Page 1 of 4 1234>
Topic Options
#38481 - 05/12/10 07:52 PM Sinister 101
Khk Offline
member


Registered: 09/07/08
Posts: 398
Hello, my name is Kris. Satanism has been a vitally important part of my experience of the world, and for a long time I have been establishing a relationship with Satan, Satanic Elements, and Satanism. I have passed through many stages and belonged to many groups - the ToB, The ONA, the IOT, and have run my own, including the Temple of THEM and Mvimaedivm. I have participated in group rituals, isolated rituals, and seriously studied and thought about the implications and meanings of Satanism from as many angles as you care to suggest. I have since gone my own individual way, developing my own unique path after coming to some interesting conclusions - yet even now, see that Satanism represents a useful, constructive and important aspect of life, given as is it to exploring the shadows, the dark, the morality of evil - and the relationship of these externalized elements that we take in hand as pentagrams, rituals, stances and philosophies as related to what is going on inside of each of us that pulls us toward such actions and activities.

Establishing a relationship with Satan is establishing a relationship with yourself - a serious journey to Know Thyself - which knowing often requires going beyond what is allowed, legal, or normal - and causes us to defy and stand against what is accepted, allowed, and considered the rule. For outside those rules lays the other half of the truth shrouded in darkness, and an unknown lorded over by such beings and energies as Satan stands for.

The further we go into this journey, the more we understand, and the harder it gets - for as we unveil what is false, we are left with little that is true. We have only a short time on Earth to figure things out, and little time to waste - perhaps why we dislike the Christian's who tie us up in knots and silly circular emotional argument - wasting our precious time to discover for ourselves what it is to be a living consciousness. Satan, that Accuser, the Heretic offers us a door to another perception, a new way of seeing.

To contribute to the knowledge that all Satanists accumulate on this journey to know Him, I would like to share two sites. One is Sinister 101 that aims to help teach about Satan - and who we'd like to partner with to this group which runs an important service in teaching and learning about Satan - the other is a wordpress that has many of the discoveries I have made in my personal journey as a Satanist.

http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/Sinister101/
http://ryananschauung.wordpress.com/


Edited by Khk (05/12/10 07:52 PM)

Top
#38529 - 05/13/10 10:16 PM Re: Sinister 101 [Re: Khk]
paolo sette Offline
member


Registered: 12/12/08
Posts: 263
Loc: IL, USA
One of the tenets of Satinism is self-deification or to direct your energy inward as treating yourself as the supreme being. The goal of the religion is not to place emphasis on a seperate entity out in the cosmos, but it's to support one in their self-realization of the 'larger picture' whatever that may be. Frankly put, we (Satanists) arrive at a point in which interpretation of life does not rest with someone else's notions, but our own. To quote a contemporary who is in the field: 'Rituals and ceremonies are psychodrama.' We ascribe certain rubrics to be the foundation of the heralded religion of Satanism. You might want to try looking at the media room of this site, if you haven't read them already. This is a thing that struck me as a bit off kilter with your personal introduction.

I wanted to commend you for taking a look 'outside the box', and stating a fact of life which is its evanescence. Everything will soon pass out of existence, and fade away from reality as we know it. If Satanism was a crutch you used to aid you in mobilizing the resources to objectify life in this respect, more power to you.

As for good and Evil, it's definetly present with its workings every day: past and present and future. I'm biased towards the Evil notion myself, and I can appreciate all the effort your placing on the symbolism.

Ciao...666
_________________________
tathagata-svapratyatma-aryajnana-adhigama
666
[nig]-ge-na-da a-ba in-da-di nam-ti i-u-tu

Top
#38530 - 05/13/10 11:37 PM Re: Sinister 101 [Re: paolo sette]
Khk Offline
member


Registered: 09/07/08
Posts: 398
Hello,
Yes, that is one of the tenets - Sinister 101, I, and my work lean on experience and theory of Satanism - but diverge off into Heurisy and Phenomenological analysis which removes the restraints placed by adherence to forms - by seeking to understand forms.

However, I have personally found, that saying Satanism is or isn't something is too rigid a proposal, since it is or isnt at various stages of psychical/magical development, is or isnt subjectively to others is or isnt's, and as a mode or vehicle can like all other forms be heavily weighed down with (well-meaning) dogma and restriction. The example of Satan's rebellious archetype is about the only thing I would consider sacred or unchangeable, and the point from which to proceed.

As you say, we arrive at a notion of life of our own devising - but I have taken it further than most and questioned the very tools we use to describe or express our notions themselves - leading to some very tricky, very awkward, very interesting conclusions. Some are happy to use words and consensus views and descriptions of life and everything in it to achieve a gnosis - but I am skeptical of this approach when it is the only approach. And all too often, words, forms and such cement things into a place they should not be, and do not belong, but are put there because of a modicum that demands it.

I am not new here, my Temple of THEM posts have had 6000 hits here, and 4500 in Occult Corpus. This synchronicity and interest does not seem accidental and I believe that my approach strikes a chord with people - a chord I intend to strum. I have since abandoned the Temple of THEM, and decided to start a new thread dedicated to my own work without the previous stigma and dogma the Temple attached to itself by its involvement with the ONA.

The introduction you read was written to appeal to a demographic of teenagers as I moved from group to group introducing myself - I should not perhaps have used it here, but it's too little too late for ammends. I would just say that Sinister 101 has another introduction to my work and encourage others to take a look before summing up my approach.

