Page 1 of 3 123>
Topic Options
#28451 - 08/14/09 07:22 PM Thelema vs Satanism
god.over.djinn Offline
pledge


Registered: 06/23/09
Posts: 75
Loc: Melbourne
This is a fork of the "I wish not to destroy my copy" thread. There is obviously some interest in comparing and contrasting Thelema and Satanism, so let's have at it.


<summary>
 Originally Posted By: god.over.djinn
Satan isn't Thelema. Thelema believes in the veracity of the Book of the Law as received from a praeterhuman intelligence named Aiwaz. A Satanist will regard this as BS.

 Originally Posted By: Mercury_Templar
You seem to find the idea of Thelema and Satanism being compatible humorous on some level; yet when asked to explain why, you hide behind some lame display of flippance and relativism.

 Originally Posted By: Fist
That position needs further elaboration and discussion, perhaps in it's own thread. Crowley's work is clearly LHP. What about his work is not 'satanic'?

</summary>

To reiterate my stance: the Thelemic view of the Book of the Law is that Aleister Crowley received ("channelled"?) the work from a "praeter-human intelligence" - supernatural? extra-terrestrial? the exact meaning seems to be open to question - called Aiwaz.

Satanism, on the other hand, embraces a naturalistic/materialistic view of reality; Satan, as Lord of the Material World, is an appropriate symbol for Reality itself, driven as it is by entropy and chaos - which in Western culture for hundreds of years were regarded as attributes of Satan. If there are any praeter-human intelligences, then they are of a material sort, and probably not in contact with humanity - and certainly not responsible for communicating any Book of any Law to Aleister Crowley, except maybe in some poetic sense, in the same way that spanking the monkey is a poetic way of talking about masturbation.

Instead, Aleister Crowley wrote, according to his own intelligence and creativity, the Book of the Law - all by himself (modulo some help/inspiration from other humans). This was well within in his capabilities, as evidenced by comparison with such works as the Book of Lies.

Certainly Thelema intersects with the LHP and Satanism; on the other hand, Magick Without Tears and other literature shows that Crowley took extensive pains to speak ill of "The Black Brotherhood" and followers of the Left Hand Path; Mr Crowley also denied being a Satanist.

Believing that Crowley had authentic communication with praeter-human intelligences, regarding Crowley as an authoritative source on magickal/mystical matters in his role as the Prince-Priest-Beast of the new Aeon, and placing moral expectations on adherents (eg attaining "Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel") are all traits of RHP religions.

Thelema may thus be regarded as a religion of mixed paths; its adherents generally strike me as knowledgeable on their subject matter, and not entirely "un-Satanic", but neither should Thelema be considered co-terminal with Satanism. Thelema may be pursued without identification with Satan, and Satanism may be embraced without particularly caring for Thelema.

Hence on a forum devoted to Satanism, it is silly to suppose that everyone will be Thelemic, or to care two hoots for what dyed-in-the-wool Thelemites think is the correct way to do things.


G.O.D.
_________________________
SATAN, a recursive acronym invented by GOD: "SATAN: Advocating The Adversarial Nihilist"

Top
#28453 - 08/14/09 08:57 PM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: god.over.djinn]
Mercury_Templar Offline
93 93/93
member


Registered: 09/16/07
Posts: 262
Loc: Cabarita, Vic, Australia
You took your time. I thought this was going to be a well thought out and presented retort. Instead all I see are ill-researched presumptions, displays of flawed logic, uneducated premises and veiled insults. What a shame.

First the ill-researched presumptions: the very title of your post reeks of missing the point. It would be silly to presume anyone other than yourself would consider Thelemic thought to be in opposition to Satanic thinking. LaVey admits the influence and even the most ill-informed can see the inspiration.

You also presume that Thelemites regard Aiwass (it has two S not a Z) as a praeternatural entity. Aiwass has long been understood as a non-corporeal essence; as in non-physical or a mental construct. Crowley himself even claimed that such an entity was in fact part of his higher self (after initially thinking such a situation was not very likely) – this is why he eventually referred to Aiwass as his Holy Guardian Angel (HGA). I fail to see anything here that does not fit into the theories of Self-Actualization or even basic accepted psychology. Again, both concepts accepted and presented by LaVey. Bit of a pattern forming here.

Nice analogies by the way, but it must be remembered that Liber AL vel Legis, sub figura CCXX, as delivered by XCIII=418 to DCLXVI, is (at the risk of belittling its importance), only part of a comprehensive syllabus. Liber Al is, at its heart (sorry for the personification, but the symbolism was too tempting), a Qabalistic text of great depth, which fits in rather nicely with the rest of the Thelemic Canon. The entire complex nature of Thelema encourages practitioners to use what is deemed useful to the individual and their True Will; therefore people develop, along an exclusive path, but with guidance from a solid base. Surely you can see parallels here?

