Page 2 of 2 <12
Topic Options
#104165 - 11/30/15 03:41 PM Re: Toying with the needle [Re: SIN3]
antikarmatomic Offline
BANNED
stalker


Registered: 09/22/13
Posts: 3208
Loc: El Mundo
Yeah, but what makes anyone think that Satanism is LHP ByD(R)ef? It's like saying west is always left. That'd be true if I were, like, stuck facing north my entire life, but I'm not. No one is.

Satanism won't stop being Satanism (whatever the fuck that means in the mind of popular opinion *smushes spider*) when any "churche's" definition of "Satanism" becomes commonly accepted. It will stop being LHP by the antinomian definition of this quote-unquote LHP. Only insofar as it is unaccepted is it an LHP praxis. Once accepted by popular vote, it will no longer be.

Satanism is not by definition "LHP praxis" - it is *an* LHP praxis only insofar as socio-political environments permit it to be presently and historically. The future remains to be seen - but if it's got you thinking stuff's just, like, somehow going to go good for you on account of your own subservience to what ought and ought-not happen - morally or whatever - as if there's a referee or someone keeping score... not very likely.

Is ISIS Sunni or Shia?


Edited by antikarmatomic (11/30/15 03:46 PM)
Edit Reason: http://dilbert.com/strip/2015-11-30
_________________________
Angelic harlequins and sinister clowns.

Top
#104167 - 11/30/15 07:14 PM Re: Toying with the needle [Re: antikarmatomic]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7190
Loc: Virginia
Which is why contrast is required if 'Satan' is to be an archetype model hijacked from Semitic peoples.

Since most users often refer to the TSB, LaVey pointed to Satan as a manifestation of LHP. It's the quality of and what the thing does.

 Quote:
Satanism is not by definition "LHP praxis"


Depends on what controls the language. Agreed upon consensus? Not without spirited discourse. Even theologians have these debates. What is Satan? What does it do? What is it after? Where did it come from? What does Satan belong to?

As stated, LaVey referred to Satan as symbol to represent deeds. It's the skeleton of the thing; then he added a bunch of other ideas to flesh it. All with the same key aims in mind: Autonomy and Power. There's much to be analyzed and plenty of disagreement to be had. It may even be a reason (among others) why was referred to as 'Doktor' LaVey. Sinister research assignment based on crib notes.

The TSB wasn't my gateway drug. I was interested in this idea of Satan and why people consider it dangerous or at least abhorrent to being a "good person" (whatever that is). While researching this character in conjunction with causal events in history, it was recommended by my Librarian. She kept it in the psychology section. I didn't find it an odd placement at all after reading it for the first time. Still don't.

Satan-ism, doesn't have an accepted definition. It accounts for autonomous people thumbing their nose at the "church" and going their own way. Even if people disagree. I often debate these so called 'types' of Satan-ism, just to see how strong the person's conviction is. Whether they have it all sorted out, or whether it's just another rendering of LHP in ideal.

The whole "Fuck it, I ain't calling myself a Satanist anymore!" is often out of frustration, or seeking to distance oneself from the 'consensus'.

The idea of the 'Black Sheep' is exactly that, those 'Pretenders to the Throne' as Gilmore calls them. What's for the masses, needs to be accepted by the masses. Everything else on the Sly.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#104204 - 12/04/15 08:40 PM Re: Toying with the needle [Re: SIN3]
antikarmatomic Offline
BANNED
stalker


Registered: 09/22/13
Posts: 3208
Loc: El Mundo
The Satanic Bible mentions LHP all of maybe 4 times in total. And in no instance was I ever like "whoa! Satan is so LHP". Not once.

I think satan hates, is also ambidextrous, and does quite well for itself

Right Satanist. It's the "ist"

For example. Guitarist. I don't like the word, BUT(!) it conveys meaning. I play guitar.

Satanist. I play satan? I do guitar as I do satan? Silliness is all it is

The church - which church?

A martial artist does martial arts.

A guitarist plays guitar.

A (quoteunquote) satanist has a WordPress.
_________________________
Angelic harlequins and sinister clowns.