Top
#38541 - 05/14/10 06:12 AM Re: Sinister 101 [Re: paolo sette]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
paolo sette

You are pretty close to debating the subject which a lot of us partake in a few months back regarding the word Satanism - what it means and who has the right to define what it means. Check out that thread if you'd like: http://www.the600club.com/topic35129-1.html

Top
#38549 - 05/14/10 09:40 PM Re: Sinister 101 [Re: paolo sette]
Khk Offline
member


Registered: 09/07/08
Posts: 398
 Originally Posted By: paolo sette


I wanted to commend you for taking a look 'outside the box', and stating a fact of life which is its evanescence. Everything will soon pass out of existence, and fade away from reality as we know it. If Satanism was a crutch you used to aid you in mobilizing the resources to objectify life in this respect, more power to you.

As for good and Evil, it's definetly present with its workings every day: past and present and future. I'm biased towards the Evil notion myself, and I can appreciate all the effort your placing on the symbolism.

Ciao...666


And, I wanted to thank you for your commendation. I ran out of time yesterday before I was able to do so - I appreciate your interest in my work and my post. Thank you. (That debate by the way, was awesome.)

Top
#38628 - 05/17/10 02:03 AM Re: Sinister 101 [Re: Khk]
paolo sette Offline
member


Registered: 12/12/08
Posts: 263
Loc: IL, USA
 Quote:
Some are happy to use words and consensus views and descriptions of life and everything in it to achieve a gnosis - but I am skeptical of this approach when it is the only approach. And all too often, words, forms and such cement things into a place they should not be, and do not belong, but are put there because of a modicum that demands it.

Golly, where to start? I don't normally post a response to follow-up on an elicited discussion because I'm not reading posts on the site as frequently as I'd like. So, I loose track of where I posted (intentionally forget) going about surfing through the threads. But, I wanted to say that I'll read through the posts as recommended by Theinsane. Gracie.

Kris, I had to read through your rebuttal twice, and paused to think for a couple minutes when you said things. I take your whole bent is on truthfulness that one amasses through obtaining insight whether empiracal or transcendental. Some information can be attained by reading books on the matter, but other intellection is gained by experience. I feel comfortable in stating that there is a concatenation between the both of THEM. (a poor joke-sorry, I don't have any humor, but I'm trying to get it!) Now, I'll take a calculated guess, and say that the knowledge which fuels your incessant pursuit of Satanic thought branches into intuitive understanding or grasping. For example, it is like drinking water yourself: you know without being told by others whether it is cold or warm. (You know you are Evil.)

I see (and think I'm an adequate seer) of the 'formless' in life. Just by me stating this opens up a 'can of worms.' Let me say a couple of things about it though, and it stems from a personal vantage point. It has awakened an ineffable self-realization when I take an objective stance, thus, looking within myself. I see the nature of my core being, and I'm working in concordance with the picture I see. (hence, meaning of 'formless') What makes me is 'formless' as it does not take shape in any manner. For starters, let me say the Satanic philosophy and religion is a beneficial and valid foundation to have. As I witnessed philosophy and religion unfolding in my life, religion handles matters of the heart. Why do we seek ceremonies and rituals? My heart is black. These are some of the tools which I use to express and receive ideas which is the functioning of the mind. If there is no mind, there is no phenomenal world.

I'm thinking that the quoted statement is a reaction to a haphazard quote from Anton I gave. The way I comprehend all that I'm predisposed to is by the educational process I've been exposed to which means, basically, that one constructs from what one is given. Adequate supplies are needed, if one decides to make something that stands the test of time. Subjects become complex fields as far as a person's will is concerned.

666
_________________________
tathagata-svapratyatma-aryajnana-adhigama
666
[nig]-ge-na-da a-ba in-da-di nam-ti i-u-tu

Top
#38645 - 05/17/10 08:05 PM Re: Sinister 101 [Re: paolo sette]
Khk Offline
member


Registered: 09/07/08
Posts: 398
Hi Paolo,

What I gave was by no means a rebuttal - the way I see it, there is ample room for more than just my convictions in the world, something I have been reminded of time and time again.

I liked your take on my approach - and to some extent you've nailed it. I don't find the concept of Truthfulness easy to define or support, or more accurately, I find it and almost every other concept, multi-faceted - which leads to confusion when they are taken out of duality - i.e. if something is not A then it must be B. Information can be elicted anywhere, nor does it have to be any particular category, drugs can give non-sensical, illogical, subconscious information by burning pathways into ones brain for instance; dreams may provide internal unconscious (or conscious) alchemical changes in one's individuation process or self-image leading to further contemplation of life and the consideration of changes on any number of levels; and as I understand it, information is more often than not unconsciously transmitted (i.e. body-language in the realm of human interaction) than is consciously processed, and of course, we're all different and so seek differently, so I would leave where information is gathered an open-ended question.

It is difficult to say what my whole bent is - because I treat each person that talks to me differently depending on my gauge of who they are, and where they are at. I therefore have no rigid bent and am flexible enough to just flow rather than dam.
There is a united link between THEM and 101, me, but many of the ideas put forward in THEM were heavily coloured by propaganda and turned toward achieving certain aims - i.e. they upheld a form. 101 travels similar paths with similar questions but is independant of any other group and its forms and needs. For abandoning those forms, I am in an infinitely better situation to give a more pure unadulterated expression in my work than was previously possible due to the worry of stepping on others toes and preserving their propaganda.

