#60659 - 10/30/11 10:59 PM
Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway?
[Re: Michael A.Aquino]
|
The Zebu
senior member
Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1647
Loc: Orlando, FL
|
As for my standing to speak for who is and is not a Satanist, I was an ordained Priest of Mendes III° and ultimately as a Magister Templi IV° the single highest Initiate of the Church next to Anton himself. So yes, actually, I think I am better qualified than anyone else on this planet to authenticate those who claim to take Satan's name.
And who do you think ordained you, and patched together the arbitrary psuedo-hierophancy into which you were ordained? Wait for it....
You sound like an 80s Wiccan at this point, going on about who-initiated-who like you're the heir to some unbroken ancient heritage handed down by Old Nick himself, when in reality you were just a bunch of nerds reading secondhand library books making everything up as you went along.
And also, you are far from the highest living authority on Satanism. You bailed out early in the game, and in the decades since then, countless other Satanists have gained more Sinister insight and experience than you ever could hope to have.
Many Satanists (myself included) are willing to give you a tip of the hat out of sheer respect, but please don't push your luck.
When you call yourself a "Satanist" to others, they naturally assume that you believe in and worship the Devil.
And when you say you are a Setian, they will give you a blank stare, and maybe ask if you're in "that weird Tom Cruise religion".
Furthermore, by that logic, should we start eating babies and sacrificing virgins because that's what Satanists are "supposed" to do?
Besides, I think most of us know what we're getting into when we take the title upon ourselves, nor do we care terribly for any innocent misconceptions the profane might make about our individual paths.
It is a question of personal intellectual honesty.
Any intellectually honest person knows that words have different layers of meaning. It is possible to accept the depth of Satanism without being afraid of ontological anarchy-- you should try it sometime.
Honestly, you're starting to sound like my granduncle, a stereotypical old man who often subjected me to half-senile rants about why modern music isn't actually "music" just because it doesn't sound like the stuff he listened to when he was younger.
Edited by The Zebu (10/30/11 11:24 PM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#60660 - 10/30/11 11:54 PM
Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway?
[Re: The Zebu]
|
Michael A.Aquino
stalker
Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2711
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
|
Dr. Aquino, could you speak at any length about Satanism without referring to your heyday in the CoS? You seem to be preoccupied with the ToS/CoS split several decades ago, which really isn't relevant to many forum members here, aside from a couple of old-timers like Jake.
My interest and credentials in Satanism per se derive specifically from my Priesthood and experience within the consecrated, literal Church of Satan 1966-75. Thereafter I went beyond its Judæo/Christian limitations finally and completely, as I think that any intelligent individual would do, having explored them as far as we did in those ten years.
So for the last 36 years I have never called myself a "Satanist". I see this term's continued use by others as either a sincere-but-limited aspiration (such as energized us in the Church) or more casually since the 1980s as a mere glamor affectation: the stuff of rock concerts and T-shirt Baphomets.
What interests me in this is the realization that many such expressions are a symptom of some individuals' isolate consciousnesses, of which, within a J/C cultural idiom, Satan is the personification.
Indeed, as I have mentioned before, I sense a great deal of this metamorphosis among 600Cers. Including from several of those who yell the loudest that they are locked into dead-end [not a bad double entendre] Atheism/materialism. Without this dawning realization of a great adventure awaiting them, what is the point of this forum? Just to natter on about amusing irrelevancies with other dead-enders? No, it's that weird, unique rush you get when you click on this URL and see that faint Baphomet staring back at you from atop the page.
Take Jake's anger at me above. What did I say about him that wasn't accurate? Yet his self-assessment is, I think, significantly beyond that of an ASLV-groupie. He sensed, I suspect, a significance in Anton LaVey that trancended his intelligence, personalty, and eccentricity: a door to the essence of humanity that he, however oddly, had found and pried open. Indeed I rather think that if Jake and I were discussing our frustrations over coffee, we'd find them to be much the same. And if either of us were asked about Anton "Why did you give that con-man the time of day?", both of us would feel an educational answer utterly beyond the questioner.
I think Diavolo's and other' posts have illustrated the breadth of Satanism categorically, that exist outside the basic models espoused by the pre/post '75 CoS. What is your response to these, such as the article quoted from Anton Long?
As amply demonstrated throughout COS, I am well aware that authentic Satanism was, and primitively still is, a function of the isolate consciousness in many cultures, including of course non-J/C ones. Wherever and whenever this impulse has surfaced, under whatever name, it is ultimately the same phenomenon.
This is an entirely different matter than merely generating excuses for glam-exploitation of the terms "Satanism/Satanist" by people who have not been driven by this ecstatic introspection, but just want a sinister social image.
As for David Myatt's writings, ask the ONAers here.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#60663 - 10/31/11 01:09 AM
Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway?
[Re: Michael A.Aquino]
|
Octavian
pledge
Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 81
|
Dr, I sometimes really wish I could make that connection between my own unique isolate consciousness and a form/principle/Neter of isolate consciousness. If there is such a thing as a step across the abyss then that may be it for me, at least at this time.
I cannot quite apprehend Satan in the way you mention, though those who resonate with Satan I think necessarily engage in a form of becoming, of a process of moving ever towards greatness and individuated divinity, toward greater consciouness.
For better or worse it is all based on Atheism/materialism for me. As I mentioned above I feel that Satan is the silent other underneath the imposed definitions. Satan is the darkness within the immature characterisations, the doodlings and the drawings. It is this consciousness of Satan which interests me, along with other qualities of course.
Your invitation to apprehend the universal/form is the most challenging invitation I have been provided with here.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#60665 - 10/31/11 01:51 AM
Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway?
