Page 4 of 6 « First<23456>
Topic Options
#45589 - 12/24/10 04:01 PM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Aklo Offline
member


Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 158
So, let's review.

 Quote:
This post was research on Satanism before LaVey and those that called themselves Satanists before LaVey.

Was it? The people who have actually offered content on this point are TheInsane and myself, with an honorary mention for Dr. Aquino. You haven't engaged any of this content, your whole purpose here seems to be to defend yourself against 0s and 1s and play semantic games. This is a damn shame, because there are gnostics here with traditions older than history, but they are certainly not going to bother with anyone who is willing to ignore their own topic for three pages and disregard the abundant content already provided.

Dr. Aquino himself has been involved for much of his life in renovating a religous tradition that goes back 5000 years or more and has been given at least lip-service by virtually every modern occult group. And he will assert to his dying breath that it's left-hand path at its heart. He may take a beating on the quasi-theism, but there's a lot of substance to what he says. Get him to talk about apotheosis and you might see exactly what I mean.

But he's working in public, and has a coherent system that requires internal consistency and so on, so he has some limitations. Many of us who are doing black magic will, within the ritual chamber, indulge in material that has no such limitations, content that you would seriously not believe.

"...the creature had been around long before human lips formed the word 'Satan,' The Sumerians had a name for him. The Sumerians; a people so ancient they could trace the lineage of their kings from before the Great Flood. So ancient that they recorded the times when feuds in Hell were actually fought on earth. Sumerians saw the creature win his tract of Hell in battle. In righteous fear of the awful things It did that day, they fell into worship of the beast. And they recorded his name well."

Get it yet?

 Quote:
Neither am I but I could be considered on to the untrained eye.

Again you have hopped down off the fence for 2 seconds to profess some vague non-theism, and no one seems to have cared or noticed. Specifically those who seem to care didn't notice, those who noticed don't seem to care. Whose fault would this be?

. . .

About the fighting, I'm sure you think you are just defending yourself, but you aren't. Keeping the other side from scoring a goal is one thing. Hopping up and down yelling NUH UH once they've scored it, is retarded.

_________________________
Behold, I send you forth as wolves among sheep; eat Lambchop for supper and fuck Bo Peep!

Top
#45591 - 12/24/10 05:35 PM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: Dan_Dread]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
I am again disappointed in that you left out the most interesting part of my questioning (theism in vamachara, why the suit doesn’t fit me, dualism vs non-dualism and the lack of one historical root for Satanism) but I will answer what you did reply with;

 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
When I think of Satanism pre LaVey I think of people like Ragnar Redbeard, Max Stirner, or Neitzche, who although lived before their philosophy was crystallized with a label, were still manifesting the same philosophy and ideology.

On the other hand, people like your selection of devil worshippers were doing something completely different. To say these two very distinct things can be lumped under the same header, or imply they are different ways of doing the same thing, seems counterproductive. The fact that you don't miss a beat trying to shoehorn the latter into the same box as the former is why we keep having this same..tired..discussion.


Nietzsche is the one philosopher I know best of the ones you mention and while he has Satanic traits for sure its quite clear if you know his philosophy that he was no Satanist – especially with a non-inclusive stance such as yours. There are essential differences on Nietzsches outlook and what you consider Satanism to be. For simplicities sake I will mention some of the things you mentioned in your post. Nietzsche was a proponent of change and denied Self-atomism. Furthermore he had no real ideas about magic and to be sure magic is a huge part of Satanism. There is more written about magic in TSB than there is philosophy and religion.

Furthermore, I never said they were different ways of doing the same thing. I only claimed that there were self-professed Satanists before LaVey and that some of them had a coherent ideology based on the character of Satan. Even you can’t deny that if you do not deny historical facts. I never said a thing about what my stance on them were and I never have. I get the feeling you think I sympathize with whatever these people wrote which just isn’t true.

I do find it funny (or perhaps sad) that you critique these peoples ideology when you elsewhere admitted to not having read any of the documents they produced. You really have no idea about what they stood for. How can you then dismiss them?

 Quote:
I am what I am, at my core. Though I constantly refine what I DO, that says nothing about what I AM. It is the prophets of the RHP that sing the song of becoming something ELSE, generally because of the belief that as we are now we are somehow broken or incomplete. This latter I find to be very anti-human at its core.

In that, Satanism is about BEING the animal we are rather than trying to leave that behind in the name of some idealistic notion of what we SHOULD be.


