Page 2 of 4 <1234>
Topic Options
#34172 - 01/18/10 12:14 PM Re: Concise meaning of 666? [Re: Meq]
DistroyA Offline
member


Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 478
Loc: Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, UK
Plus, wasn't the number of the Beast originally 6 *1* 6 in the Catholic Bible?

Edited by DistroyA (01/18/10 12:15 PM)
Edit Reason: Needed asterisks for added emphasis
_________________________
"A man chooses, a slave obeys." - Andrew Ryan of Ryan Industries (Bioshock)

Top
#34173 - 01/18/10 01:07 PM Re: Concise meaning of 666? [Re: DistroyA]
Meq Offline
Banned
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 861
The Wikipedia article covers some interesting points, including arguments that the original number was 616, and the adoption of 666 by Aleister Crowley (see other interpretations).

This may also be of interest:
Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia (fear of the number 666)


Edited by Meq (01/18/10 01:35 PM)
Edit Reason: Added article

Top
#34177 - 01/18/10 04:28 PM Re: Concise meaning of 666? [Re: Meq]
Fabiano Offline
member


Registered: 09/06/08
Posts: 374
Just for fun, adding some "occult porn" on 6 and Allah.

In the Arab Abjad, Allah is numerically transposed as 5 (ha) 30 (lam) 30 (lam) & 1 (alif) for a total of... 66 \:o

Can we conclude Allah is 2 thirds of a beast ? LOL ! \:D

Top
#34180 - 01/18/10 05:57 PM Re: Concise meaning of 666? [Re: Meq]
Baron dHolbach Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/09
Posts: 162


I think I have long-ass-word-a-phobia.

In any case, I like 616 better because if you add the digits together the sum is 13, so it's two for the price of one! So then you can have 666-phobia and 13-phobia simultaneously and really scare the shit out of yourself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triskaidekaphobia
_________________________
The baboon is the soul of man.



Top
#34243 - 01/19/10 10:39 PM Re: Concise meaning of 666? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



“Once sensitized to 9, the Black Magician can use its power in many ways - for calculation, prediction, suggestion, revelation.”

I am running a bit late here in responding to this particular thread, but I still wanted to add a post.

To Dr. Aquino

I find the information which you have provided to this Gldn Sprl Pth to be rather remarkable and I am surprised that he or she is not going to follow it up further.

There are many aspects of the Satanic philosophy and the practices of the C.O.S, which I am still trying to work out and understand. The significance of the 9 is one of those aspects.

I have read The Unknown Known a few times and am still surprised by its content.

Dr. LaVey seems to be drawing out definite periods of time, such as workings, ages, epochs etc. on the basis of a law of the 9.

Time or history seem to be understandable or readable (at a very broad level) through a logic of the 9, and further human beings and their societies and their actions are possibly readable or understandable (at a very broad level), through a logic of the 9 as well.

I do not know if I am off track here or not – more study required.

I am not sure how serious Dr. LaVey was about all this, or whether he was speaking tongue in cheek, but it is interesting that there is of course a Council of 9.

It seems obvious that 9 was an important number to The Church and still is in some sense.

I do take 6’s point on numbers just being numbers, but…

Obviously, I have a hell of a lot of work to do here to get a deeper understanding of this. Some of Fist’s intellectual heavy lifting is required.

The example you have provided to this Gldn Sprl Pth is interesting - If one follows the formula, than the outcome of thinking is completely predictable every time. I am assuming that this is just one of many such formulas. Will enjoy studying this!

Does your example and your understanding of the power of the 9 have any sort of relevance to your work in Psy – ops?

Maybe I am barking up the wrong tree, but I have a feeling that some vast and dark order is wrapped up in all this.

Best wishes to you.

Matt from Sydney

P.S. have a ton of work to do on the trapezoid as well and the particular place it held in Mortensen’s work, and consequently the perception, knowledge and organisation or order of The Church.

