Page 12 of 14 « First<1011121314>
Topic Options
#61051 - 11/04/11 11:10 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Apeynon]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: Apeynon

What I'm basically asking is if those who accept the symbolic interpretation of Satan have done practical Satanic stuff or not?


"Practical" in what sense? Practical in the way of throwing off the chains of prescribed RHP religions and taking the onus of a fulfilling life upon oneself? Practical in the way of discarding faith in favor of reason? In what way do you define what is practical?
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#61052 - 11/04/11 11:30 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Fnord]
Apeynon Offline
stranger


Registered: 11/04/11
Posts: 40
Loc: In Your Bedroom Pillow
 Originally Posted By: Fnord
"Practical" in what sense?

Practical as in doing Occult, Satanic, rites and ceremonies with the aim of evoking and invoking Satan. Ceremonies as in 'with other people' and rites as in 'by yourself' and also possibly with other people.

If the answer is yes to doing such practical Occult stuff, then what specific rites and ceremonies and with what result, if any.

Examples of practical stuff could range from old grimoire magick, to Temple of Set ceremonies and rites, to ONA sorcery like as in their 'black book of satan' and 'ceremony of recalling'.

What I'm basically asking is if those who believe that Satan is symbolic and that Satanism is therefore just some personal heretical praxis, have ever done such practical Occult rites and ceremonies.

If they haven't such practical Occult experience, then how have they arrived at their conclusions about Satan? By reason alone?

Also, and I may be wrong, but I get the impression from what Aquino has said in this thread - and elsewhere - that he's not only done such practical Occult stuff but that his practical Occult experience extends over decades.

Is that practical experience therefore the basis for his belief, or not? If so, then perhaps his beliefs are not as unfounded as some here seem to think.

Top
#61053 - 11/04/11 11:43 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Autodidact Offline
member


Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 428
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
 Originally Posted By: Autodidact
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
Well, that gets rather tautological, since you're now insisting that there is no "real you" to perceive anything external to itself; [...]

This doesn't follow at all. The only way to make the above work is to stipulate that you cannot perceive yourself, thus there "must" be two bits, the ba/soul/spirit and the OU-you. That seems to me another unwarranted leap, and it's still orthogonal to claiming one's soul must be outside the OU.

Well, someone/something has to do the perceiving, and to do so it must be able to distinguish itself from the perception.


Nope, same error. The problem with this argument is that there's an implicit assumption that there must be some "objective" "you". By requiring a separate "you", you are led into infinite recursion, the only escape from which is to claim the "real you" must be "outside". This is circular reasoning.

It's far simpler to take "self-aware" to mean, well, "self-aware". You mentioned your big toe - you can see your big toe, can't you?

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
 Quote:
I dunno, maybe I need to go study some of those jibber-jabber philosophy guys ... I always hated Philosophy for this same reason - they always seem to start with way too many premises seemingly picked from the blue.

Here you go ... Take two OU-aspirin first ...


I've given this, and some of the links, a quick once over, and the basic summation appears to be "your senses can be fooled, therefore they are not real, therefore there is no sensing", which, frankly, is stupid. I'll keep looking, though - that seems too big a hole, maybe I'm just not getting good explanations ...

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
 Quote:

That was precisely my point. It's humans doing the perceiving, and denoting the Forms. It seems simpler that the former is the cause and the latter the effect, as it were, rather than vice versa.

You as a human can perceive an apple and assign it a name & significance, but you did not pre-create the thing & its characteristics.


That's a physical object, not a Form. Humans create Forms, usually assigning them an abstract average of desirable qualities. They can also change them, for instance by saying tomato is fruit, not vegetable; in that case, scientists have one version of the Form "fruit", while the layman, who still thinks of tomato as veg, has another.
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

Top
#61054 - 11/04/11 12:20 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Apeynon]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: Apeynon
Practical as in doing Occult, Satanic, rites and ceremonies with the aim of evoking and invoking Satan.