Top
#104210 - 12/05/15 07:31 AM Re: Toying with the needle [Re: antikarmatomic]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7190
Loc: Virginia
What the thing does.

The act of writing blogs on a Wordpress alone isn't Satanic but rather what the words carry to the receiver of the message perhaps might.

The modern media, Hollywood and the actors in the deed are often described as Satanic, Why?
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#104217 - 12/05/15 05:59 PM Re: Toying with the needle [Re: SIN3]
antikarmatomic Offline
BANNED
stalker


Registered: 09/22/13
Posts: 3208
Loc: El Mundo
 Originally Posted By: S3
What the thing does.
Clarify. Satanism? I don't think exists, much less does anything. As an identity pin it fails; but not because Satanism requires substance, instead because identity pins require things of substance which the ism isn't. It says nothing. It has no real meaning - Satanism.

Every other spiritually-oriented "ism", for all of their internal schisms, have one thing in common: beliefs and leaps of faith of some seemingly nonsensical type. This is so even with Atheism. I can't prove one way or another if there is a god - or multiple gods - or even agree on a common definition of what a god is. Demiurge? Does the universe end with the physical? Is god responsible for life? existence? Is it sentient? Even an affirmative "no - it's a lie" is a leap of faith one cannot be certain of. Faith is a criteria of almost any ism.

One key feature of any substance in the satanic is, as I apprehend it, faithlessness. Keystone. That "Satanism starts with Atheism" is alone sufficiently absurd enough to dismiss the notion that this "ism" should've ever started at all.

The only more absurd word to me than "Satanism" is "Occultism" and for somewhat similar reasons.

If I define, in any specific way, what I mean by "Occultism" - like, in detail - then it stops being the occult. It stopped being the occult the moment its contents landed on someone's bookshelf - ya know.

Similarly, the whatever-they-are-trying-to-describe-as-Satanism stops being that the moment it, whatever "it" is, is commonly accepted as it.

It is, by design, anti-ismic. Matthew 12:26 - a house divided and such.

The lysosome is inextricable. What fuels the cell consumes it - etc. The whole concept is intrinsically fucked if taken at face value. Now, the artistic brilliance of the whole thing is that it's an anti church based on one church's bad-guy. That's only one church. Born and raised Hindus don't really give a tits-on-a-bull about this Satan thingy. The ones that do give a fuck about this thingy go on record as saying that they don't believe it literally exists.

So fuck it! I worship the *allegorical* Easte(r/n) bunny. Like the one on Gummo (waird movie, right?) I pretend I know Sanskrit.

Let me throw this out there to the experts.

How on Earth do you equate Satanism with "Left Hand Path."

What does Left Hand Path mean to you?

Why does it mean what it means to you?

Is it not merely the power of suggestion?

Who else equated LHP with Satanism specifically? None that I know of, except LaVey. Maybe it's just me, but I see a serious "reach" in lumping Rand and Nietzsche into the same bucket as Aghoris(?) - ostracism sorta plays a huge role. If you belong, chances are you're doing it wrong.

If you and anyone else knows about it, chances are it's not occult.

What makes them satanic - these "peeps who seem to grok it" is that they do not follow a recipe, they write it.

The whole "them that can do. Them that can't teach" deal.

It's not a practice - it is not a prescription. It's an observation - a descriptive.

This is my primary contention.

Once it becomes a prescription, it stops being "it".
_________________________
Angelic harlequins and sinister clowns.

Top
#104230 - 12/06/15 08:19 AM Re: Toying with the needle [Re: antikarmatomic]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7190
Loc: Virginia
Without going in circles here, again... What the thing does. It's active vs. passive. The difference between doing the Devil and the the Devil doing you.

The DSM IV added ODD as a mental disorder as it pertains to those patients under distress from being a combatant.

When I said LaVey pointed to the Satanic as a manifestation of the LHP, it was in relation to what the East was describing (as discussed HERE). The words to describe it isn't as important as what is being described.

As I've stated in other threads, you could easily use a dozen other words (and we often do).