[Re: Octavian]
|
Jake999
senior member
Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
|
Aardvark boy fails to mention that he gained those grand titles he so proudly proclaims as a member in good standing of the Church of Satan. When he left, they did not follow him in any way, except in his mind. He has NO standing. None. The only titles and associations he can rightfully claim are those he no holds by granting them to himself under the auspices of the Temple of Set. That and a buck will get you a cup of coffee in most cheap donut shops.
Really, man, have you no shame? You've reduced yourself to a joke here and probably elsewhere on the web as well. That's right. People ARE laughing at you. The cartoon I put up once of LaVey calling you a "Putz" was indeed farcical on its face, but how he came to see you.
To assume that you would anger me with your bullshit is farcical itself. You are a clown and a disgrace. You are a pompous, swaggering hot air bag whose entire
post 1975 life has been dedicated to self promotion at the expense of others. You've been shown to be a fraud, but in true Aquino fashion, think that people will ignore your bullshit be cause after all, you are "Mikey," which is what we called you post 1975... not Dr., or Magister or Priest... "Mikey."
I personally see you as pathetic, but I don't pity you. You've made yourself look like a damned fool. And now you wallow in it. I also personally think you might very well have been gay for LaVey... sorry, Charlie, but the boss didn't swing that way.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#60676 - 10/31/11 06:47 AM
Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway?
[Re: Antigod]
|
Dimitri
stalker
Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3303
|
I like Satanism, but isn't it pretty much what people do by default if their minds haven't been corrupted by religious crap? I mean, isn't it basically atheism with rituals?
No it is not.
If it were Atheism with rituals it would be called along the lines of "ritualistic Atheism" or some blend of (a)gnosticism.
I can follow mikey with his statement of "believing in Satan to be Satanist", but it should be added that the interpretation of Satan is up to the readers own (dis)liking.
Edited by Dimitri (10/31/11 06:51 AM)
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#60679 - 10/31/11 08:11 AM
Jake vs. Aquino, round ??
[Re: Michael A.Aquino]
|
Jason King
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member
Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
|
Does it make Jake a Satanist? Not unless Jake's actual allegiance and dedication was to Satan, not Anton. Otherwise, strictly speaking, he is an "Anton LaVeyist".
To me, this really nailed it. Not just the interpersonal thing, but the OP as well. Philosophers generally refer to themselves by school, which tend to be named after their founder(s) - e.g. a follower of Immanuel Kant is a Kantian; a follower of Aristotle is an Aristotelian. Religionists tend to refer to themselves by deity/tribe/dogma - e.g. a worshiper of the Cosmic Christ is a Christian; one who submits to Allah is a Muslim (one who submits . . .).
Now what does that make a Satanist? Was Satan a philosopher? Milton may be so dignified, and his character may have reached heights (depths) of understanding, but at the end of the day, there was never a "Satan Black," philosopher. In fact, the roots of LaVeyan philosophy are both well known and well documented. One part Epicurean, one part Randian (objectivist), one part Desmond . . . hell, just get an old SB or read Flowers' Lords of the Left Hand Path, chapter 9 (lol).
Here's what Aquino was saying (I think), and why it matters:
If a person self-designates as a "Satanist," then they should have some metaphysical reason for doing so. If their reasons are only romantic, vis a vis a literary figure reinterpreted, then perhaps they should adopt a better label. One more apt to their personal worldview.
Why? Well, in this case, I could ask why a person would choose the single greatest cultural Albatross in existence as their religious totem? Just because society took a shit on you?
"I'm a Satanist because God picked on Satan and I was picked on and I wear all black and listen to death metal and have a lot of piercings and I'm really into the Satanic Bible because it describes my angst perfectly and . . ."
How many times have we seen this exact dude (chick)? Anywho . . .
When I look to systems which intuit metaphysical vergences of Satan, I look first to Howard Bloom. Not Anton LaVaey. He was born a generation too early.
Any real Satanism must begin with a foundational understanding that the world is metaphysically adversarial. Not that it is un-anything, but that it is exactly what it is: The strong win, and the weak lose. And that this fact is given as the UR-philosophy of Satanism. Not because some dude said so, or "codified" anything, but because it is just the Nature of things.
And then, one might begin to get how such a thing is called a GOD.
JK
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#60680 - 10/31/11 08:24 AM
Re: Jake vs. Aquino, round ??
[Re: Jason King]
|
Diavolo
RIP
stalker
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
|
Any real Satanism must begin with a foundational understanding that the world is metaphysically adversarial. Not that it is un-anything, but that it is exactly what it is: The strong win, and the weak lose. And that this fact is given as the UR-philosophy of Satanism. Not because some dude said so, or "codified" anything, but because it is just the Nature of things. And then, one might begin to get how such a thing is called a GOD.
Not that I disagree but in such a case, one embraces true (or blind) adversarialism if one embraces Satanism. It's not that you then can pick and choose your Satan as done in what could be considered romantic Satanism. This is a process that just is, without any limitation. Milton's Satan is just as much as Set, as countless others, just someone's personal Jesus.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#60685 - 10/31/11 11:29 AM
Re: Jake vs. Aquino, round ??
[Re: Diavolo]
|
Dan_Dread
stalker
Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3975
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
|
I too agree that Satan is important to Satanism. From where I sit though, walking his walk, the walk that has been defined as evil, wrong, adversarial, transgressive, antinomian, heterodox, etc right here in the real is far more meaningful than assigning him to something as arbitrary as being self aware.
That whole 'man is uniquely special because he has been favoured and blessed by a diety' mess is best left to those other guys anyway.
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: SkaffenAmtiskaw, fakepropht, TV is God, Woland, Asmedious, Fist
|
|