That’s the thing, I deny self-atomism. I do not think that there is an eternal and unchanging core. The only thing that is unchanging is change itself. I do not consider man broken or as having fallen from grace. I definitely would claim that we are incomplete however an that we will never be complete. Complete is something static and since I believe the universe basis is chaos I believe nothing can be static. On the same reasoning I believe the very concept of perfection to be impossible since it indicated no change (because if it changes from perfect to something else it really isn’t perfect).

I don’t think dreams and ideals are something bad or negative as it can be the fuel for action (which indeed should the most important part in any ideology) and action itself is change. To me this is what the LHP is all about:

VAMACARA TANTRA is part of a broad evolutionary process in consciousness, which is moving toward an integration with the Natural World, the physical body and the many sexual expressions of human behavior. All of Nature is then perceived as a sacred manifestation of the Divine, where there is no separation between Spirit and Nature, Mind and Body. So consequently there isn't any great effort to go beyond or transcend Nature. Rather, the effort is to put one's self in accord with Nature and the physical body, and to express one's own creative potential more fully. . .

VAMACARA isn't part of the adolescent male's quest for dissolving the body in a ball of light, or seeking to conquer physical mortality. It doesn't seek the spiritual at the expense of the physical, because the two are already recognized as expressions of the same underlying reality. It doesn't seek physical immortality by turning away from death, because it also recognizes that birth and death are the complimentary sides of the same continuum.

Top
#45592 - 12/24/10 06:01 PM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: TheInsane]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1751
Loc: New York
 Quote:
VAMACARA TANTRA is part of a broad evolutionary process in consciousness, which is moving toward an integration with the Natural World, the physical body and the many sexual expressions of human behavior. All of Nature is then perceived as a sacred manifestation of the Divine, where there is no separation between Spirit and Nature, Mind and Body. So consequently there isn't any great effort to go beyond or transcend Nature. Rather, the effort is to put one's self in accord with Nature and the physical body, and to express one's own creative potential more fully. . .


Spirit? Really?
Let’s throw some other over used words in there like Energy, aura, and goddess, then we can all sit around and have a Wiccan tea party.

Merry meet ya’ll, and blessed be.
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#45594 - 12/24/10 06:59 PM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: TheInsane]
Aklo Offline
member


Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 158
 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
[Nietzche] ... had no real ideas about magic

I'm going to have to disagree with you here. The Birth of Tragedy is a foundational text in modern magic. He discusses primitive religious feeling and ritual, its elaboration in the tragedies, its revival in opera, and sets the stage for cinema and interactive media. His points on the proper modern interpretation of Aristotle's catharsis and the use of all the arts in a piece are absolutely key. These considerations, and his emphasis on Will throughout his works, have an obvious profound influence on Crowley's work. And the movies developed in Germany thereafterward on these lines have an equally obvious and profound effect on LaVey. I'm talking about things like Nosferatu and Metropolis, sure. But that's not all, is it?

Triumph of the Will

Engaging multiple senses and modes of thought and uniting them around a single message to produce extraordinary results; what did you think Magic was?

 Quote:
I only claimed that there were self-professed Satanists before LaVey and that some of them had a coherent ideology based on the character of Satan.

Yeah I don't see how there's really any conflict on that point. But as you've also noted, overall it's one set of predecessors who provide the overt religious part of the material, and another set altogether who provide the philosophical part.

 Originally Posted By: Anton Szandor LaVey
The pseudo-Satanist has always managed to appear throughout modern history, with his black masses of varying degrees of blasphemy; but the real Satanist is not quite so easily recognized as such.

It would be an over-simplification to say that every successful man and woman on earth is, without knowing it, a practicing Satanist; but the thirst for earthly success and its ensuing realization are certainly grounds for Saint Peter turning thumbs down. If the rich man's entry into heaven seems as difficult as the camel's attempt to go through the eye of a needle; if the love of money is the root of all evil; then we must at least assume the post powerful men on earth to be the most Satanic. This applies to financiers, industrialists, popes, poets, dictators, and all assorted opinion-makers and field marshals of the world's activities.

Occasionally, through "leakages", one of the enigmatic men or women of earth will be found to have "dabbled" in the black arts. These, of course, are brought to light as in the "mystery men" of history. Names like Rasputin, Zaharoff, Cagliostro, Rosenberg and their ilk are links - clues, so to speak, of the true legacy of Satan . . . a legacy which transcends ethnic, racial, and econimic differences and temporal ideologies, as well. The Satanist has always ruled the earth . . . and always will, by whatever name he is called.