Flawed logic: did anyone state that Thelema was Satanism and vice versa? I am having trouble finding where that was stated. Oh that is right; it was not. And again; you are pitting one against the other for some reason. No one stated that one would not exist without the other and so on either. The question was, why you considered it funny to post a question regarding Thelema on a Satanic forum; nobody ever stated that everyone here was Thelemic. From what I can see, you opened your mouth and blurted out a flippant remark that you are now trying to defend. Admit what you said was facetious and move on. You are certainly failing to present a well constructed point of view on the subject; which would imply you have no vested interest. Hell, you have even admitted so yourself.

Uneducated premises: You fail to understand what the Black brotherhood represents and you have yet to realise the folly of false philosophical inversions. Dig up some essays written by Israel Regardie and try this argument again when you are better educated. That is if you care to.

Defining Satanism to me is a little redundant, but obviously you need a little nudge towards understanding Thelemic philosophy. While the term thelema had been previously used, it is a general Greek word after all; the codified philosophy of Thelema is purely Crowleyan. This is very similar to the way Satanism is a relatively old idiom, yet it would be a sensible assumption to regard Satanism (as in Modern Satanism) to be a way of life codified by LaVey. Even the word itself has an ambiguous duality and connotation of indulgence (very Satanic). The word relates to the individual's Will being gratified and even suggests that an individual's will can only be gratified when in accordance with the Will of God, or the Devil – this would be referred to as, Knowledge and Conversation with the Holy Guardian Angel (K&KwtHGA). I hope there is no need for me to spell out the naturalistic definitions here. The concept of being true to one's own Will is at the foundation of Thelema, much as true individuality is a core principle of Modern Satanism.

Veiled Insults: This one should not need an explanation.

Your contention is weak, and your argument is inconsistent. Try not to take this personally, but it is obvious, on this point, you do not know what you are talking about.

M.'.T.'.
_________________________
ATEH
MALKUTH
VE-GEBURAH
VE-GEDULAH
LE-OLAM
AMEN

Top
#28456 - 08/14/09 10:06 PM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: Mercury_Templar]
god.over.djinn Offline
pledge


Registered: 06/23/09
Posts: 75
Loc: Melbourne
 Originally Posted By: Mercury_Templar
You took your time.


Yes, I have a life outside of this forum. I see that you don't take long to respond.


 Originally Posted By: MT
It would be silly to presume anyone other than yourself would consider Thelemic thought to be in opposition to Satanic thinking. LaVey admits the influence and even the most ill-informed can see the inspiration.


So are you contending that LaVey was a Thelemite? I too admit to "influence" from Thelema and Crowley's writings; a Thelemite that doesn't make me.

Nor did I state that Thelemic thought is in opposition to Satanic thinking; I merely contend that Satanic thinking is in opposition to Thelemic thought.


 Originally Posted By: MT

You also presume that Thelemites regard Aiwass (it has two S not a Z) as a praeternatural entity. Aiwass has long been understood as a non-corporeal essence; as in non-physical or a mental construct.


Yes, this is exactly what I was talking about with the whole thing about how Satanism is naturalistic and the Satanist will regard the non-material as, well, immaterial.


 Originally Posted By: MT
Crowley himself even claimed that such an entity was in fact part of his higher self (after initially thinking such a situation was not very likely) – this is why he eventually referred to Aiwass as his Holy Guardian Angel (HGA). I fail to see anything here that does not fit into the theories of Self-Actualization or even basic accepted psychology. Again, both concepts accepted and presented by LaVey. Bit of a pattern forming here.


That must be why LaVey's writings are (not) peppered with references to the HGA and some "higher self". These are mystical ideas and do not form a part of Satanism.

If it (Thelema along with all buzzwords associated) is the same as Self-Actualisation and "basic accepted psychology" then why don't you use the words Self-Actualisation and basic accepted psychology to describe your faith-system? Why don't psychologists talk about a HGA, higher selves, and non-corporeal essences? Um, that could be because the concepts are not the same.


 Originally Posted By: MT

Nice analogies by the way, but it must be remembered that Liber AL vel Legis, sub figura CCXX, as delivered by XCIII=418 to DCLXVI, is (at the risk of belittling its importance), only part of a comprehensive syllabus. Liber Al is, at its heart (sorry for the personification, but the symbolism was too tempting), a Qabalistic text of great depth, which fits in rather nicely with the rest of the Thelemic Canon. The entire complex nature of Thelema encourages practitioners to use what is deemed useful to the individual and their True Will; therefore people develop, along an exclusive path, but with guidance from a solid base. Surely you can see parallels here?


