in pre WWII films are chilling when you know what is to come. The first time I saw Gold Diggers of 1933, I was totally spooked when the film ended with Remember My Forgotten Man which is all about the actual causes of the coming war.

The pendulum is always swinging, and the future belongs to anyone with the skills to survive.
_________________________
Only Man cares for Man; the Universe doesn't give a shit. -- Marcelo Ramos Motta

Top
#116154 - 03/30/18 11:51 AM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7187
Loc: Virginia
 Originally Posted By: MA
Since 1975 it was clear to me [and the rest of the original Priesthood of Mendes] that the entire substance of Satanism as a basis for [or portal into/lens to see] metaphysical reality was obsolete.


You sure about that? It seems to me, what you have beef with is the Meta. Satanism hasn't been reenvisioned as much as it has been apprehended by troo believers, that want everyone else to believe along with them. Do you really think those fancy titles were all that valuable in the grand scheme of things? That LaVey selling them off was a point dismissed? At what point do you just admit you've been WRONG all along?

In the schema of your life, what value does being called 'Grand Master Aquino' really have? Do you really need sycophants hanging from your balls to feel important? To feel accomplished? To feel as though your inner devil has reached its full potential?

I'd rather be detested for what I am, than what I pretend to be.

What about you? Do you think the sense of annoyance with your continual complaints post-1975 will be fully realized?

This has never been a battle between Theism and Anti-Theism but rather if you understand the LHP and tread it at all. I mean, if you believe in spooks, make no apologies for those beliefs. You don't need people to jump in your bandwagon, or do you?

That every twit occultnik needs to become some friggin' life coach is just nauseating.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#116155 - 03/30/18 01:17 PM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Kori Houghton]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2711
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
Points taken, Kori. As previously, I'm not yet sure there's "Satanic kinesis" here. There's "reaction just for the sake of reaction", but there's also dialectic: thesis+ antithesis>synthesis. And that's not always a good outcome either.

Problem is also, as I detailed extensively in FindFar, that the present national & international situation includes a number of major destabilizations. You don't necessarily have to come up with a magic bullet to fix all of them, but whatever you propose can't be blind to them either.

Satanism is traditionally more a personal than an institutional application. A way to navigate through the jungle, as it were. But the jungle may be too overwhelming, as Orwell illustrated in 1984.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#116156 - 03/30/18 02:11 PM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: SIN3]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2711
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
SIN, titles can be useful as recognitions of some reality, a summary. That's exactly why the Temple of Set has always used that term instead of rank, elevation, etc.

In The Magus, Conchis' teacher left him with a question: Which are you drinking - the water or the wave?

The Church's original degree system was the water of Recognition, and Anton's decision proposed to turn it into the wave of appearances.

The shorthand or simplicity of a title can be misleading if, for instance, it is too confining a stereotype, or is too vague, used also by poseurs, etc. There are some Ph.D.s that are sound, many more that are fraudulent either institutionally or personally. AMORC's Spencer Lewis just used it. Nor does even a valid Ph.D. or M.D. prevent the recipient from misusing it or just screwing up subsequently. Such titles, whether initiatory, academic, or etc. are indications of potential, not guarantees.

Taoists get all this but don't bother about it. \:\)
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#116157 - 03/30/18 07:49 PM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Obitus Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/20/17
Posts: 45
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
Since 1975 it was clear to me [and the rest of the original Priesthood of Mendes] that the entire substance of Satanism as a basis for [or portal into/lens to see] metaphysical reality was obsolete.


I've personally been grappling with this "inevitable impasse" for a good little while now. I became a Satanist 15 years ago when I read the SB out of morbid curiosity (expecting it to be some goofy/nasty horror book; I had no idea who LaVey was and wasn't searching for a creed to identify with), and was amazed at how I agreed with the guy about most everything he had to say about how one ought to live one's life and feel about their own Ego.

I was intrigued that I was agreeing so much with a dude who also claimed to be a Priest of the Devil . . . so I got a candle and a Baphomet sigil and asked the Devil if He was real. I was somewhat shocked to find out that He was. And so here I am today.

Of course, as the years have gone by, my understanding of who/what that "Devil" really is as a metaphysical reality have evolved quite a bit, to the point where I have to fully admit that the Judaeo-Christian lens/mythos is essentially a crude (and generally demeaning) caricature.