One thing stands sure: the standards, philosophy and practices set forth on these pages are those employed by the most self-realized and powerful humans on earth. In the secret thoughts of each man and woman, still motivated byt sound and unclouded minds, resides the potential of the Satanist, as always has been. The sign of the horns shall appear to many, now, rather than the few; and the magician will stand forth that he may be recognized.


So yeah, Walt Disney a bigger contributor than Ben Kadosh. Fact.

A Night on Bald Mountain

_________________________
Behold, I send you forth as wolves among sheep; eat Lambchop for supper and fuck Bo Peep!

Top
#45595 - 12/24/10 06:59 PM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: TheInsane]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
A satanist is not much more than a description of certain qualities in a specific context. As such, these qualities can exist outside of the context, be similar to a satanist without being part of Satanism. All those different types of Satanists are not much more than descriptions in a different context and/or of different qualities.

The roots of the LHP are indeed in the Tantric tradition where the LHP and the RHP were just two different paths towards the same goal; enlightenment. Later on in history they split and became opponents, most likely because we Westerners are suckers for dualism.

Personally I feel much more aligned with the Vamamarga tradition and their ritual of the 5Ms. It is a tradition which is closely aligned with the Nietzschean philosophy and by definition a path of heterodoxy. It is also a path which has similarities with traditional (pre-satanic) devil-worship, in which I see the black mass as a (Western) translation of the Pancha-makara.

However, I am not bothered about enlightenment; I find it a rather fuzzy word. My path is an attempt at what Nietzsche called becoming what we are.

It's not for everyone.

D.

Top
#45611 - 12/25/10 05:35 AM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: Diavolo]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Asmedious

Spirit? Really?
Let’s throw some other over used words in there like Energy, aura, and goddess, then we can all sit around and have a Wiccan tea party.

Merry meet ya’ll, and blessed be.


Oh, one of the words of the Satanic boogeyman along with divinity, gods, prayer, belief, faith, anti-liberalism, theism etc \:D
"Spirit" can be used in a lot of different ways but I have to admit that when I read about the original tantric traditions from India it has a too deep religious message for me. After all I am born and raised in a completely different world. You have to remember for example that Anton LaVey did use the word spirit in a non-derogatory way. Nietzsche did too. Neither man really meant anything traditionally spiritual or religious by using it.

The main thing for me is the notion how it is all the same. Like modern quantum physics claim all material to really be energy moving. It appears materially solid, and the material does exist, but it has no material core (no "atom" - as in the original Greek meaning of the word). It is a doctrine of the interconnectedness of all things and that the main feature that everything shares is the change of shape and form. Very much like Heraclitus said in what is left of his work.

Aklo

On Nietzsches "the birth of tragedy" I can't really comment. Its one of the few books of his I havent actually read.

Nietzsches work on will and the will to power is a huge discussion which we probably shouldnt hold here (perhaps a new thread would thrive on the subject). For now I can only say that the "will to power" is so often interpreted as a will to power in the mundane life when it is really Nietzsches version of a metaphysical doctrine (even though he did try to move away from metaphysics). And again this has alot to with Heraclitus and his view of the all changing world and "forces" colliding, some dominate and some get dominated etc.

"The will to power" is about as commonly misunderstood as Crowleys "Do what though wilt" which hardly means do whatever you want as some people indicate. It is also a metaphysical notion and Will is actually seen as a semi-deterministic thing and the goal is to find its right "orbit" and stay on this path.

 Quote:
Engaging multiple senses and modes of thought and uniting them around a single message to produce extraordinary results; what did you think Magic was?


Correction to my other post;

"Furthermore he [Nietzsche] had no real ideas about ritual magic and to be sure ritual magic is a huge part of Satanism. There is more written about ritual magic in TSB than there is philosophy and religion."

I dont know if he touches on ritual magic in the Birth of Tragedy but I doubt it. However LaVey dedicated the whole second part of his TSB to the subject at hand which must have meant that he thought of it as way important for his religion.

 Quote:
So yeah, Walt Disney a bigger contributor than Ben Kadosh. Fact.


Sure he was but not to Satanism. But to be honest neither man had much impact on Satanism at all.