Defining Thelema to me is a little redundant, but obviously you need a little nudge towards understanding Satanic philosophy.

Parallels? I never said that Thelema and Satanism were disjoint. With some overlap between philosophies, yes, you will have parallels. There are also "parallels" between Islam and Christianity. And if someone goes to a forum for Muslims, attests that they have just read the New Testament, and asks whether we should really become Fishers of Men as Jesus commands, then what response do you think they would get?


 Originally Posted By: MT

Flawed logic: did anyone state that Thelema was Satanism and vice versa? I am having trouble finding where that was stated. Oh that is right; it was not. And again; you are pitting one against the other for some reason. No one stated that one would not exist without the other and so on either. The question was, why you considered it funny to post a question regarding Thelema on a Satanic forum; nobody ever stated that everyone here was Thelemic. From what I can see, you opened your mouth and blurted out a flippant remark that you are now trying to defend. Admit what you said was facetious and move on.


Well, yes, the original comment was flippant. Move on? I was moving on, but you asked for me to elaborate on my views.


 Quote:

You are certainly failing to present a well constructed point of view on the subject; which would imply you have no vested interest. Hell, you have even admitted so yourself.


My "vested interest" is to be able to be able to interact with other Satanists. That is harder to do when the forum is riddled with people who take seriously the occult and the supernatural.


 Quote:

Uneducated premises: You fail to understand what the Black brotherhood represents and you have yet to realise the folly of false philosophical inversions. Dig up some essays written by Israel Regardie and try this argument again when you are better educated. That is if you care to.


*yawn* No, I don't care to. If it is that important to your argument, you will present your own point of view on the subject. It is a bit lazy to expect Mr Regardie to do all your arguing for you.


 Quote:
The word (Thelema) relates to the individual's Will being gratified and even suggests that an individual's will can only be gratified when in accordance with the Will of God, or the Devil – this would be referred to as, Knowledge and Conversation with the Holy Guardian Angel (K&KwtHGA).


"Will" with a capital "W"? "Knowledge and Conversation with the Holy Guardian Angel"? Hogwash!

I can talk about the Mysteries of the Dark Magisterium being self-evident to all True Walkers of the Path of Investitude till the cows come home, but that doesn't mean I'm not talking utter bullocks.

Eschew obfuscation!


 Originally Posted By: MT

The concept of being true to one's own Will is at the foundation of Thelema, much as true individuality is a core principle of Modern Satanism.


The core principle of Modern Satanism is that the secret to happiness and success in a world governed by the Satanic forces of entropy and chaos is to adopt the Satanic attributes of critical thinking, competency, industriousness, responsibility, and self-indulgence. There aren't any non-corporeal "True Wills" "non-physical essences", "higher selves", or "Holy Guardian Angels". There is only reality and your experience of it.


 Quote:
Veiled Insults: This one should not need an explanation.


Veiled insults? Insults right out in the open? What's the difference? Do unto others as they do unto you - and you haven't been a model of courtesy.


 Quote:

Your contention is weak, and your argument is inconsistent. Try not to take this personally, but it is obvious, on this point, you do not know what you are talking about.


Your occult and supernatural beliefs are a load of BS. Try not to take this personally, but it is obvious, on this point, that you are severely out of touch with reality.


G.O.D.
_________________________
SATAN, a recursive acronym invented by GOD: "SATAN: Advocating The Adversarial Nihilist"

Top
#28463 - 08/14/09 11:40 PM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: god.over.djinn]
Mercury_Templar Offline
93 93/93
member


Registered: 09/16/07
Posts: 262
Loc: Cabarita, Vic, Australia
If you really do not care and wish to move on so be it. I guess this means I am wasting my time. The term Troll springs to mind.

Your assumptions are tainting your contention, if indeed you are trying to make a point. Stop contradicting yourself and claiming I have said things I have not.

Surely you understand what a mental construct is? Everybody uses them every day. I am constructing thoughts right now.

If you do not wish to discuss anything relating to The Occult then please stop posting nonsense in the Occult section of the forum.

If you do not wish to research a subject before claiming to understand it, please stop trying to comment upon it.

Yes, I could use purely psychological terms to describe what I am referring to, but I like the traditional labels.

Oh, and I do not have any occult or supernatural beliefs.

By the way, the term is 'bollocks' not 'bullocks'.

I thought this was going to be an actual discussion, I am now sorry I wasted my time responding to your drivel.