As for the pre-packaged deal of "LaVeyan Philosophy", personally I think that's a tailor-made thing for those that need to be told 'how' to do it. How to flesh it. Eventually (one would hope) with a little understanding and mental maturity, a personal realization is made about that. If not, leave them to their service. It thereby remains "Occult" to those not in the know, even if it's right there staring them in the face. So obvious to some, so alien to the odd man out. It accounts for the "Specialism" aspect you see on these boards, (Theistic, Spiritual, Gnostic, et al. etc.). I didn't disagree with my Librarian maintaining that it's (The TSB) a Psychology for the masses. I still don't. The most useful thing I got out of it was the language. I had been using other terms, LHP was already explored through other research when chasing down the Devil in a historical context.

Causal? Perhaps, in my case (linguistic quips). Catholics are obsessed with this figure and any activity that goes outside their culture is Satanic, and the practitioner is a Satanist. I don't disagree. Still don't.

It doesn't just apply in a religious context. It applies across all lines because they're all imaginary lines, even those not to be crossed. I actively crossed them, still do.

It's both observation and active engagement, which is why I asked you about the modern media and Hollywood. John Q Public (of the religious sort) see the Diabolic in both and often speak on it. It's what the thing does, vs. what it is.


Western Occultism is gobbeldygook because of misunderstandings, modernization and misdirection.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#104241 - 12/06/15 12:41 PM Re: Toying with the needle [Re: SIN3]
antikarmatomic Offline
BANNED
stalker


Registered: 09/22/13
Posts: 3208
Loc: El Mundo
That's just it. See for as quick as many are to note that LaVey pointed to the Satanic as a manifestation of the LHP nowhere does he exactly define what what he means by that. Is he talking Eastern or Western LHP? He never explicitly says.

Satanism = LHP in a basically a'priori way. It's LHP because it just is. But are we talking Eastern LHP, as-in Tantra or the Aghoris, vama-someword-I-never-had-cause-to-use-before-since-Eastern mythos was not something I grew up with or are we talking Western LHP, as-in the questionable assertions of Blavatsky or Crowley?

He seems to abhor the ascetic and self-deprecation as a means of "spritual enlightenment", which would lead one to think that he did not lean so much to the Eastern lens in making this correlation.

He also seems to take every possible opportunity to assert his derisive opinion of "occultniks" and Crowleyanity. Despite Crowley's depiction of the Black Brothers (as opposed to Black Magicians)) is really the one interpretation of the LHP that most fits the underlying principles of "LaVeyean" Satanism.

He never goes on to elaborate sufficiently as to why (or which) LHP is Satanism. The correlation hardly seems necessary, meaningful, or even relevant. No one actually makes the case otherwise. It's just implied. It comes up a lot and for unconvincing reasons.

Satan means fuck-all outside of an Abrahamic political narrative. It's about as meaningfully taboo to these greasy Hindus as eating pork (just don't fuck with their cows.)

Like worshipping Shakti in the west. etc.

If someone were cursing at you in a language you did not understand, how would you know enough to be offended in the first place?

Similarly, I would not bat an eye to learn that on some obscure Polynesian island, the middle finger is the universally recognized gesture of good luck and good fortune... like them blasted devil horns those metal heads great each other with... as well as these refer cigarettes.

Satan is an oddity to atheists and open-minded peeps, an abomination to 3 major religions, and largely irrelevant to most other persuasions. No one's fooling anyone - it's the bad guy in a chronicle no one reads any more. Like... what was it called? "Chronicles of Pyrdain". Anyone else read that? The pig keeper! The anti-Islamic proto-hero - by trade. Taran.

I wonder if ISIS would behead an infidel unwilling to convert to Islam on account of their love for the fallen goat-headed whore Mary (or their red card). I hear oil's pretty cheap lately.

See - Christians, and sheepish people - they're easy to feel bad for. "Satanists" - They're hard to feel pity for, ya know?

