Thelema and "S...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Thelema and "Satanism"

Page 1 / 3

Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

Does anyone see LaVeyan Satanism as a subset of Thelema?    They certainly share the moral nihilism,  the atheism ("there is no God ,Devil or afterlife" - Peter Gilmore high priest of Satansim)  and war on all psychical repression (Crowley himself described the attainment of the HGA as peeling back the repressions in the mind) .  Although both are advocates of  scepticism there is one point of contention though which is that Satanists take credit for any metaphysical curse that appears to have worked which, to me reneges upon their sceptical objectivism.    They share the war on Abrahamic sin  ("The word of sin is restriction")  and both appear to recognize and accept, with honesty the harsh ways of Nature as the directive of evolution("stamp down the wretched and the weak") etc .  .

Nietzsche is held in very high regard by both (Crowley called Nietzsche, "almost an avatar of Thoth") and the hatred for weakness and (Judeao-christian)  slave morality in both philosophies is paramount.      I was watching these various TV interviews with some spokespersons for Satanism  ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ltr2-JkDfOA) including Boyd Rice and Nikolas Schreck.  The latter says the following, "we reflect what is beautiful in Nature","we would like to see most of the human race killed off as it is unworthy of life", we are forming an elite master race."

Circa 40m40s Schrek says that the Thule society and the third reich were big inspirations and says that Nazism was a rare moment in the 20th century when humanity's full potential (the predatory instinct in man) was fully unleashed and since 1945 the world has declined into weakness, corruption and decadence and he is optimistic about the return of order and authoritareanism.  He then goes on to talk about the Manson File which he claims is an objective documentation of our one time Beach Boy.  Then, in all seriousness he proclaims that Manson was, "one of the most important thinkers of the 20th century" (at this point I am searching for a ROTFL icon but to no avail) "and has previously been dismissed as a madman or a psychopath." 

There's lots of other points in this movie you may find interesting including the Tate murders as a ritualistic end to the false compassion movement of the hippies and discussions about a small evolutionary elite who have always existed and been misunderstood and represented as werewolves and vampires  so on.

Anyway here is a list of the official Nine Satanic Sins

Stupidity

The top of the list for Satanic Sins. The Cardinal Sin of Satanism. It’s too bad that stupidity isn’t painful. Ignorance is one thing, but our society thrives increasingly on stupidity. It depends on people going along with whatever they are told. The media promotes a cultivated stupidity as a posture that is not only acceptable but laudable. Satanists must learn to see through the tricks and cannot afford to be stupid.

2. Pretentiousness

Empty posturing can be most irritating and isn’t applying the cardinal rules of Lesser Magic. On equal footing with stupidity for what keeps the money in circulation these days. Everyone’s made to feel like a big shot, whether they can come up with the goods or not.

3. Solipsism

Can be very dangerous for Satanists. Projecting your reactions, responses and sensibilities onto someone who is probably far less attuned than you are. It is the mistake of expecting people to give you the same consideration, courtesy and respect that you naturally give them. They won’t. Instead, Satanists must strive to apply the dictum of “Do unto others as they do unto you.” It’s work for most of us and requires constant vigilance lest you slip into a comfortable illusion of everyone being like you. As has been said, certain utopias would be ideal in a nation of philosophers, but unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately, from a Machiavellian standpoint) we are far from that point.

4. Self-deceit

It’s in the “Nine Satanic Statements” but deserves to be repeated here. Another cardinal sin. We must not pay homage to any of the sacred cows presented to us, including the roles we are expected to play ourselves. The only time self-deceit should be entered into is when it’s fun, and with awareness. But then, it’s not self-deceit!

5. Herd Conformity

That’s obvious from a Satanic stance. It’s all right to conform to a person’s wishes, if it ultimately benefits you. But only fools follow along with the herd, letting an impersonal entity dictate to you. The key is to choose a master wisely instead of being enslaved by the whims of the many.

6. Lack of Perspective

Again, this one can lead to a lot of pain for a Satanist. You must never lose sight of who and what you are, and what a threat you can be, by your very existence. We are making history right now, every day. Always keep the wider historical and social picture in mind. That is an important key to both Lesser and Greater Magic. See the patterns and fit things together as you want the pieces to fall into place. Do not be swayed by herd constraints—know that you are working on another level entirely from the rest of the world.

7. Forgetfulness of Past Orthodoxies

Be aware that this is one of the keys to brainwashing people into accepting something new and different, when in reality it’s something that was once widely accepted but is now presented in a new package. We are expected to rave about the genius of the creator and forget the original. This makes for a disposable society.