I probably won't respond to this crap again as I am preparing to take 40 students to the snow-fields for a week. But even if I were not – I fail to see any worth in trying to discuss this subject with you. I got over the whole ‘what does The Occult have to do with Satanism’ thing a long, long, long time ago.

M.'.T.'.
_________________________
ATEH
MALKUTH
VE-GEBURAH
VE-GEDULAH
LE-OLAM
AMEN

Top
#28479 - 08/15/09 05:00 PM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: Mercury_Templar]
god.over.djinn Offline
pledge


Registered: 06/23/09
Posts: 75
Loc: Melbourne
How predictable. You even got out the word "troll" which I thought you might try and spring on me. I realised the bullocks vs bollocks thing after I posted, too, and there you go, you've done a nice job there of picking up on it. I can see how Thelema must really improve life.

All this because I rightly made fun of an idiot who asked a Satanic forum whether or not to burn a work invented by Aleister Crowley over 100 years ago.

If you are too lazy to form an argument, then why bother starting one?


G.O.D.
_________________________
SATAN, a recursive acronym invented by GOD: "SATAN: Advocating The Adversarial Nihilist"

Top
#28484 - 08/15/09 05:40 PM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: god.over.djinn]
Mercury_Templar Offline
93 93/93
member


Registered: 09/16/07
Posts: 262
Loc: Cabarita, Vic, Australia
I must admit I am sort of disappointed on some level. I sincerely thought you may have been able to present a discussion in a rational and concise manner; but for all to see, you have not. The mocking is very immature too. As I said, I have wasted too much time on people like you before; but if you think I am being lazy, so be it. I have already proven my worth in life, as well as on here. Cracking a hissy fit when being asked to back up a point you made is not very adult or impressive.

I am going to leave this thread open while I am away; if nothing good comes from it I am going to delete it when I get home. We have seen enough of this sort of mindless self-indulgence around here to last us a very long time.

M.'.T.'.
_________________________
ATEH
MALKUTH
VE-GEBURAH
VE-GEDULAH
LE-OLAM
AMEN

Top
#28485 - 08/15/09 06:07 PM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: Mercury_Templar]
god.over.djinn Offline
pledge


Registered: 06/23/09
Posts: 75
Loc: Melbourne
You are a moderator so I guess if your way of dealing with arguments that you start but don't want to finish is to delete them then I guess I can't stop you.

Like you say, very disappointing.


G.O.D.
_________________________
SATAN, a recursive acronym invented by GOD: "SATAN: Advocating The Adversarial Nihilist"

Top
#28667 - 08/19/09 10:13 PM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: god.over.djinn]
Domonic Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/27/09
Posts: 41
Loc: Edgewood New Mex
Youy know what dude, Im not gonna put on a show of wit, all I am going to tell you is FUCK YOU. Go eat a dick. Merc Temp is right. You make yourself look childish. You just couldnt let my post go eh?
_________________________
Liber III vel Jugorum- " To understand initiation, you must understand yourself."

Top
#28674 - 08/20/09 01:16 AM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: Domonic]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
And what does you popping in to give your "words of wisdom" do but you make you look childish?

Just couldn't let it go, eh?
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#77831 - 07/07/13 04:19 PM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: god.over.djinn]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6662
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
Thelema may thus be regarded as a religion of mixed paths; its adherents generally strike me as knowledgeable on their subject matter, and not entirely "un-Satanic", but neither should Thelema be considered co-terminal with Satanism. Thelema may be pursued without identification with Satan, and Satanism may be embraced without particularly caring for Thelema.


Certainly and comparable arguments occur within Modern paganism, as such: "Witches can be pagans, but all Witches are not pagan..." I could add a few others, but that would distract from the crux of the matter.

If you believe that Olde Crowe penning a work was the stepping stone to Thelemic followers, where is your evidence for this?

In other words, do you believe he intended for it to be Religion?

I slum Thelemic boards on occasion and have been dubbed the 'Satanic Thelemite', it doesn't bother me much because I recognize that the users of these forums are both identifying me as kin, as well as Other. The identity label doesn't mean much to me, but it may to those that apply it to me. My point of view on any given subject is often in opposition to the commonly held view. I haven't been on Lasthtal in years but I'm fairly certain a lot of those old debates are still hosted there.

For example, you can visit any Thelemic board and find at least (2) different topics discussing 'THE COMMENT' at the tail end of Liber AL vel Legis (Lashtal included). Not so far removed from the myriad of discussions found on any 'Satanic' board attempting to decipher Yankee Rose. Crowley was a bit more blatant with the advisement than LaVey may have been.