I do not agree with the quoted piece from LaVey. I think he bases it to much on the Christian Bible of all things. The reasoning that "if the Bible tell us this then it must mean that" doesnt really fly with me. I do not think success of every kind is Satanic in itself because it leads to a circle argument - if A then B, If B then A - therefore B and A.

To actually be a Satanist I do think you have to have a lived philosophy based on the character of Satan and acceptance of the label in one way or another. This is the essential part. Furthermore I think strife for success alone is not all there is. To me it is way more important for the Satanist to gain knowledge about him/herself and develop what he or she has in a direction that is beneficial. It doesnt have to involve becoming famous, becoming powerful or becoming rich.

Diavolo

One of Nietzsches more interesting concepts is indeed the notion of “becoming what you are” and furthermore, as a consequence of this, his rejection of Socrates (or was it Platos?) “know thyself”. The path of doing, the path of action of realizing and using your potential and not about know what you are since you are a plurality of ever changing selves that exist in power/slave relations. His notion was that you can search bur you can never find the core because there is none.

I also feel more connected to the philosophically based LHP of the east just as I feel more connected to their metaphysical ideas. I do believe that the LHP and the RHP is not opposed each other but are two different ways to the same goal which, as you wrote, is the original idea of the two paths. The word enlightenment is indeed fuzzy and I prefer the word wisdom (not that that is much better in regards to fuzzyness). Definition of those terms in itself would be a potentially disastrous thread :P
I have to say though that my work with antinomianism is way more connected to the mental part of breaking one’s own chains through mental practice rather than, as the agoras –traditional hindu practitioners of the LHP - for example, focus on physical taboos which can include indulging in feces or living in cremation grounds.

Top
#45613 - 12/25/10 08:06 AM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: TheInsane]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Vamamarga isn't only visible in the East; you'll also find traces or practices of it in the Gnosticism of the past. Maybe through that it seeped into Occultism and even Devil-worship. Although it might be a case of "will see what wants to see" which again isn't terribly important either.

I'm personally not as much interested in the metaphysical aspects as I am in the practical part. I think that to define your own morality, you'll logically have to deconstruct their morality first, which might inevitable lead you through a phase of amorality. You can not build a world without destroying the current one. It is indeed about breaking chains; after your birth, you are brought up in slavery, your prison being a reality created by them with all its laws and do's and don'ts. What I see as the LHP is a path from their reality into your reality. It is a path for the truly heterodox.

As such, many other branches in Satanism are not that interesting to me, although they can have interesting aspects. One of the problems is that most are too tightly anchored in the orthodox. Even when having a heterodox appearance, their core isn't. It also explains why I prefer the ONA when it comes to modern Satanism. If you'd look closely, you'll notice that Vamamarga is an essential part of it, and they can abandon the orthodox because they never forgot the most essential part of the LHP; living in the shadows.

D.

Top
#45614 - 12/25/10 08:18 AM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: Dan_Dread]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
Did Satanism exist before ASL? Yes and no. Depends on what you mean by "Satanism". Groups such as the Fraternitas Saturni and the Ophite Cult of Sloane are interesting from the point of view of history, but like Latin, they are a dead language.

ASL identified a current of thought, and freely admitted that it was older than himself (see the entire TSR here). But he was the first to describe it as "Satanism" and reduce it to a workable and specific philosophy.

To OrgasmicKarmatic, I highly recommend Flowers' Lords of the Left Hand Path.

JK
_________________________



Top
#45616 - 12/25/10 10:59 AM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: Jason King]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Jason King
ASL identified a current of thought, and freely admitted that it was older than himself


And just so we're clear, I identified a Current of the real and built my (postmodern) Satanism around that.

JK
_________________________



Top
#45618 - 12/25/10 02:47 PM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: Diavolo]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Vamamarga isn't only visible in the East; you'll also find traces or practices of it in the Gnosticism of the past. Maybe through that it seeped into Occultism and even Devil-worship. Although it might be a case of "will see what wants to see" which again isn't terribly important either.


I havent been studying gnosticism that much. The only parts I ever read about (on a very basic level) was filled with dualism which I do not appreciate. Perhaps my initial judgment was wrong. Or perhaps there are other schools that are more closely linked with a more, what we today would call, eastern mindset.

 Originally Posted By: Jason King

To OrgasmicKarmatic, I highly recommend Flowers' Lords of the Left Hand Path.