Like that whole Charlie Hedbo thing. Yes, you are free to talk shit about a person's mother. That is your right - quote unquote. The thing is - right or wrong - some people have buttons - ya know? Some people take seemingly minor things rather seriously. Some people are as "into" their prophets as others are "into" their___ seriously___ hard drugs.

Will, has, and will shoot again. And for lesser infractions. On principle alone.

I know it's fucked up and non-sensicle, but on the other hand (probably the left one) there's seriously no accounting for taste. Say what you like - the best "we" as a society can afford anyone is that their murderers will serve no less than 10 years.

What do I see in the media? I think both the creators of South Park and Sethy-poo of Family Guy fame are the most obvious and relevant winners of the LaVeyan angle. Satire par excellence.

Certain comedians - the Amazing Racist - for example. Over the top stuff. Gimmickey and Novelty acts. Such as FarmCum. Or Gwar. Or both. 30 second clips of an infant being scolded by a birthday clown prior to having its umbilical thingy severed.

Any joke and/or skill that leaves you immediately questioning "wtf did I just witness?". Sick as a positive adjective. Harlequin pornography - until it gets passée.

Digital occultism is where its at nowadays.

Literal Djinn.


Edited by antikarmatomic (12/06/15 12:45 PM)
Edit Reason: always enough time to do it over
_________________________
Angelic harlequins and sinister clowns.

Top
#105421 - 02/04/16 02:15 PM Re: Toying with the needle [Re: antikarmatomic]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7190
Loc: Virginia
 Originally Posted By: antikarmatomic
That's just it. See for as quick as many are to note that LaVey pointed to the Satanic as a manifestation of the LHP nowhere does he exactly define what what he means by that.


Actually he does. The definition is contained within specific statements made about being an autonomous being, in spite of the social landscape. It supports the 'born not made' premise in that when reading it, you tend to agree with some things and naturally buck others. It's an innate quality. The idea that one reads it, then adjusts to become, is off, in my opinion.

 Originally Posted By: AK
Is he talking Eastern or Western LHP? He never explicitly says.
Because Western is Eastern; there's no need to distinguish the two. The proper interpretation is obvious. We don't need to live in the East or be Hindus to understand it. Vamacarians arose in response to specific cultural practices that were opposed. Likewise, the same thing occurs in the West. It's just language to mediate understanding.

 Originally Posted By: AK

But are we talking Eastern LHP, as-in Tantra or the Aghoris, vama-someword-I-never-had-cause-to-use-before-since-Eastern mythos was not something I grew up with or are we talking Western LHP, as-in the questionable assertions of Blavatsky or Crowley?


Some may describe Crowley as having been on the LHP as it pertains to what he was doing because it goes beyond words. It requires deeds. He was exiled from Sicily because word got out that he was having sex with animals, doing drugs and the possibility his group could affect the local populace was feared. The things they were doing made people literally gasp. Blavatsky embraced Lucifer while others shunned it as the embodiment of Evil. She was using it as a vehicle to disseminate information that otherwise would have been kept in darkness. Not completely demystified though, only a certain sort were willing to have a look. To consider concepts she was presenting (especially in the area of genetics/race). The Nomos reaction to having been exposed to controversial ideas, was outrage and discrediting the information as a way to stop the flow of it. She could have kept it private and reserved for a private group but she didn't. She made it very public and invited the controversy.



 Originally Posted By: AK
Satanism = LHP in a basically a'priori way. It's LHP because it just is.
No, this is what Dread is getting at with 'thingness'. After the 13th century words arose in sanskrit to describe the dynamic because things were already done, things that needed to be described to mediate understanding. The Aghori would be the extreme scale with cannibalism, dead things and fecal matter. Those not content with spiritual pipe dreams and embarking on the carnal, were on the rise. It caused a cultural schism. This happens all over the world in every culture and every culture has its language for it. Whatever is the most 'Evil' at that time. LaVey used it to make a point and at a time when peace love and lollipops was the popular trend. It was certainly reactionary but also responsive. The 'Witches' of the era had been pussified, rejected the devil, sought societal acceptance and used their Witchery to gain acceptance. The Neopagan movement was on the move but it was an altar for RHP.