Okay, I suspected we were perhaps using the word practical in different ways. When I see it I think 'pragmatic' which certainly doesn't always apply when discussing things like greater magic (in practice, which is how you were using it).

I'm not sure I agree with your initial premise that people here either think that Satan exists symbolically or that there is a belief in a literal Satan. Certainly some of the most vocal people here are atheists who resonate with a symbolic Satan and I would be loathe to suggest that any of them haven't thought well through their own particular positions.

For myself, I would like to use the term agnostic though completely removed from any religious framework. That is a fancy way, I suppose, of saying that I simply don't know. Certainly I don't believe in an anthropomorphic being, good or evil. I can see, though, something that appears to reveal itself as a higher level of order. I suppose some would call this nature or biology or perhaps even natural order but since my unsophisticated brain cannot fathom how it all came to be, all I can do is to continue investigating it and trying to work out how it applies to me.

Anyway, personally, I have been engaged in ritual magic for quite some time and to what I would call a good effect. Unlike Dr. Aquino, I have not experienced anything through ritual that I would call an intelligence outside of myself and separate of the mortal coil. I suppose I continue with this sort of thing because I do enjoy the process and it allows me time during my exceedingly busy life to pause and reflect on things important to me.

Finally, I wouldn't call Aquino an idiot as I've learned much from his insights on my own personal path (as I have from many others here at 600). I've come across others who also believe in a literal deity that I wouldn't call idiotic either. My assignation of that term depends wholly upon the person and their actions.

I do think you'll find, if you search the 'Satanism' forum, many discussions around greater magical practice and who has and hasn't participated in it and why or why not. I may be misreading you, but it appears as if you've dropped in on your first post, to defend Dr. Aquino and have made some assumptions about the population at large here. If this is the case then I can assure you that it's not a wise move.



Top
#61055 - 11/04/11 01:15 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Apeynon]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1638
Loc: Orlando, FL
Firstly, many of us here have different views of Satan that rest outside the illusory "he's either a red guy with horns, or doesn't exist period" conflict. I'd elaborate, but all you would really need to do is fish around the forum a bit more to get a good picture.

 Quote:
What I'm basically asking is if those who believe that Satan is symbolic and that Satanism is therefore just some personal heretical praxis, have ever done such practical Occult rites and ceremonies.


Some people have, some people haven't. Even the Order of Nine Angles has many non-occultists in its ranks, who resonate with its radical ideology, but haven't touched a tarot deck in their lives. Others practice ritual occasionally, but don't see it as being that important in the big picture.

 Quote:
If they haven't such practical Occult experience, then how have they arrived at their conclusions about Satan? By reason alone?


Naturally, one must rely on reason when gnosis is not available. An agnostic or hard Atheist, therefore, must rely solely on reason (and occasionally emotion).

In the past, "Satanism" was synonymous with heresy and antinomianism, not just magical rituals or the religious worship of the Devil (the latter, in fact, was not widely grouped in with "Satanism" proper until modern times). There is also a certain literary/artistic current which has been called "Satanic" (ala Blake, Shelly, Baudelaire).

So there exists a clear case for non-occult interpretations of Satanism.... which, of course, isn't appealing to somebody who has spent the last three decades insisting otherwise for the sole purpose of retroactively justifying some quarrel that happened in the stone age.

 Quote:
Also, and I may be wrong, but I get the impression from what Aquino has said in this thread - and elsewhere - that he's not only done such practical Occult stuff but that his practical Occult experience extends over decades.

Is that practical experience therefore the basis for his belief, or not? If so, then perhaps his beliefs are not as unfounded as some here seem to think.


Such "basis" is about as firmly-grounded as every other New Age guru who claims to have received some Aeonic revelation from a deity. There is nothing particularly amazing about performing lots of rituals, either. Crowley seemed to live his life in the magic circle, but even he was (quite often) full of shit, and prone to vain obfuscating.