When these types of discussions pop up (Satanism vs. Thelema), I can't help but see the same blunders time and time again. It is usually reduced to comparing Crowley's life to that of Anton, before it moves on to discussing the texts. Once that is all argued into obscurity, I think people miss the focus of both men and their life pursuits. Setting that aside, for a moment...

The tone of The Book of the Law is a strong focus on personal Liberty and Responsibility. Some may get lost in the metaphor and symbolism (sound familiar?) and end up taking things too literally or missing the underlying message all together. Prose isn't for everyone, I just happen to enjoy it immensely.

To say Thelema isn't co-terminal simply because 'Satan' isn't the symbolic messenger isn't quite cutting it for me. Defining Thelema itself by the Thelemites, is a horrid way to fully understand the premise because very few get it right, and the majority get it wrong. I think there's a good reason that LaVey expresses his opinions of Thelemites publicly, don't you? He recognized Crowley as a word-smithy trickster, (kin) while rejecting the feeble followers of the word that didn't quite understand its mediation. Doesn't that also sound familiar?


If one recognizes that a Satanist could be running tandem ideologies, it gets down to the nitty-gritty of Satanism as a method of practice. It goes without saying that extrapolations can be made from The Book of the Law and comparably may be quite different by a Satanist than your average Thelemitic follower.


If you believe Thelema to be a 'religion', I can only speculate that you may believe Satanism is too.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#77871 - 07/09/13 01:09 AM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: SIN3]
Kemble Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/13
Posts: 139
I'm not sure they can really work cooperatively due to a conflict in their primary principles. We have Thelema that pivots around the idea of a divine, sort of pre-destined Will to get "in tune" to, with egoic desire eventually phased out until post-death reunion with Nature and Satanism that sees egoic desire as the primary and only valid vehicle to happiness. So both systems have a pretty profound conflict in their "mission and goal" statements.
Top
#77876 - 07/09/13 06:21 AM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: Kemble]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6662
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
We have Thelema that pivots around the idea of a divine, sort of pre-destined Will to get "in tune" to, with egoic desire eventually phased out until post-death reunion with Nature


Can you expand on this definition of Thelema a bit? How did you come to believe this is the message of The Book of the Law?
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#77881 - 07/09/13 11:41 AM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: SIN3]
Kemble Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/13
Posts: 139
Thelemaledia gives an overview of two important concepts:

True Will - Crowley's Mission Statement essentially
Holy Gaurdian Angel - the goal

In the later it elaborates on two quotes by Crowley:

 Originally Posted By: HGA and Black Magick
The implication is that only magick devoted to the spiritual evolution of the individual and their attunement to the global and cosmic Will is honorable and in line with the ultimate goals of Thelema. Any magick that is self-serving or results-oriented is regarded as impure and in contradiction to the necessary evolution of the species.

Top
#77882 - 07/09/13 12:15 PM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: Kemble]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6662
Loc: Virginia
I see. Personally, I don't filter through the interpretations of others. Reading Book 4, he seemed to be focusing on the inner-conversation, (Esoteric) and manifesting in the Exoteric.


You also have to consider what Book 4, is.

 Quote:
THIS book is intentionally "not" the work of Frater Perdurabo. Experience shows that his writing is too concentrated, too abstruse, too occult, for ordinary minds to apprehend. It is thought that this record of disjointed fragments of his casual conversation may prove alike more intelligible and more convincing, and at least provide a preliminary study which will enable the student to attack his real work from a standpoint of some little general knowledge and understanding of his ideas, and of the form in which he figures them.



I would no more accept an understanding from a Thelemite than I would from a person that hasn't actually digested his writing, and mused with it.



Edited by SIN3 (07/09/13 12:17 PM)
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#77883 - 07/09/13 12:27 PM Re: Thelema vs Satanism [Re: SIN3]
Kemble Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/13
Posts: 139
I does not seem like Crowley fully understood the original Book of the Law and he later came back to it with a commentary. It's these later elaborations by Crowley that make up the foundaions of Thelema in Crowley's post-1904 years and our contemporary times. It may not be fully possible for anyone today to pick up the Book of the Law and decipher it as it was originally intended. But anyway, to quote from Crowley:

 Quote:
The Adept will be free to concentrate his deepest self, that part of him which unconsciously orders his true Will, upon the realization of his Holy Guardian Angel. The absence of his bodily, mental and astral consciousness is indeed cardinal to success, for it is their usurpation of his attention which has made him deaf to his Soul, and his preoccupation with their affairs that has prevented him from perceiving that Soul.


Crowley's mistrust of the ego/carnal seems antagonistic to Lavey's work.

Top
Page 1 of 3 123>


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

Generated in 0.028 seconds of which 0.001 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.