I don't subscribe to Judaeo-Christian theology at all. I don't think "Satan" is literally a "fallen angel" from the court of some gross Hebrew caricature of "God" (a caricature perhaps even more warped than the caricature of "Satan.") My own views on metaphysics are heavily influenced by Platonics (especially as presented by the ever-shit-upon Thomas Taylor), Crowley, and, admittedly, some of the "Spiritualist" writers of the early 20th century (most notably Dr. James Hyslop.) Oh, and of course there is a tad bit of influence from yourself as well. \:\)

So, I sometimes find myself (especially recently) questioning the rationale behind why I keep insisting on referring to my particular blend of various concepts as "Satanism." But, I keep coming back to these lines from the SB and SR:

“Before Christianity gave him the names of Satan, Lucifer, etc., the carnal side of man’s nature was governed by the god which was then called Dionysus, or Pan, depicted as a satyr or faun, by the Greeks. . . . The earliest Christians believed that the Pagan deities were devils, and to employ them was to use ‘black magic.’ . . . The old gods did not die, they fell into Hell and became devils.”

"It has become necessary for a NEW religion, based on man’s natural instincts, to come forth. THEY [the Christians] have named it. It is called Satanism."

“Even if one recognizes the character inversion employed in changing Pan (the good guy) into Satan (the bad guy), why reject an old friend just because he bears a new name and unjustified stigma?”

So . . . basically, it boils down to three things for me:

1)I still resonate with the "Infernal," "Satanic" terminology and lens from the Judaeo-Christian mythos, because that's the culture I was born into, and is the lens the Prince of Darkness has been seen through for centuries now. I was not born into a pagan world. It has always been easier for me to "connect" with those forces through that lens, because, for better or worse, that lens is the one that grabs me and titillates me more than others.

2) I still think that much of the philosophy of LaVey is healthy and productive, and that philosophy was codified as "Satanism."

3) Even though my metaphysics and views on Deities are perhaps more classically pagan than many on the LHP in many ways (such as my insistence on "Satan" being "Pan," particularly as seen in an Orphic/Platonic light) . . . I still define the LHP in the way that you and the ToS generally do: as the choice to strengthen and glorify the individual psyche as opposed to opting to obliterate it through [insert whatever brand of anti-individual-psyche "enlightenment" here.] And I associate the "LHP" traditionally with the "Satanic" lens.

All of the above is pretty much why I still call my stuff "Satanism," because nothing else seems to quite encapsulate it. I've often thought of just saying fuck it, and sending in an application to the ToS, but I keep feeling like a lot of my views on Deity and the relation between "Satan/Set/Pan, etc" and the Cosmos are just not . . . something really welcome in the ToS. But, who knows, maybe I'm wrong and maybe I should try to join and find out first-hand at some point. But, for now, "Satanism" is still what I'm going with.

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
Was there a venue for those sincerely interested in the "classic" concept while not wanting to take it beyond the Judćo-Christian idol?


I think it could reasonably be argued that the original CoS, even from the get-go, took it beyond the Judaeo-Christian idol in at least some key respects. LaVey admitting that Satan was essentially Pan repainted with an "unjustified stigma," and rejecting the Judaeo-Christian concept of "God," could be fairly described as somewhat "beyond" the J/C idol, insofar as Satan was seen as far more than what orthodox J/C views held Him to be. And of course the "Infernal Names" and the SR as a whole made it clear that what LaVey's "Forces of Darkness" were envisioned as something universal and unbound to any individual cultural lens.

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
So after "all this" is there anything of active and future value in Satanism, or does it lock as the historical phenomenon and period covered by CoS? In this thread I'm going to suggest that there is.


I certainly think that as far as (some) individuals go, Satanism is and will continue to be a useful and empowering context through which to find value and meaning. But as far as in any sort of organized or institutionalized form? I really don't know. It's been tried over and over countless times in countless ways since 1975, and not once has it ever come close to achieving what the original CoS did as a "movement."

But, who knows? After all, in your own writings, you have stated that 1966-1975 was an Age of Horus/Set combined . . . and if I recall correctly, you also have hinted that you think that the next phase could very well be Horus/Set combined once again in some form for a new Aeon/Age. I've wondered before if by that, you were suggesting a new "Satanic" Age.

Top
#116158 - 03/30/18 08:30 PM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Obitus]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2711
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
Historically there have been moral or political movements which have used a mythical, folk, or religious symbol not literally as a belief, but as a symbol for dramatic effect. The Devil as a social statement is exemplified in the Hellfire Clubs in England, for instance.

But I remain dubious because current social flaws are so numerous and extreme, and also because "Satan" & "Satanism" have been thrown around so pejoratively. If you surf Youtube, for instance, there are numerous videos complaining about the "Satanic" music industry, Hollywood, Rothchilds, Pizza places in Washington, the military & intelligence agencies, etc. In short there's an awful lot of BS baggage attached to the term.

It was entirely difference back in the 1960s, when it was not in use. Anton LaVey had these words pretty much to himself to define and relate to society. When the term was used, as in films like Rosemary's Baby and The Devil Rides Out, the imagery was still very traditional and orthodox. Much easier to control. It began coming apart in the 70s with rock music, and disintegrated in the 80s as adopted by "SRA" scammers.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#116176 - 04/03/18 11:32 AM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7187
Loc: Virginia
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
SIN, titles can be useful as recognitions of some reality, a summary. That's exactly why the Temple of Set has always used that term instead of rank, elevation, etc.