In regards to intuitive grasping - I have put myself in dozens of situations roles and jobs purely to learn more about different aspects of life directly;- which is where my experience turns information into knowledge, and further experience and counter-experience (i.e. an opposite role Janitor vs Govt Employee for instance) turns knowledge into personal wisdom. However, my incessant pursuit of Satanic thought hinges on the fact that I believe Satanism as a behaviour people exhibit (i.e. in questioning authority/status quo/rebellion) is symptomatic of an objective deeper human condition - which condition passes through many layers (See: Theory of the Beast for one of these layers) until it can be reduced no further than fear. Each of these layers has its own truth and only in tandem with fomenting and then challenging my own assertions on all these layers do I gain any real understanding - thesis/anti-thesis/synthesis as the ONA once put it.
The example you give of drinking water and knowing it is cold however is apt - since autonomy and the power of confidence and conviction in one's own self to judge what is what without external reassurance is a (beneficial) by-product of confronting fear. And I believe confronting fear is something forms are set up for precisely to avoid.

Quite often I meet people who give me their own take on formlessness - some expect me to refute it, correct it, somehow interfere in it. I'm not going to do that - your take to you is as valid as my take to me; I don't see why there need be room for one since both are subjective self-contained hypotheses we use to make sense of things, give them context, and proceed from. A comparison of approaches is not an attempt to exclude or push one out in front of the other. What is interesting to me, is the brain, and the noticable fact that whatever it is filled with colours what it sees, and whatever it points its attention to, becomes its reality. I call it the 23 syndrome - and it is the fact THAT we think not so much WHAT we think that interests me.

Your last paragraph is a beautiful summary - but do, or How do, or even Why do, you expect me to argue? Your points are yours, I can only defend my points ie. when someone's guess does not match my self-image of my work, I may feel the need to explain.
101 is what it is, no better no worse, and I am what I am, no better no worse. It uses Satanism because it is something I have great experience with, is more balanced than most forms by having a synthesis of light and dark and then seeking to go beyond them, (or at least I see this aspect in Satanism) and because it is part of the pathway down through the layers I spoke of to get to the truth - wherein as I said to someone else, truth, is confusion.



Edited by Khk (05/17/10 08:15 PM)

Top
#38675 - 05/19/10 09:06 PM The 101 of 101 [Re: Khk]
Khk Offline
member


Registered: 09/07/08
Posts: 398
Okay, I guess I should start by giving some more information about myself and the Sinister 101 group.