Top
#34251 - 01/20/10 04:02 AM Re: Concise meaning of 666? [Re: ]
Baron dHolbach Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/09
Posts: 162
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
“Once sensitized to 9, the Black Magician can use its power in many ways - for calculation, prediction, suggestion, revelation.”


I'll toss this in for fun, since it seems it will interest you. There is a reason businesses will price their products at X dollars and 99 cents, instead of X+1 dollars. Part of it is the obvious; I.e, the dim witted will perceive the price as nearer to X than to X+1; but there is, in addition to that, another element at play. Studies have been done that indicate a statistically greater likelihood for consumers to buy a product priced at X dollars and 99 cents, than at lower prices, such as X dollars and 84 cents*. There is a psychological triggering power to the number 9. Remember that I'm saying psychological. I'm talking strictly about the Subjective. But on the Subjective the number 9 has demonstrated enough power as to help justify a ubiquitous business practice, that of pricing products at X and 99 cents.

*Obviously businesses will rather price at X and 99 cents as opposed to, say, X and 84 cents, if the former will trigger more sales, since the former has the added virtue of being a higher price and thus increases the profit margin at point of sale.
_________________________
The baboon is the soul of man.



Top
#34253 - 01/20/10 05:09 AM Re: Concise meaning of 666? [Re: ]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2514
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
Time or history seem to be understandable or readable (at a very broad level) through a logic of the 9, and further human beings and their societies and their actions are possibly readable or understandable (at a very broad level), through a logic of the 9 as well.

I do not know if I am off track here or not ...

On track. As the esteem'd Baron has just pointed out, one of the properties of 9 is that people are drawn to it, much as they are to the Golden Ratio. So if you talk of 9-year cycles, or 9-anything-else, you will always elicit more attention & interest than, say, 8-s. [Ever hear of that great Hollywood film Plan 8 from Outer Space?] If I had to guess, I would say this is probably a subconscious ripple-effect from all the mathemagic connected with that number.

 Quote:
I am not sure how serious Dr. LaVey was about all this, or whether he was speaking tongue in cheek, but it is interesting that there is of course a Council of 9.

Completely serious. Even when we were just goofing off in Santa Barbara or L.A., any 9-phenomenon always got him going. He would have gone apeshit with Google.

The Church of Satan's Council of Nine actually had varying and arbitrary membership pre-1975; its original title was Council of the Trapezoid, but later took the C9 title after Mundy's The Nine Unknown. When we founded the Temple of Set in 1975, we formalized the C9 as the Temple's corporate Board of Directors, with each Councillor serving a 9-year term (one expiring each successive year). A board or council of that size works out very well in practice, and of course doesn't tie-vote either.

 Quote:
Does your example and your understanding of the power of the 9 have any sort of relevance to your work in Psy – ops?

Only to the extent that in PSYOP intelligence and campaign-design we would always consider target audience susceptibilities, including superstitions. You could, for example, use stage magic 9-tricks to suggest that you were a sorcerer or shaman, which can be useful at times, etc.

 Quote:
I have a feeling that some vast and dark order is wrapped up in all this.

Well, the Order of the Trapezoid has considered it one of its signature interests, and has amassed a startling amount of research & lore over the decades. You get astronomers, physicists, theoretical mathematicians, and other assorted weirdos together for a weekend and things can get very freaky very fast.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#34282 - 01/20/10 06:03 PM Re: Concise meaning of 666? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



I wanted to include The Unknown Known in a post for members to examine.

No doubt many members have already read this piece of writing before, but some members may not have.

It may also be useful to remove it from the text of TSR and look at it in isolation.

THE UNKNOWN KNOWN

Despite others' attempts to identify a certain number with
Satan, it will be known that Nine is His number. Nine is the
number of the Ego, for it always returns to itself. No matter
what is done through the most complex multiplication of Nine
by any other number, in the final equation nine alone will stand
forth.