If I believed in the traditional hermetic demonology, I would go so far as to say that Aquino (and Crowley, by extension) must have gotten crank-called by some bored aerial spirit.


Edited by The Zebu (11/04/11 01:18 PM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#61056 - 11/04/11 03:24 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: William Wright]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2399
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: William Wright
you’re sort of like the Howard Stern of the 600 Club.



 Quote:
I still, for the life of me, don’t understand what is so great about being a Satanic/Setian Priest ... So what’s the payoff? How is “apprehending Satan/Set” better than simply “being your own Satan” and living life on your own terms?

It's not an option, but something that happens to you which you either assimilate or not, depending upon your intelligence and capacity to comprehend it. Perhaps the best example I could give you is the experience of Nicholas Urfe in John Fowles' The Magus, who certainly does not seek Election but undergoes it nonetheless. The novel also discusses two other individuals who were exposed to Conchis' masque: one who completely lacked the capacity to comprehend it, and another whose psyche it so overwhelmed that he collapsed into a Catholic monastery.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#61057 - 11/04/11 03:36 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Apeynon]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2399
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Apeynon
I get the impression from what Aquino has said in this thread - and elsewhere - that he's not only done such practical Occult stuff but that his practical Occult experience extends over decades. Is that practical experience therefore the basis for his belief, or not? If so, then perhaps his beliefs are not as unfounded as some here seem to think.

Yes, you can overview my experience in The Church of Satan & The Temple of Set on my webpage, and Black Magic on the same page discusses how what I have learned may be applied by others.

And also yes, Black Magic is something you actually have to do, not just jawbone about. This applies to both its Greater and Lesser versions.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#61058 - 11/04/11 03:41 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino

It's not an option, but something that happens to you which you either assimilate or not, depending upon your intelligence and capacity to comprehend it. Perhaps the best example I could give you is the experience of Nicholas Urfe in John Fowles' The Magus, who certainly does not seek Election but undergoes it nonetheless. The novel also discusses two other individuals who were exposed to Conchis' masque: one who completely lacked the capacity to comprehend it, and another whose psyche it so overwhelmed that he collapsed into a Catholic monastery.



Could you explain the difference to me between this capacity and intellect to comprehend and the "need to believe" requirement in other religions?

I have a hard time seeing the difference since in both cases, the premise is built upon similar arguments while the acceptance of this premise both require the same sort of belief factor.

We could call it capacity or required intelligence but since evidence isn't a factor, these labels do not mean very much.

D.

Top
#61059 - 11/04/11 04:03 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Autodidact]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2399
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Autodidact
Nope, same error ... etc.

I could take the time and the threadspace to patiently go through this again with you, but I simply don't think we're connecting; and I am not interested in playing word games. Just deal with yourself to your own satisfaction.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#61060 - 11/04/11 04:08 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Apeynon]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me people are giving Aquino a hard time here because he accepts that Satan is real, while everyone else here appears to accept that Satan is symbolic and then go on to say that those who don't accept Satan being symbolic are delusional or just plain idiots.


You're wrong. The issue here is not that he has imaginary friends; people can believe in whatever stupid shit they want. The problem is that he is a patronizing douche bag and has been off and on since his appearance here a few years ago.

If he wouldn't constantly call all people who don't believe in Satan "posers", maintain that Satan/Set/whatever exists with nothing to back it up but his same old tired writings and dance around issues with pointless links and silly emoticons, there wouldn't be a problem. However, he does all of those things, so there is a problem.

 Quote:
Which leads me to ask - how do they arrive at this conclusion about Satan? Have they, as I assume Aquino has done, done many effective and practical Satanic rituals to evoke Satan?


Logic, reasoning, critical thinking. I don't perform rituals because I don't feel the need to. Especially not to try and contact some imaginary being.

 Quote:
What I'm basically asking is if those who accept the symbolic interpretation of Satan have done practical Satanic stuff or not?


I do "practical" stuff almost every day. Except for days like today when I don't have school. On those days I don't do much of anything.