Sinister 101 deals with what is often the very uncomfortable practice of Knowing Thyself. The art of Knowing Thyself is complicated by the tremendous layers of variables involved and to many of which we have a heavy resistance in knowing or learning because of their disruptive qualities to certain other aspects of ourselves, including who we think we are.
101 uses the Satanic archetype in the sense that Satan represents a true and no-apology rebellion against everything that stands – this archetype is extremely powerful and diverse but is valuable because of the balance it often provides in allowing us to face the darknesses of life (as well as its lights) rather than outright denying them or denigrating them as is the practice of many new-age and white-light groups.
The core premise of 101 is that human beings live in fear which they try to hide. This fear arose out of Original necessity to survive our sudden process of Being into Life by developing the means to understand and know things in a world with no names or labels for anything, no memories or past, no time or space, or control over any of it. This eventually lead to Gods as convenient ways to explain what certain phenomena were, and those Gods in turn were used to dictate what other things were or should be for. All these things that we gave names to, labelled, understood, came to Know – for convenience and so we weren’t say, surprised twice by the same “rock”, and so that we could begin to control our paralysing fear of Nature and begin to get on with being the human “Race”.
This naming and understanding of ‘things’ is referred to as the creation of ‘Forms’. And Forms arose out of a necessity to control our innate fear of the unknown – something we still do as a core fundamental daily practice even today, millions of years later. 101 believes that Forms, once used as convenience, have become more like prisons by relying on consensus understanding of what something is, it can be more easily controlled. Forms are a means of control, and in many cases, are used by an existing established element in our entire social lives to control us. The concept of TIME for instance, or SPACE, or MATTER, are taken for granted and defined by those words – or at least seeks to be. Argument rages over everything, including matter, origin of the universe etc, because of two extra elements of the human condition – subjectivity and objectivity. Objectivity cannot be proved to exist because objectivity speaks for all of us and quickly runs into trouble because of subjectivity – subjectivity is what we feel or think we know and express it accordingly.
This process is further complicated by two additional conditions, the consciousness and the unconscious. Half the time at least, we do not know if we are in control or something else is – body language for instance, something noticeably lacking on the internet leading us to perform all manner of careful gymnastics and add lots of smileys for emphasis – is almost entirely unconscious but extremely important. The subconscious plays an extremely important but undervalued part of our consciousness that allows us to Be who we are, but is beholden to What we are beneath all our efforts to break free of a primal process far more complex than anyone has been able to figure out. Dreams for instance, slips of the tongue, body language, all signal things about our being we may not be comfortable knowing or are blissfully unconscious of – but each of us know the absolute terror the mind can evoke when having a nightmare or trying to get us to wake up to ourselves in a dream.
Furthermore, the conscious is ‘inhabited’ by the ego – a rule-maker and stasis keeping aspect of ourselves that resists a great many elements of what is actually occurring or about us, firstly by limiting information by passing it through filters and processes that change that information to accord with it; and secondly because the ego is a protective device that pushes back the subconscious atavistic side of ourselves that allows us to speak, think, and consider ourselves.
Add to this the societal norms, rules, cultures, laws, trends, what is popular, peer pressure, group dynamic, introvert/extrovert, personality, loyalties, prejudices, beliefs, and hundreds of other variables and we build a picture that the human being is extremely complicated – this is also evident in the fact that no-one has managed to replicate the most powerful computer we know, the brain.
This complication is our lot – we built it all – to gain control, and lose our fear. Our fear originates in coming from Non-Being into Being and having no way to deal with it thus giving rise to absolute terror until we somehow developed the means to survive it by not being afraid. Questions remain however over the origin of the human species. We use Forms in everything we do because it is our collective tradition from the beginning. This includes Satan. Satan is many things, as many as people want him to be or as few, he can be both until someone’s subjectivity tries to prove that their own thoughts are objective and writes down words or speaks to others. This process is where all human conflict emerges in trying to control the objective. Satan is an archetype that is unique for possessing the keys to struggling beyond all the layers we have built around ourselves in order to face the fear we carry in each of us but desperately hide from ourselves and others in everything we do.
The erosion, not just intellectually, but philosophically, of things like time, space, form, conviction, consciousness etc are things that 101 deals with in great detail – making many of the human processes used by the brain in everyday functioning to highlight how we miss, skip or paint information – in the hopes that the ego, that controlling function in all human beings, can be de-solidified long enough to allow in enough information to ‘compartmentalize’ the consciousness so that it realizes its own ego – and develops the –I- behind it.
For instance, I am acutely aware that in joining this group I am entering a new dynamic that has many written and many more unwritten rules. In being so friendly so quickly despite having great seriousness in the subjects I discuss, I may be perceived as flippant careless or insincere; In suddenly tearing apart what others use to stand on I realize all too well that I may be stepping on others toes and they may see me as a threat; I am also aware that without deference to those who own the forum I will not be welcomed; and perhaps most importantly aware that my considerable ego wants me to acknowledge the compliments and let itself be praised and worshipped – but the –I- behind that troublesome engine understands that that is the very minefield my work needs to avoid. Hence, I take a casual relaxed approach until I am involved in explaining a point.
Often times I refer to certain concepts briefly as given – but I have spent a long time writing them down in great detail, exactly how I think Form developed for instance is written down in ‘Theory of the Beast’ or my thoughts on subjectivity and objectivity in ‘Insynsian’.
I systematically take interest in the way logic, language, conversation, form, power-play, interaction of all kinds, beliefs and so on work. I also include psychology, sociology, human behaviour, linguistics, and any number of other social sciences and issues in my studies. That is, why they exist, where they originate from, what role they play in our conscious mind, what role they play in our unconscious mode, human behaviour, thought processes, leaps we make, processes we perform – all of these things are of extreme fascination to me and I have written thousands of pages of text trying to get closer to the heart of the matter of all of them. However, many of my own ideas were previously imprisoned by being part of a group or required to not say certain things do certain things and only in the last few months has there been a shift away from all groups and possessive forms in order to express my own thoughts without inserting propaganda or subliminal direction into them for the benefit of my former colleagues the ONA or Temple of THEM.
Trying to Know any of these things in any great detail has lead in the course of eighteen years to some extraordinary findings, some very powerful sadness, and yet some indefinable joy. It has constantly attacked ridiculed and hurt my ego with serious consequences – and time and again I have slipped into different modes of living, different personas, as my ego changed shape from the pressure I was putting on it. The ego doesn’t like to be disturbed, its evolution demands that it exert the least amount of energy in everything it does which is why we call all walls, Wall instead of looking for the difference between them, noting the polymer, what else in is that space, i.e. bacteria, paint, wood, or the shape as a plane, vertice, barrier, protective or supportive device, division, or even what it is to another species such as an ant, or so on. We don’t do these things because we require Control, Consistency, and above all – the absence of Fear. So, it hates to be disturbed, its hates to have things it uses to rely on as belief or conviction removed or attacked, it hates to be contradicted or thwarted, it hates having its stasis changed rapidly with new information, and its hates the idea of not being in control.
My approach is a long-learned means to bypass that conflict and work With the natural inclinations of the ego which I do not seek to threaten but enlist the aid of to get beyond it – because like it or not, everything we do requires the aid of the ego. Reading this requires it, writing back requires it, and breaking down the control the ego has over each of us, also, paradoxically, requires its help. That is why Satan helps – because of his powerful rebellious archetype he can help us to face our fears, tear down things we hold sacred, embrace darkness and terror with a smile, and get deeper into who we are than anything else can.
I believe that by breaking all these things down, the consciousness can be shifted out of the skull and a human-centred geometry which is prejudiced toward the world because of all these factors plus its size in relation to other things and become a life-centred geometry with a greater understanding and depth of our home and our place within in it. 101is a complex mixture of magical knowledge and scientific/biological knowledge dancing with one another in an attempt to truly understand and Change.