The true ages of time are cast in the likeness of Nine, with
all cycles obedient to its Law. All matters of terrestrial concern
may be evaluated by the infallible resolution of Nine and its
offspring. Action and reaction relative to humanity's tribal
needs are contained within successive nine-year periods: the
total of both (eighteen years) is called a Working. The beginning
and end of each Working is called a Working Year, and
each midway point between the Working Years displays a
zenith of intensity for the Working which has been brought
about.

Nine eighteen-year Workings equal an Era (162 years).
Nine Eras equal an Age (1,458 years), which has been mistakenly
called a millennium. Nine Ages equal an Epoch
(13,122 years).

Each Age (1,458 years) alternates as Fire or Ice, each
differing in the means by which the Control presents its dictum.
During an Age of Ice, man is taught to refrain from his pride
and to retreat from himself; then he will be good. During an
Age of Fire, man is taught to indulge himself and to tear
himself open and look inside; then he will be good. During
an Ice Age, God is above. During a Fire Age, God is beneath.
Throughout each Age, big things occur each eighteen years, for
the Control must maintain a cycle of action and reaction within
the greater cycle of Fire and Ice.

Meaningful and portentous messages are cast forth each
eighteen years, and are acted upon for the eighteen years which
follow, at the end of which a new statement appears. The Ice
Age from which we recently emerged began in the year 508
"A.D." Just as the zenith of passion for what each Working
has inspired occurs halfway between the Working Years, so the
greatest intensity of each Age's message occurs at its midpoint.
Thus in the year 1237 "A.D." man's fervor for what the last
Ice Age represented had reached its summit. That Age ended
in 1966, and the new Age of Fire was born.

The twentieth century has prepared us for the future and
the coming of the Age of Fire was well heralded in the last
Working Years of the Ice Age. The peoples of the Earth have
been touched by the vehicles of 1894, 1912, 1930, and 1948,
and communication has been well wrought. The new Satanic
Age was born in 1966, and that is why His Church was built.

The infant is learning to walk, and by the first Working
Year of his age-that is to say 1984-he will have steadied his
steps, and by the next-2002-he will have attained maturity,
and his reign will be filled with wisdom, reason and delight.

REGE SATANAS!
AVE, SATANAS!
HAIL, SATAN!

There are a couple of initial points, I would like to make here:

• This particular piece of writing has been included at the end of a book of rituals. The piece of writing itself, however, does not conform to the structure or pattern of the rituals in the book. Is the Unknown Known a ritual or ceremony of some sort? And if so, what sort?
• Is The Unknown Known a sort of declaration of universal and necessary truth or a revelation of sorts?
• Is Dr. LaVey declaring his own particular subjective claims in The Unknown Known?

If this piece of writing cannot be construed as some sort of psychodrama, than LaVey held the opinion (at the time the Unknown Known was written and published) that Satan was a real conscious entity of some sort, in my view. The fact that the 9 became so important to The Church, suggests to me, that this piece of writing was more valuable than mere psychodrama.

If the above point is true than LaVey and his organisation held some form of infernal mandate, as far as LaVey and a certain portion of his organisation was concerned.

If the above point is true than his Church was a real and genuine C.O.S and its degrees were genuine, as far as LaVey and his organisation was concerned.

Now before the Atheist cops come rushing in here to trash this, can you please look at The Unknown Known and make a comment on it and the conclusions I am drawing here. I am an Atheist as I have stated before and I am not trying to force you to reject your position, nor am I trying to alter mine at this stage.

I know that LaVey publicly stated many times that Satan was a symbol. I have examined a large amount of Dr. LaVey’s public statements, including The Occult Explosion and I think I have quite a good grasp of The Churches public face.

To Jake

I don’t think I have to tell you this, but I have a high regard for you and Dr. LaVey so please keep this in mind. I am just exploring and trying to get an understanding of a particular piece of writing and its consequences.

To Dr. Aquino

How does this play out? I want to get into a deeper study of Set and the principles of the Temple, but would like to do that at a later time and am also not sure what I am authorised to read and study anyway.

Right now, I am interested in what Satan is or was to the pre 1975 Church and also how Satan functions as a genuine and intelligent entity?