 Quote:
If they haven't, then aren't they just making an assumption about Satan based on a lack of practical Occult rituals?


No. Ritual proves nothing. It someone performs a ritual during which they have a conversation with Satan, Janis Joplin or Count Chocula, that is only evidence of an active imagination and nothing more.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#61061 - 11/04/11 04:09 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Diavolo]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2399
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Could you explain the difference to me between this capacity and intellect to comprehend and the "need to believe" requirement in other religions?

I would again recommend that you read Fowles' The Magus to see the difference. There is no "need to believe" anything therein. Nor have I ever felt any such "need" in my own odyssey, as it were.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#61063 - 11/04/11 04:19 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
I would again recommend that you read Fowles' The Magus to see the difference. There is no "need to believe" anything therein. Nor have I ever felt any such "need" in my own odyssey, as it were.


Excluding you who have "experienced" Set, to anyone else, it does require belief.

To someone like me, all I have to form my opinion upon is words. That what Set said to you, or that what you (and others) said about Set. But there is no concrete evidence that I might take into consideration which implies that if I embrace it, I embrace it purely upon faith.

This implies there is a "need to belief".

D.

Top
#61064 - 11/04/11 04:58 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Diavolo]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2399
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
I would again recommend that you read Fowles' The Magus to see the difference. There is no "need to believe" anything therein. Nor have I ever felt any such "need" in my own odyssey, as it were.

Excluding you who have "experienced" Set, to anyone else, it does require belief.

No, you could, for instance, become a Setian and an Adept in using the tools and resources the Temple provides. You could limit yourself to LBM if you prefer. Many Setians do this indefinitely and are completely comfortable thus. Indeed the Priesthood of Set is, like its predecessor, not something that can be deliberately sought or applied for in any case. It either finds you or it doesn't.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#61065 - 11/04/11 05:06 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Diavolo]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3060
 Quote:
Could you explain the difference to me between this capacity and intellect to comprehend and the "need to believe" requirement in other religions?

The differentiation lies in the idea that the "need to believe" is an automated reaction of people to make and interprete the world around more digestable. It is simple indulgence without making any depth or action. It is a means to dumb down.
The capacity and intellect to comprehend is more over the path into a becomming, the harder way.

It could be said that the one is RHP (need to believe) whereas the other is LHP.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#61089 - 11/04/11 06:44 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Dimitri]
Octavian Offline
pledge


Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 81
The problem is that you cannot provide people with evidence of the existence of Set/Satan, as per some sort of scientific methodology.

Satan/Set must be personally apprehended or personally perceived or personally experienced, rather than confirmed through a process of reaching the truth, via the Objective Universe. If people can do this than they are Elect, candidates for the Priesthood.

I don't think belief has much to do with it. Either you apprehend or you don't. I cannot take this existence of Set/Satan, on faith, as that is not the way it works, whether you are a member of the Elect or, on the othet hand, a skeptical Atheist.

Being a member of the Priesthood of Set is still regarded as LHP, from what I understand, as it is an individual grail quest, but it is also a repudiation of faith and blind belief and an appreciation of a potentially unlimited I-theism. One must experience it for themselves and no amount of faith or belief in Set/Satan will do the trick. Genuine initiation must take place.

This apprehension necessarily involves an understanding that individual isolate consciousness is a particularisation of the form/universal. Maybe at this level individuality, or the sovereign individual, has been somehow supplanted by the possible "authority" of the neter, probably not though, not sure.

I imagine that trying to adequately describe what takes place during this apprehension, or this initiation, is difficult to do. I imagine that the words are limiting and not quite sufficient to adequately cover the meaning.

Dr. Aquino has mention the Fowles book, which is a masterpiece.

I would also suggest the book The Stars My Destination by Bester as a potentially useful book, for at least learning more about this. I am not sure if Dr. Aquino would agree with this book choice.

Top
Page 12 of 14 « First<1011121314>


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

Generated in 0.031 seconds of which 0.004 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.