Top
#38714 - 05/21/10 02:16 AM Re: The 101 of 101 [Re: Khk]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1723
Loc: New York
You talk about breaking down barriers of the mind, yet you often refer to Sigmund Freud’s idea of the Ego, conscious, subconscious (there’s also the id, the alter ego). Yet these terms might not actually be totally valid as to how the mind works. Might not be valid at all as a matter of fact. These terms might themselves be a chain of the imagination if you will. However, if someone wants to learn about Freud's theory of how the brain works, wouldn't they be better off to read HIS works then someone else's interpretation of them?

Many here have already worked out most of what you state here themselves in one form or another. I would go so far as to say that most of this site is geared towards those individuals who “get it,” or are on their way to getting it. Satanism 101 at this point is quite boring and unimpressive to many.

I can appreciate the time and effort that you have put into your own research, and attempting to explain it. On the other hand I also believe that it may be a waste of time to attempt to spoon feed Satanic principles to people. I don’t think that people can be taught how to think objectively, or freely without themselves exercising their brains and figuring out the nuts and bolts themselves. There are possibly hundreds of books that can show a person how someone else has figured it out for themselves such as the Satanic Bible, Might is Right, and works by Nietzsche, Ayn Rand and dozens of others. It’s all out there already, and those who truly want to understand it will have to put in years of time and effort to even begin to comprehend it and make it their own. It cannot be done for them.
Most who continually seek guidance and reassurance will never get it.

I like to say that Satanism is much like Poker, in that it takes a very short time to learn it, but a life time to master it.
Satanism also has something in common with the martial arts. Most enthusiasts think that after a few months they are grand masters, until a street fighter hands their asses to them ;\)


Edited by Asmedious (05/21/10 02:23 AM)
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#38724 - 05/21/10 11:43 PM Re: The 101 of 101 [Re: Asmedious]
Khk Offline
member


Registered: 09/07/08
Posts: 398
 Originally Posted By: Asmedious
You talk about breaking down barriers of the mind, yet you often refer to Sigmund Freud’s idea of the Ego, conscious, subconscious (there’s also the id, the alter ego). Yet these terms might not actually be totally valid as to how the mind works. Might not be valid at all as a matter of fact. These terms might themselves be a chain of the imagination if you will. However, if someone wants to learn about Freud's theory of how the brain works, wouldn't they be better off to read HIS works then someone else's interpretation of them?

--Hello Asmedious, I actually refer to Jung's concept of the ego, but please don't misunderstand my use of these terms as used either by Freud or Jung to isolate a completely defined field and description of the minds contents or its operations. Ego/Self/ID are a relatively accepted notion that form a convenient starting point enabling someone something to grab hold of to begin understanding where I am coming from in a subsequent and lengthy deconstruction of Everything. - I must use 'something' to communicate, some 'mode or model' to capture what I am trying to say in order to provide context and substance - but the essential meaning of any word or term is as fragile as the next. I believe the ego and self concepts are valid up to a point - then cease to be valid. My own theory uses Jung's work, but is not focused on re-telling it, but getting deeper into where it, and all other forms, emanate from. I would indeed recommend anyone interested in Freud or Jung to read their works for themselves - as indeed I would urge anyone interested in understanding my work to actually read it too.


Many here have already worked out most of what you state here themselves in one form or another.

-- On what do you base that? What I have said here is two of two thousand pages of what I have to say about things. You expect to much from me for an introduction \:\)

I would go so far as to say that most of this site is geared towards those individuals who “get it,” or are on their way to getting it. Satanism 101 at this point is quite boring and unimpressive to many.

-- Satanism 101? Do you mean Sinister 101? and "get what"? what is there to be gotten?

I can appreciate the time and effort that you have put into your own research, and attempting to explain it. On the other hand I also believe that it may be a waste of time to attempt to spoon feed Satanic principles to people.

-- It is a waste of time to spoon feed Satanic principles to people, yes. Heuristic methods on the other hand...

I don’t think that people can be taught how to think objectively, or freely without themselves exercising their brains and figuring out the nuts and bolts themselves.

-- Somewhat agreed.

There are possibly hundreds of books that can show a person how someone else has figured it out for themselves such as the Satanic Bible, Might is Right, and works by Nietzsche, Ayn Rand and dozens of others.

-- Yes, and I host many of them and many others in 101 - but not because of what they consciously say.

It’s all out there already, and those who truly want to understand it will have to put in years of time and effort to even begin to comprehend it and make it their own. It cannot be done for them.

-- Where do I say that it can?

Most who continually seek guidance and reassurance will never get it.

-- I think you misunderstand my intent and approach. Which is not to appropriate control of people's learning but contribute to the human collective.

I like to say that Satanism is much like Poker, in that it takes a very short time to learn it, but a life time to master it.

-- Master it? Master What? What is it that people are mastering exactly? a philosophy? why do they need the philosophy, any philosophy? why this concept that things can be mastered, or of things at all, why , why, why? And what is Mastery? knowing something completely? or what is available, completely? or what is the edge of knowledge, for someone, completely? What is completely? Everything we represent is too nebulous to be mastered - that is why we have a world filled with forms to begin with.

Satanism also has something in common with the martial arts. Most enthusiasts think that after a few months they are grand masters, until a street fighter hands their asses to them ;\)

-- What does that have to do with anything here? Are you a streetfighter that got your ass handed back to you?