I wasn't speaking on what you'd later 'become', I'm speaking of the reason you found schism within the CoS and with LaVey. It's fairly obvious, even by your own re-telling of events.

 Quote:
The Church's original degree system was the water of Recognition, and Anton's decision proposed to turn it into the wave of appearances.



Sure, everything has a start. Cause/Effect. That people were vying for his attentions, hoping to be dawned a crown is the effect. Nothing much to get your panties in a twist about, but you DID.


 Quote:
the shorthand or simplicity of a title can be misleading if, for instance, it is too confining a stereotype, or is too vague, used also by poseurs, etc. There are some Ph.D.s that are sound, many more that are fraudulent either institutionally or personally. AMORC's Spencer Lewis just used it. Nor does even a valid Ph.D. or M.D. prevent the recipient from misusing it or just screwing up subsequently. Such titles, whether initiatory, academic, or etc. are indications of potential, not guarantees.

Taoists get all this but don't bother about it. \:\)



It was blatant, there was no confusion. No mislead, nor mischaracterization. The exodus for your 'reasons' aren't very convincing, still.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#116190 - 04/06/18 01:05 AM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3300
Through experience and observations I can only say this.

People who complain about a re-envisioning Satanism, or having the need to give it an enema, tend to be the same people who are mostly interwined with form and totally alienated from substance.

The people who go for the aesthetic instead of the substance.

If the (a)theist dichotomy bothers you that much you might fall into the category of "aesthetic" instead of "substance". There have been interesting discussions in the past which played with theistic concepts.

The matter of fact, where it concerns theistic concepts and discussion, is that most of the theistic inclined are either batshit crazy, as dense as a brick or either have their heads stuck up so deep in their arses they might start gurgling their own stomach acids.

The only thing that must be re-envisioned tends to be ones personality. Leave Satanism (or any other -ism) out for covering up and/or trying to intellectualize the own short-comings or lack of substance.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#116192 - 04/06/18 05:04 AM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: SIN3]
Ateosoth Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/03/16
Posts: 13
Satanism as such, envisioned by CoS, and viewed within that sociological perspective, was relevant and effective while certain kind of dualism was more sharply present within constrained consciousness of Western man. Now, while world is moving toward greater unification, liberalization, and while once sharp lines of old morality are now being blurred, Satanism naturally becomes more and more obsolete as a form, also being deprived of its shock value and controversy that fueled it for a while. Also, being mostly reactionary phenomenon opposed to traditional morals and worldviews of religious authority it is not the wonder that Satanism weakens with the weakening of that same authority. Satanism in such a form, was the antithesis within that, already mentioned, dialectical formula, and which is destined to be dissolved, along with the thesis, by the occurrence of the synthesis. In other words Satanism actually won the battle it started, so it is only logical that weapons used for achieving such a victory are now useless. Though not being declared Satanist, most of the people of the Western world are actually now living very satanically. "Satanically" as envisioned by LaVey and the like, and by all those preceding revolutionary groups and movements, mentioned by Mr. Aquino, that used Satan as an inspiration, a symbol while fighting exactly for the world we are now living in. Many things once considered to be a sin, evil, immoral, devil's work etc., are now either a norm or something tolerated and promoted. This form of Satanism, which is now on its deathbed, was and is just an exoteric form that never, on its own, had any esoteric substance. It had its esoteric purpose but within a greater perspective which goes beyond it.
The funny thing is that, during the period mentioned in initial post, mid 70's, Satanism was in fact reenvisioned and was given that lacking esoteric substance by the Order of Nine Angles, and within their Sinisterly-Numinous Tradition which encompasses both dark and light aspects of man and Nature, as well as it was given a new exoteric form, or rather inclination, through which it can become new, very lasting and very effective multiform (shape-shifting) antithesis, and where it is just means to an end (of individual and collective transformation). The true understanding of what the essence of Satanism is, beyond any form, can only be acquired and preserved within such genuinely esoteric traditions. Here, of course, I have in mind also many Orders spawning from older traditions predating Sinisterly-Numinous one, and some of those orders actually initiated creation of CoS and phenomenon of modern Satanism as an exoteric form employed for certain esoteric purposes. Now this form is dying out as fulfilling its purpose, but this doesn't mean that the very essence of Satanism would or could ever die out - this essence will be always safely kept and inherited within some of those genuine esoteric traditions. Just make your peace with the fact that every exoteric form has its life span, including modern Satanism.
_________________________
3.:.9.:.A

Top
#116197 - 04/07/18 06:35 AM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Ateosoth]
Czereda Offline
senior member


Registered: 03/14/11
Posts: 2089
Loc: Poland
 Originally Posted By: Ateosoth
Now this form is dying out as fulfilling its purpose, but this doesn't mean that the very essence of Satanism would or could ever die out - this essence will be always safely kept and inherited within some of those genuine esoteric traditions. Just make your peace with the fact that every exoteric form has its life span, including modern Satanism.