Even today with a somewhat castrated devil, it's still an accurate descriptor because of the political ideologies it represented and was communicated in Classical Hebrew words. So again, whether Sanskrit or Hebrew, that doesn't matter. What matters is what these words mediate.


 Originally Posted By: AK
He seems to abhor the ascetic and self-deprecation as a means of "spritual enlightenment", which would lead one to think that he did not lean so much to the Eastern lens in making this correlation.


Nah, the essence of what Satan represents remains in tact. The carnal vs. the spiritual pipe dreams populated by gaggles of gurus. "Spiritual Enlightenment" is what exactly?

Embracing your carnal impulses in a society that prefer you keep them in check, is adversity. The religious wagging their finger at all the 'sinful' behaviors of the people. Sex, drugs, music, language, ideas, etc. et. al. is a judgment and a reaction that's righteous/holier-than-thou and fear based. If you're a true believer that is terrified of the wrath of God, wouldn't you want to stop it?


 Originally Posted By: AK
He also seems to take every possible opportunity to assert his derisive opinion of "occultniks" and Crowleyanity. Despite Crowley's depiction of the Black Brothers (as opposed to Black Magicians)) is really the one interpretation of the LHP that most fits the underlying principles of "LaVeyean" Satanism.
I think he acknowledges what Crowley was doing at that time but also the effect of compulsory behavior like guru syndrome and taking concepts into the "Spiritual Enlightenment" camp. The Occultniks are those castrating the Devil and trying to turn the Left to Right. Not that this adversity isn't useful to us, it can be stratifying.

A few years back I had this dance gig and used crystal balls as props. I was approached by a Thelemite that was trying to convince me that I could trap 'spirits' in these balls. At first, I thought he was speaking metaphorically but I quickly realized he wasn't just talking about using them as focus tools to captivate. He meant it in a literal sense. When I pushed him to explain the 'how' and the 'why' of it, he got rather pissed off and called me a charlatan. That's the kind of shit LaVey was criticizing. He was apprehending concepts from the Golden Dawn and taking them to a strange place. A place that simply doesn't exist beyond fantasy and the imagination.


 Originally Posted By: AK
He never goes on to elaborate sufficiently as to why (or which) LHP is Satanism. The correlation hardly seems necessary, meaningful, or even relevant. No one actually makes the case otherwise. It's just implied. It comes up a lot and for unconvincing reasons.


He does, which is why it's qualified as 'Occult' those with eyes to see and ears to hear, get the message. To the rest, understanding remains out of reach.


 Originally Posted By: AK
Satan means fuck-all outside of an Abrahamic political narrative. It's about as meaningfully taboo to these greasy Hindus as eating pork (just don't fuck with their cows.)


As I've already pointed out, it does. At a time when eating pork was taboo, by eating it, it one can experience this so-called "Enlightenment" in a more meaningful way.

 Originally Posted By: AK
Like worshipping Shakti in the west. etc.
Shatki just represents the electric upon the static. Shatki is eating the pork, fucking the goat or doing Heroine.

 Originally Posted By: AK
If someone were cursing at you in a language you did not understand, how would you know enough to be offended in the first place?
Intentionality is made clear through movements. The words just describe the 'thingness'.

 Originally Posted By: AK

Similarly, I would not bat an eye to learn that on some obscure Polynesian island, the middle finger is the universally recognized gesture of good luck and good fortune... like them blasted devil horns those metal heads great each other with... as well as these refer cigarettes.
If you happen to be on said Polynesian island, learn what would be offensive and use it, you're on the right track.

 Quote:
Satan is an oddity to atheists and open-minded peeps, an abomination to 3 major religions, and largely irrelevant to most other persuasions. No one's fooling anyone - it's the bad guy in a chronicle no one reads any more. Like... what was it called? "Chronicles of Pyrdain". Anyone else read that? The pig keeper! The anti-Islamic proto-hero - by trade. Taran.


Again, "thingness", it may behoove you to play an insight role like a fanatical Christian if you want to engage in conflict with a militant Atheist. That would be far more effective.