Edited by Khk (05/22/10 12:17 AM)

Top
#38767 - 05/24/10 01:58 AM Re: The 101 of 101 [Re: Khk]
paolo sette Offline
member


Registered: 12/12/08
Posts: 263
Loc: IL, USA
To Kris,

I am grateful for the detailed information you gave in your never-ending pursuits of Satan as an archetype. You have provided examples given your defining labors pertaining to the concepts of knowledge, forms, and fear. The dialectical interpretation of each depends on the individual, and their readiness to understand the austere thought offered a group that you founded, Sinister 101, is up to them. I can appreciate all the work that you do.

Since your conative make-up is to 'play' in the Satanic field, and build knowledge onto knowledge because overbearing forms can rule out crumbling fear. The radical aspect of Satan being a rebel pervades in your postings. The brief discursive sentences I put forth were to give you a tender picture of the philosophy, intellection, and metaphysics I ascribe to which has to do with the advaitistic realm. Even though I like reading and studying about it, I cannot help but feel it's inadequate. It's not nihilism by any means, but through religious experiences; Satanism is a contender. Their is discrimination (good and Evil) present in our daily lives, and I am of the bent of Evil/darkness/black magic because it resounds with my inmost feelings. We all know about the Mind as written by prominent authors and practicians, and it's importance to defend against societal forces by it's own powers of senses. To repeat: We all can posit or question certain examples to give principles fruition.
[quote] [It has constantly attacked ridiculed and hurt my ego with serious consequences – and time and again I have slipped into different modes of living, different personas, as my ego changed shape from the pressure I was putting on it. /quote]
I can generalize with normalizing, and say that everyone faces similar situations.

Ciao.
_________________________
tathagata-svapratyatma-aryajnana-adhigama
666
[nig]-ge-na-da a-ba in-da-di nam-ti i-u-tu

Top
#38778 - 05/24/10 05:53 PM Re: The 101 of 101 [Re: paolo sette]
Khk Offline
member


Registered: 09/07/08
Posts: 398
"The radical aspect of Satan being a rebel pervades in your postings. The brief discursive sentences I put forth were to give you a tender picture of the philosophy, intellection, and metaphysics I ascribe to which has to do with the advaitistic realm."

Yes it does - but mainly because of bias and familiarity than any wide-spread knowledge of other archetypes suited to my particular 23 syndrome. For instance, you are the first person to use the word advaitistic - which, I have just looked up and found to be a vedantic non-dualist school of thought? I am all ears if you'd care to elaborate on your particular ascription. What I communicate through 101 is not Satanism - but Heuristic Method, using Satan archetypally as a vehicle. In Theory of the Beast I outline why I think Satan arose as an archetpy and the purpose he and any others like him, serve. Which is multi-tiered and indefinite due to being a force/idea captured in a word.

I don't see any problem with what you are doing - nor do I actively seek to dissaude you from a) being your own person and doing things your way, or b) accepting that my subjective understanding is objective. I would say however, that perhaps Evil comes in different flavours and perhaps my own is a fine grain. Perhaps too, what I am doing will come out to be evil rather than neutral as has happened in the past, destructive rather than constructive. How people use what I say I have no control over. That is something I have had to accept and learn to deal with.

Evil and Good, even if they can be shown not to exist outside of intellectual framework, or inside it as a simpistic dualistic projection that does not accurately reflect nature's endless sea of grey colours and blurry boundariers, are nevertheless inspired time and time again to come forth as words to describe other forces that occur all the time for a myriad of reasons.

If you are Evil, then that is your choice and your mode and your description with which you have chosen to appropriate yourself and who you are. It is not my concern philosophically, yet I would react to such persons in my sphere pending degree of evil and usefulness to the world and judge them on an individual basis. Here online, without being able to see how evil you are, or become emotionally involved in what you do to practice evil - I remain dutifully unaware of the extent of any damage you are doing to my self-imposed conceptualization of the world and work quietly in the shadows writing things to influence and balance people with ideas, showing how I break them down, providing my context, my heuristic methods, in the hope that people choose both, rather than just the one - working of course, in accord to my own private madness and wisdom and particular geometry.

I appreciate your candour Paolo.

Top
#38816 - 05/26/10 07:45 PM Re: Sinister 101 [Re: Khk]
Khk Offline
member


Registered: 09/07/08
Posts: 398
On the Origin of "Satan".

The following is taken from an extract of 'Theory of the Beast'. It forms a neat outline of my concept of the origin of forms arising out of chaos. I'd be very interested to hear anyone else's beliefs or understanding of how he and we came to be. Is anyone willing to put forth their thoughts on creation? I am not talking about thoughts on the literal origin, i.e. whether He was a jeiwsh invention, persian, or his roots in historical antiquity - I refer to his example of energy as a ubiquitous collective inhuman archetype that appears present in almost all cultures in some form or another as darkness, evil, wickedness... I would like to hear how others think all of This around us arose and the connection we have to it, biologically/psychically/magically. Of course, anyone feeling an overwhelming urge or simply possessed of startling clarity wishing to outline the history of Satan, may also feel free to join in.