Is Satan a dark flame or intelligence, which animates the carnal subject?

What sort of place can Satan hold when the cultural tradition from which he emerges is suspect in some sense, or occupied by an all powerful, but illusory God?

I’m sorry Dr. Aquino, you have probably been fielding questions of this sort for years.

Top
#34284 - 01/20/10 06:26 PM Re: Concise meaning of 666? [Re: ]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Surely you understand the concepts of symbolism and metaphor.

"Satan" is used as a symbol. The personification of that symbol in prose is to give it intimacy with the reader. Nothing more.

It's as if I was saying, "Oh the demon rum... he tasks me sorely and makes me ill in the morning." Now, you and I both know that rum is an inanimate object... well, it can be animated going down my gullet... but it has no self determining power, nor has it any power to task me in reality. But as a metaphor for its effects... symbology given life in prose to make a point... it can be shown as an entity.

As for what LaVey's stance on the anthropomorphism of Satan was pre 1975, all you have to do is listen to the first minute of the 1973 LP recording THE OCCULT EXPLOSION, which you can find here: http://www.the600club.com/topic33445-1.html

The album came out in 1973, however, given lead times in making the interviews of LaVey and several other prominent "occultists" of the time, we can easily see that this was his belief prior to that time... to at least 1971. He states CLEARLY that Satan is not an anthropomorphic being, but that he understands that some members of the Church of Satan might think differently and why he allows that within the organization.

Now, I know it fits well with the agendas of some to have us think that LaVey was theistic. I'm sorry, but it just wasn't the fact. If you can't take it from his own words, then I can't help you with the delusion that he felt differently. We can speculate anything. But when a man tells you what he believes...
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#34294 - 01/20/10 08:39 PM Re: Concise meaning of 666? [Re: Jake999]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Thanks for your post Jake.

Your position is certainly noted and I also recognise that Dr.LaVey made a number of statements to the public or other audiences regarding the symbolic or metaphorical quality of Satan.

It would seem to me that these particular statements of Dr. LaVey's focused on what Satan represents or how Satan represents, rather than whether Satan "himself" is real or not.

May I ask - in regards to The Unknown Known. How would you read this particular piece of writing?

Top
#34295 - 01/20/10 08:43 PM Re: Concise meaning of 666? [Re: ]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
WHAT THE FUCK PART OF "Satan, to us, is a SYMBOL, rather than an anthropomorphic being" DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

You're either being intentionally obtuse or intellectually dishonest. I have no time for either.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#34300 - 01/20/10 10:42 PM Geraldo, it's all just symbolism. [Re: ]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2514
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
I know that LaVey publicly stated many times that Satan was a symbol. I have examined a large amount of Dr. LaVey’s public statements, including The Occult Explosion and I think I have quite a good grasp of The Churches public face.

During 1966-75 both Anton personally and the Church organizationally presented an unthreatening public face and a serious, literal private face (particularly within the Priesthood). There was no doubt that Anton believed in [and personally represented as his High Priest] Satan; indeed it would have been unthinkable to even ask such a question.

It was just as obvious to him and us that this is exactly what would scare the Great Unwashed and result in villager torchight parades as you see in the old Universal monster films. Therefore "symbolism" was standard practice when giving lectures, interviews, etc.

Post-1975, for reasons which I think are obvious in my Church of Satan ebook, Anton generally stopped commenting on Satan as an entity altogether. "Satanism" and "Satanic" became lifestyle descriptions, most usually his own: how he behaved was de facto "Satanic", period. [Satan Speaks, typically, was "Anton Speaks".] That's the Anton that Jake met, so his take doesn't surprise me at all.

 Quote:
How does ["The Unknown Known"] play out? I want to get into a deeper study of Set and the principles of the Temple, but would like to do that at a later time and am also not sure what I am authorised to read and study anyway.