 Originally Posted By: AK

I wonder if ISIS would behead an infidel unwilling to convert to Islam on account of their love for the fallen goat-headed whore Mary (or their red card). I hear oil's pretty cheap lately.


Depends, seeing that ISIS is more of a militant group using Islam as a vehicle, maybe if you agree to burn an entire village to the ground and set off a few bombs, your apostasy would be irrelevant and so too would your beheading.


 Originally Posted By: AK
See - Christians, and sheepish people - they're easy to feel bad for. "Satanists" - They're hard to feel pity for, ya know?
This is presuming the usefulness of a Satanist, especially one that comes correct and acts on the Sly. I mean, how effective would it be to declare yourself one of the Devil's people to Boko Haram? Martyrs usually end up dead. In knowing the beast that is man, one acts accordingly; especially to save your own head.


 Originally Posted By: AK
Like that whole Charlie Hedbo thing. Yes, you are free to talk shit about a person's mother. That is your right - quote unquote. The thing is - right or wrong - some people have buttons - ya know? Some people take seemingly minor things rather seriously. Some people are as "into" their prophets as others are "into" their___ seriously___ hard drugs.
Right, which is why the acts of CH are two fold. On one hand, it may seem foolish to rely on some bogus social contract and figure you're 'safe' but then on the other, you keep pushing that envelope, show no fear, use the dead to your advantage and take the 'terror' down a notch. That's the idea, seeing the CH hasn't backed down and continue to publish satire about Islam and its prophet.

 Originally Posted By: AK
Will, has, and will shoot again. And for lesser infractions. On principle alone.
But do you back down out of fear of reprisals? Even if they shoot again, or blow some shit up, do you cower and surrender to it?

 Originally Posted By: AK
I know it's fucked up and non-sensicle, but on the other hand (probably the left one) there's seriously no accounting for taste. Say what you like - the best "we" as a society can afford anyone is that their murderers will serve no less than 10 years.
Provided they are caught. Killers kill and sometimes kill oneself to avoid capture. Those that don't get caught just go on, business as usual. The best "we" as a society can afford anything is that understanding.

 Originally Posted By: AK

What do I see in the media? I think both the creators of South Park and Sethy-poo of Family Guy fame are the most obvious and relevant winners of the LaVeyan angle. Satire par excellence.

Certain comedians - the Amazing Racist - for example. Over the top stuff. Gimmickey and Novelty acts. Such as FarmCum. Or Gwar. Or both. 30 second clips of an infant being scolded by a birthday clown prior to having its umbilical thingy severed.

Any joke and/or skill that leaves you immediately questioning "wtf did I just witness?". Sick as a positive adjective. Harlequin pornography - until it gets passée.

Digital occultism is where its at nowadays.

Literal Djinn.


Because nothing is off-limits, all the sacred cows are kicked and unapologetically. There's a certain sort (RHP) that tow the PC party line, apologize for having offended on behalf of (fill in the blank) network. You see it everywhere in social media. Strangers apologizing to strangers for the offenses of others.

When these 'attacks' are made on our own soil, the people cower in fear and say "See? We knew this would happen!" aren't cut out for a LHP MO. So the descriptor simply doesn't fit. It's not any more complicated than that.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#105422 - 02/04/16 04:40 PM Re: Toying with the needle [Re: SIN3]
antikarmatomic Offline
BANNED
stalker


Registered: 09/22/13
Posts: 3208
Loc: El Mundo
Now, mind you, this has been one of the more in-depth replies I've received in a while, and I will come back to this. Unfortuantely, you have (I shit you not) unloaded this right in the midst of <AK> doing what <AK> does the way he does... and it's a tangled knot of "WICGAW" (what I can get away with)

pero (but) I would ask you, and one and all - what presides utmost? Satan? or the path of the left? and why?

[TBC...] just some lube for where this is going while I wait on hold for matters entirely unrelated.
_________________________
Angelic harlequins and sinister clowns.

Top
Page 2 of 2 <12


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

Generated in 0.039 seconds of which 0.022 seconds were spent on 22 queries. Zlib compression disabled.