"Before we gained the level of consciousness that allowed us to recognize ourselves as individual thinking beings separate from each other and the rest of the world, in fact before we were “humanity”, proto-man was ruled by base desires and savage primal instincts. At some point in our evolution we were able to suppress our ruling animal instincts long enough for Consciousness to arise. We eventually achieved a state of self-awareness that allowed us to appraise and wonder at our own existence. This unique state of self-awareness is referred to as the ‘I’ in Psychology and has long been regarded as the single-most fascinating achievement of the human organism. But the emergence of the ‘I’ came at a heavy price. In exchange for Consciousness, we had to forcefully drive our natural, raw instinct of what we were (the Collective Unconscious) back from the fore of our minds and forge a new artificial conscious collective agreement (the Collective Consciousness) on what we wanted to be.

To help do this, over time our species created, and then instilled, Values, Group Obligations and Right Conduct into and onto each other, further suppressing the raw state of our natural being to further the aims of our artificial one – which was a mass social form of indefinitely deferred gratification (having to wait for set conditions to arise before one can gratify ones natural desires). So long as we kept our primal dark forces [The Id] in check, we were able to get along with each other relatively well enough to develop groups and societies – usually ruled by a few, who used fear, violence etc., to enforce Law, Order, and instill conscious conduct.

Over a vast span of time, and as Consciousness spread, the majority of people developed an Ego strong enough to contain the Id indefinitely, or productively released it via outlets of creativity, dance, music, language, symbols, etc. A whole social matrix was built upon the attempts to keep the subconscious out so that our new state of independence could thrive and we began to cloak immediate needs and base desires within respectability and glamour. Such glamour is artifice; all humans contain the Id and all Conscious human beings are scorpions.] We also began to give names and labels to things to begin dispelling fear. The more names we created the more complex the world became. Today, there are so many names for things, and so many institutions to perpetuate more names, that we have forgotten its original point as an exercise in control. Because there are so many concepts and names and ideas that have been layered onto what really Is apparently there [which is geometry] and nameless, there are now millions of illusions that must be broken before a grasp of genuine reality can be achieved. Owing to the hardship required to break free from such illusions most cannot help but be entrapped by the deception of authority and the webs of the matrix.

But, those that made a religion of suppression were ill-prepared for the strength of their new enemy. The Id or “Beast” could not be tamed and the forces of the subconscious proved powerful beyond their wildest dreams. Although punishment was meted out to those unable to hold back the advancing forces of our primal being as a social admonishment to discourage others from releasing what was imprisoned within; suppression did nothing to sate our desires and urges to behave naturally. While some adopted the new Conscious collective agreement and joined the religion of holding back their impulsive urges, some followed only in part by practicing its release in private (or in public granted certain power); and still others refused (or were incapable) to suppress it at all, continuing to embody our original natural state of being that sought instant gratification.

Out of growing fear of the Beast to undermine our civility and our human-ness, we denied the unknown realm locked away within us that frightened us for its unpredictability, its cruelty and its propensity to erupt from the calmest human being. Such a force threatened to engulf the conscious accomplishments of humanity in chaos and destruction. In time, various Religions and magical tribes came to call signs of activity stemming from the subconscious by unfavourable names. In effect – A war was declared against the forces of ‘The Great Beast’, the opening psychic shot in a Mind War that would lead to all manner of dark masters/forces Named responsible for the horrors that issued forth from people – various Monsters, Deities, and Gods, and of course, “Satan”, all in a bid to control the subconscious. Other words crept in “Demons”, “Evil”, and so forth that led to wide-spread persecutions to stamp out the Beast. It did not take long for some to realize the power that came from interpreting existence for others… Yet those who suppressed the beast the hardest were often those most afflicted by its insurmountable power..."


Edited by Khk (05/26/10 07:52 PM)
Edit Reason: x

Top
#38817 - 05/26/10 09:02 PM Re: Sinister 101 [Re: Khk]
Khk Offline
member


Registered: 09/07/08
Posts: 398
There are of course a great many angles to this life query.

Where did we come from? - I haven't answered that one, and since evidence is often buried and lost as empirically shown and demonstrated - it is likely we may never know. Perhaps if we knew we would be less interested in personal equity and more focused on collective gnosis - but it is a moot point to consider seeing how things are the way they are.

What is the world composed of and what are we composed of? If I close my eyes, I can reduce the world to blackness. At its most simple point, there is me - whatever I am, consciousnes, sentience, [Insert name here], life, a human being, organism, virus, bacteria, extension, electrical conductor... a force that I can feel owing to being the centre of that force, and something that resists me. the floor, my body, organs, skin, sensations - two worlds, one that I can term inner, one that I can then term outer, but neither is really either, and the puzzle grows.

The world is composed of an unknowable soaring crawling miasma of natural inclinations of such staggering complexity that names for things are our best effort to control and understand them. We can look at a horizon and say 'look at the mountains - aren't they beautiful' but instantly reduce the millions of myriad creations, the thousands of plants, ferns, mosses, and their lives, their chemicals, essence, smells, their origin, the little biospheres of the insects, the history of all the growth, the things it may have seen, taken part in, its shapes and colours and grades, its content, its matter, and so much more into a graphic image of a simple pointy shape. We reduce things - all the time - to the simplest level. Its the point of our language to do it, our human-centred geometry that habitually performs it. Almost all the time we remain unaware of it. And we quickly slip back into doing it even after occult practices have shown us something else beneath our collective perception - because everyone else does it. The world relies on it to build, harness, and subvert its surroundings into humanity's needs and whims. This is not speculation - it is observable, everywhere, anytime of the day, through one's own eyes. Is it subjective? My interpretation maybe, but the sheer number of people who perform this act and give rise to the architecture of the world the way they do is virtually unquestionable. I've theorized that this habit of ours, this reduction of things into names and forms to make them usable stems from an ancient origin in Fear, when our proto-people were born and passed from non-being into being, there was nothing, no ego, no words, no language, no thoughts, to insulate or make sense of the transition - resulting as it still does today in a screaming baby terrified by its emergence into the world around it. [qv. Physis of the Sinister] - fear explains everything that can be observed, because humans copy patterns and strive for consistency in everything they do. Even Chaos Magicians, Anarchists, and others who pride themselves on being different or against the norm, make only an arbitrary venture near the forces that govern us - in some sense, in a more accurate sense they do nothing more than carry out the same task everyone else does.