In COS I wrote:

 Quote:
At the conclusion of the Satanic Rituals there is a short epilogue entitled “The Unknown Known”. It touches obliquely on Hans Hörbiger’s Welteislehre, or Doctrine of Eternal Ice, in which the history of the universe consists of alternating cycles of fire and ice. The “Wel”, as it was termed, gained popularity in Nazi Germany because of Adolf Hitler’s enthusiasm for Hörbiger, whom he called “the German Copernicus”.

Anton LaVey, however, offers the theory in a social, not a cosmological context. The key number, he suggests, is nine - the number of the Devil because it always “returns to itself” when subjected to basic mathematical computations. [For example: 9x3=27 and 2+7=9. 92=81 and 8+1=9.]

History, says Anton, is divided into “Epochs” of 13,122 years. Each Epoch is divided into nine “Ages” (1,458 years), and each Age consists of nine “Eras” (162 years). An Era is divided into nine 18-year “Workings”.

A Working consists of nine years of “action” followed by nine years of “reaction”, with the mid-point year being a “zenith of intensity” and the beginning and ending years being “Working Years”. The initial Working Year sees the generation of the Working, while the final one is witness to its ultimate product.

Whether or not there is any external basis for this theory of social evolution, it is intriguing to note that the history of the Church of Satan itself adhered to it. At the mid-point of the mid-year of the “Working” begun in mid-1966, the Church went through a crisis which resulted in its transmutation into the Temple of Set.

Strictly speaking, the Temple is not so much a “reaction” to the doctrines or design of the Church as it is an “evolutionary succession” to them.

And what of the final Working Year (1983 CE)? At the Wewelsburg Castle in Westphalia in October 1982 CE, an appropriate Working was celebrated, the nature and results of which are beyond the scope of this volume and are discussed in the Jeweled Tablets of Set.

That last was the [famous/infamous] "Wewelsburg Working", which has since become a significant part of the castle's lore, most recently in this extensive anthology. [Or just Google "Aquino Wewelsburg" for raves, rumors, & rants.]

 Quote:
I’m sorry Dr. Aquino, you have probably been fielding questions of this sort for years.

No apology necessary, but I think we've crisscrossed much of this in other 600C threads to date, so you might want to browse through them. As for the documents of the Temple of Set, the vast bulk of them are membership-access only. A small portion has trickled/pirated onto the Internet, but much of that is inaccurate, incomplete, or obsolete; just about everything except historical material is constantly being revised, expanded, updated. Even when I was High Priest I had to scramble to keep up.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#34303 - 01/20/10 11:04 PM Re: Geraldo, it's all just symbolism. [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Hello wall....
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#34321 - 01/21/10 09:09 AM Re: Geraldo, it's all just symbolism. [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
111Cal Offline
member


Registered: 12/22/09
Posts: 143
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
During 1966-75 both Anton personally and the Church organizationally presented an unthreatening public face and a serious, literal private face (particularly within the Priesthood). There was no doubt that Anton believed in [and personally represented as his High Priest] Satan; indeed it would have been unthinkable to even ask such a question.

It was just as obvious to him and us that this is exactly what would scare the Great Unwashed and result in villager torchight parades as you see in the old Universal monster films. Therefore "symbolism" was standard practice when giving lectures, interviews, etc.

Post-1975, for reasons which I think are obvious in my Church of Satan ebook, Anton generally stopped commenting on Satan as an entity altogether.


Dr. Aquino-----

I am very curious as to your opinion. Post-1975, do you believe that LaVey stopped believing in Satan as a literal entity all together??? Or simply stopped talking about it with others?

I mean that quite honestly. I do not question your integrity at all, but am curious if you feel that LaVey had a change of beliefs or simply decided to become quiet on the issue?

Top
#34323 - 01/21/10 09:23 AM Re: Geraldo, it's all just symbolism. [Re: 111Cal]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
He's done that one several times... although I'm sure he'll be more than glad to do it again. By the way, he wrote an ebook about it.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
Page 2 of 4 <1234>


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

Generated in 0.03 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.