JK


Yes, I would also recomend this book but with a small notion that it obviously works from within the Temple of Set "current". Therefore the definition of the LHP is the definition given by the ToS and Flowers tries to incorporate that to the older LHP traditions. I think he should have done it the other way around. Started at the beginning and gone forward explaining the similarities but also the differences in how the concept evolved in the west. Still a good book. Wish they could release a version without the typos though :P

Top
#45619 - 12/25/10 03:16 PM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: Jason King]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1647
Loc: Orlando, FL
Lords of the Left Hand Path is a good overview of the subject, and presents several viewpoints of the Sinister that highlight some very strong currents in religion/occultism that are usually overlooked because they are not explicitly "Satanic".

Which, I think one of the problems inherent in these kinds of discussions is that it usually boils down to semantics games. There is a tendency among some people to prematurely dismiss ideas or works that do not readily fit their current point of view, or reject large portions of it due to pretenses over "labels"-- even by those that present themselves as the paragons of reason and open-mindedness.

There is a prevalent kneejerk reaction, for instance, to the term "theism", which is understandable in a country where stark militant Atheism is the only visible alternative to the traditional self-deprecating ritual groveling that passes as "divinity" these days.

But even our old friend Epicurus was a theist; he simply had a different view of what a god was compared to most of his countrymen-- which in turn differs still from the modern Anglo-American view. His disciple Lucretius despised religion as an institution, but that didn't stop him from kicking off his groundbreaking "De Rerum Natura" with a lavish Hymn to Venus. I once came across a self-titled "Atheist Reader" compilation in a bookstore (by Hitchens, think it was), which included the entire opus-- but with the Hymn surgically excised. It was a somewhat disappointing testament to the narrow-mindedness of others who never look beyond appearances, only cherrypicking ideas to feed their egos, lest anything "different" induce them to think outside the box.

Which, of course, is the entire essence of the Left Hand Path- to transcend the illusory matrix that prevents us from Becoming. Whether I call the essence of this path Satan, Lucifer, or God, is only a semantic game requiring scholarly perspective and a little wordplay to justify. But for those who choose to actually take the first step into the proverbial Abyss-- where names and outward forms of practice are of little pertinence-- is another matter entirely.


Edited by The Zebu (12/25/10 03:21 PM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#45621 - 12/25/10 03:43 PM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: TheInsane]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: TheInsane

I havent been studying gnosticism that much. The only parts I ever read about (on a very basic level) was filled with dualism which I do not appreciate. Perhaps my initial judgment was wrong. Or perhaps there are other schools that are more closely linked with a more, what we today would call, eastern mindset.


It is impossible to escape dualism in all those older ideas, as it is impossible to escape the religious structure of most but we can hardly hold that against them; in those days people had a completely different world-view, strongly reinforced by those in power and close to no option to inform themselves outside those.
You should check Carpocrates whose ideas and practices show similarities with the practice of Vamamarga.

D.

Top
#45622 - 12/25/10 04:00 PM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: Diavolo]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
[quote=TheInsane]You should check Carpocrates whose ideas and practices show similarities with the practice of Vamamarga.

D.


Cheers! I will take some time to researching Carpocrates \:\)

Top
#45624 - 12/25/10 06:01 PM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: TheInsane]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
When you'll explore the Gnosticism of the past, you might find more you'll enjoy. Just don't take it all too serious; they are pieces of a puzzle. In the end, the LHP is about finding and using the pieces you need to complete a puzzle which only makes sense to you.

D.

Top
#45642 - 12/26/10 10:10 AM Re: Research of Satanism before LaVey [Re: The Zebu]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: The Zebu
Which, of course, is the entire essence of the Left Hand Path- to transcend the illusory matrix that prevents us from Becoming. Whether I call the essence of this path Satan, Lucifer, or God, is only a semantic game requiring scholarly perspective and a little wordplay to justify. But for those who choose to actually take the first step into the proverbial Abyss-- where names and outward forms of practice are of little pertinence-- is another matter entirely.


Transcending the illusionary matrix is an idea that can be found in a lot of religious thoughts. In Gnosticism, certain sects saw the physical world as a prison; Buddhism has similar ideas and even in Christianity, life on earth is nothing but a transformational phase.

But where I see the difference with Satanism, is that instead of the end-result being an absorption or submission into the Divine, our transcendence beyond the matrix results in establishing a personal matrix and become the Rex Mundi in that. As such, Satanism is not merely a manner of thinking or believing (philosophy vs religion) but, above all, one of acting.

D.

Top
Page 4 of 6 « First<23456>


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.