Very wise words, Ateosoth. At last, there comes someone who is not blind. Those who whine that Satanism is dying either can't see the forest for all the trees there or pretend not to see it to manipulate fools into following them.
_________________________
Anna Czereda
Crazy Cat Lady

Top
#116202 - 04/09/18 11:15 AM Re: Satsnism Reenvisioned [Re: Ateosoth]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7187
Loc: Virginia
 Originally Posted By: Ateosoth
Satanism as such, envisioned by CoS,


It wasn't. The CoS was merely a social club, still is. Whether active or registered, those counted among the rank and file can utilize the connection for networking, or ignore it and keep on living the LHP.

 Quote:
and viewed within that sociological perspective,


It wasn't. It was merely repeated in sentiment by a Baby Boomer sick and tired of the status quo permeating society at that time, so he snubbed it further and made a show of it. One could argue it was a marketing ploy to attract numbers.



 Quote:
was relevant and effective while certain kind of dualism was more sharply present within constrained consciousness of Western man.
As if that has just disappeared? Whether East or West?

 Quote:
Now, while world is moving toward greater unification,


Ideology, nothing more. Such as this desired 'peace' people have been going on about since the 60's. It's Utopian at best. It will never be achieved because people are protective of their cultural identities and property.

 Quote:
liberalization, and while once sharp lines of old morality are now being blurred, Satanism naturally becomes more and more obsolete as a form, ...
False. It would be more accurate to say, that the trendy notions of a shared morality are even more obtuse than ever before.


 Quote:
also being deprived of its shock value and controversy that fueled it for a while. Also, being mostly reactionary phenomenon opposed to traditional morals and worldviews of religious authority it is not the wonder that Satanism weakens with the weakening of that same authority.
'Traditional Morals', are still in use across the globe, and aren't just framed within the Judeo-Christian world view. Even your run-of-the-mill 'Atheist' gets rather sanctimonious these days, even more so in this decade. So please...


 Quote:
Satanism in such a form, was the antithesis within that, already mentioned, dialectical formula, and which is destined to be dissolved, along with the thesis, by the occurrence of the synthesis.


False. Word Soup. Taboo doesn't cease to exist simply because of your gross misunderstanding and over-simplification of human behaviors.

 Quote:

In other words Satanism actually won the battle it started, so it is only logical that weapons used for achieving such a victory are now useless.


Oh? Is this perhaps the reason the TST has clung to it even more tightly while towing the lines of Abortion, Secularism, and all for the love of the children?

 Quote:
Though not being declared Satanist, most of the people of the Western world are actually now living very satanically.
Actually, they're not.


 Quote:
"Satanically" as envisioned by LaVey and the like, and by all those preceding revolutionary groups and movements, mentioned by Mr. Aquino, that used Satan as an inspiration, a symbol while fighting exactly for the world we are now living in. Many things once considered to be a sin, evil, immoral, devil's work etc., are now either a norm or something tolerated and promoted.


Oh? A fringe embrace does not a society make. This is why the U.S. still criminalizes prostitution, drug use, restricts armaments, and the abortion debate still rages on. Among other things...

 Quote:
This form of Satanism, which is now on its deathbed, was and is just an exoteric form that never, on its own, had any esoteric substance.


That you seem to think so isn't really a shocker here. This form indeed....



It had its esoteric purpose but within a greater perspective which goes beyond it.
The funny thing is that, during the period mentioned in initial post, mid 70's, Satanism was in fact reenvisioned and was given that lacking esoteric substance by the Order of Nine Angles, and within their Sinisterly-Numinous Tradition which encompasses both dark and light aspects of man and Nature, as well as it was given a new exoteric form, or rather inclination, through which it can become new, very lasting and very effective multiform (shape-shifting) antithesis, and where it is just means to an end (of individual and collective transformation). The true understanding of what the essence of Satanism is, beyond any form, can only be acquired and preserved within such genuinely esoteric traditions. Here, of course, I have in mind also many Orders spawning from older traditions predating Sinisterly-Numinous one, and some of those orders actually initiated creation of CoS and phenomenon of modern Satanism as an exoteric form employed for certain esoteric purposes. Now this form is dying out as fulfilling its purpose, but this doesn't mean that the very essence of Satanism would or could ever die out - this essence will be always safely kept and inherited within some of those genuine esoteric traditions. Just make your peace with the fact that every exoteric form has its life span, including modern Satanism.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
Page all of 2 12>


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.041 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 31 queries. Zlib compression disabled.