What we now build may not necessarily always be out of fear - yet consider the reaction people have when something is torn down, threatened, picked up and re-considered and changed, altered, moved around - it's considered highly ' inconvenient' but since that inconvenience is unconscious - erupts in conflict.

So Fear, is my take on Us - and our desire to control it. Led to everything, and still does. I suppoes what puzzles me with the occult is the resistance to actually getting to know what we are, why we do things, and the truths that surround us. The occult seems willing to hint at these things, but it seldom goes so far as to undermine its own credibility or 23 syndrome - it often seeks personal equity and champions nothing more than another form; there's lots of discussion over the difference between RHP and LHP - but nothing about the fear we all represent that make sus bring these forms forth as shields, as distractions, as convenient descriptions of our purpose that we suppose set us apart from the other side.

Time, Space, are both conveniences. They imprison us, control us, but neither exist. The power of suggestion, habit, tradition, forms - they enslave us. Though we can't admit it - we're not generally aware - precisely because of how forms work - yet we live and die by the clock.

The first human beings - how did they survive? Every indication today is that babys are helpless - what is the logical sequence of events that preceeded us?

Subjective rambling - do I trust my own convictions enough to cement them onto these pages as the truth? No - I'm a compartmental being, prone to inaccuracies, judgments, prejudices, bias, stupidity, wishfulness, mis-observation, interpretation, lying, ignorance as the next person. I also have a shadow, an ego, a motive, a subconscious, and forces pull and push me in every direction, many of which I may never be aware of. I have goals, aims, a certain outlook on the world, beliefs, and many other things and elements necessary to be who I am that make me who I am and influence what I say. I'm too variable an organism to really trust; only the strength and rigidity of my ego gives me the confidence arrogance and strength to be Sure. But I'm aware of its failings, of its inaccuracies, and its 23 syndrome. I'm aware of being convinced by a dozen forms and systems in truths that fell down and werne't what they appeared, even though they seemed so real at the time - is this another of those times? Almost certainly. Being wary of oneself is the truth, but it is an unpopular one.

Morality - did the world always split things into twos? Dark/Light/ God/Devil or was it artificially introduced? Since nature appears to have no divisions I would agree with her clues and pronounce morality artificial. Some texts say, invented by the Church, in which case, morality, as the umbrella so many fight and feud under, is the perfect weapon.

Supernatural/Ghosts/God - Well, I've seen God. Whatever it is. And that experience left a deep mark, a huge question mark ingrained about life and its potential purpose. I'd like to say that I didn't see God, esp. being a Satanist in many different ways all these years it would have been so much easier to forget and just hate god and christianity blindly like everyone else around me did. But, I can't deny what I saw. I certainly deny organized religion and the millions of spurious followers of "God" who do all kinds of decadent, selfish, atrocious things with its name on their lips. But I cannot deny what I felt and saw. On occasion I have seen ghosts too - and again wish I hadn't because that just made the world even more confusing. The whole architecture of life is set up to reduce, to make conveinent, to fit in, to sit down shut up and get on with running through the labyrinth - but I feel its not the only labyrinth and that weighs heavy on a 31 yr old man. Colours everything differently. Which is probably why my work is the way it is.

*shrug* And still, at 30, with knowledge I may live another 30-40 years, the world hasn't changed enough for all my efforts.
I guess at 30, you want to see the effects, see the impressions you make, see things change before your eyes, its an important part of your life to feel like you are making a mark. I guess if I keep writing for another 30 years maybe I'll get there. But I write so much because I'm worried I may not. Maybe when I'm 60 all this effort will pay off and forever change the dynamic of the human race. It's what Satan would want right?

Top
#38830 - 05/27/10 03:12 AM Re: Sinister 101 [Re: Khk]
the earthly duck Offline
stranger


Registered: 09/22/09
Posts: 37
Satan would want you not to doubt yourself nor to give up.
patience is key to our workings he speaks to those who are ready to see and hear his commands.
hard work pays off as long as there is no doubt.
i have seen and done things that only many can imagine you just have to believe THELEMA, XEPER, DEITUS.

if individually you are capable of influencing people then as a whole you can influence the many,
its up to those people whether or not they want to listen.
the beauty about the sinister way is that those that are meant to come to you will come a)because there the best at what they do.
B) they are the all that is needed for that change.

if one person can remotely influence let say for example a dictator to do something bad using a ritual and for the sake of argument it works then imagine what twelve people could do.

Top
Page 1 of 4 1234>


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

Generated in 0.034 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.