8. Counterproductive Pride

That first word is important. Pride is great up to the point you begin to throw out the baby with the bathwater. The rule of Satanism is: if it works for you, great. When it stops working for you, when you’ve painted yourself into a corner and the only way out is to say, I’m sorry, I made a mistake, I wish we could compromise somehow, then do it.

9. Lack of Aesthetics

This is the physical application of the Balance Factor. Aesthetics is important in Lesser Magic and should be cultivated. It is obvious that no one can collect any money off classical standards of beauty and form most of the time so they are discouraged in a consumer society, but an eye for beauty, for balance, is an essential Satanic tool and must be applied for greatest magical effectiveness. It’s not what’s supposed to be pleasing—it’s what is. Aesthetics is a personal thing, reflective of one’s own nature, but there are universally pleasing and harmonious configurations that should not be denied.


Quote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

The philosophy of The church of Satan is pragmatic and sound,and it also abhors herd mentality. Take stupidity for instance. Statistics from IQ-tests shows that the people on the upper half of the scale are more prone to atheism. Although there are Mensa people in all races, there should be a higher percentage of really smart people in countries population where the average is high.
Just look at the arabian - brainwashed - countries. The arabian country with highest average is Iraq with a 87 average ( http://www.alsumaria.tv/news/86956/international-study-iraqis-are-the-smart/en). Is this a coincedence? Shouldn't we strive to better ourselves, to strive for the "superman" and create a society that is closer to an ideal (wholesome political with humanethical basis) than many of the countries in arabia, and some of the societies in europe, which are pretty far away from their potential due to rotten parlamentary systems where the government are several parties, put together, which differ politically? Dispersed powerless politically. Compromised, Noonday societies. This is how I would describe some the best nations in the world today, measured by life quality (Norway for instance; although the constellation of parties joint together in the last election wasn't too bad; the government is a constellation of two right sided parties - I wish they had a bit more workspace though). Liebe Nietzsche. It's time to move away from the naive, left party, hippie movement which govern parts of the world today.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5703
 
"david" wrote:
Does anyone see LaVeyan Satanism as a subset of Thelema?

No - not in my temple.

Wikipedia: "... the founder of LaVeyan Satanism, a synthesized system of his understanding of human nature and the insights of philosophers who advocated materialism and individualism, for which he claimed no supernatural or theistic inspiration."

No supernatural, no Aiwass, no HGA, No Thelema, No "Subset."


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4119
 
"Kharlatan" wrote:
It's time to move away from the naive, left party, hippie movement which govern parts of the world today.

As a matter of interest, Kharlatan, which countries do you regard as being governed today by "the naive, left party, hippie movement"?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Norway was governed by a left sided government, also Germany was, if I remember right, and Sweden is on it's way into one. I understand your point: there's a right wing wave swiping over Europe now a days (early days:). Stil the political systems aren't efficient and too much is left to chance (the market is dictating too much which - I know - traditionally is a result of right wing politics).


ReplyQuote
William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1091
 

obviously Schreck hasn't read Hannah Arendt.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"david" wrote:
Does anyone see LaVeyan Satanism as a subset of Thelema?

I think LaVey was influenced by Crowley to some extent, and obviously -- as you point out -- there are a lot of ways in which Thelema and LaVeyan Satanism are compatible (atheism, non-supernaturalism, moral nihilism, taking Satan as an inspirational character, exalting the Self, etc.). I'm sure there are plenty of people who style themselves as both Thelemites and LaVeyan Satanists.

But technically speaking, Satanism can't be a "subset" of Thelema because Satanism doesn't specifically have the idea of a "True Will." I'd say it's a compatible philosophy. Personally, I like some aspects of Satanism, and I dislike other aspects of it (the name, for starters....).


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"Kharlatan" wrote:
Take stupidity for instance. Statistics from IQ-tests shows that the people on the upper half of the scale are more prone to atheism.

For what it's worth, there could also be a lot of causal factors at play here, including social class. People who are born into wealthier families might tend to be less religious because they have less of a need to turn to supernatural beliefs to make up for their lack of material comfort. Wealthier families also tend to have access to more and better education. That's one example of a way that higher intelligence and low religiosity could both be independently caused by a third factor, rather than causing each other.

some of the societies in europe, which are pretty far away from their potential due to rotten parlamentary systems where the government are several parties, put together, which differ politically? Dispersed powerless politically. Compromised, Noonday societies.

This seems overly simplistic. No government is perfect, so they all could theoretically be improved, but it seems a big leap from there to claim that cooperative parliamentary systems are the cause of...whatever you're complaining about.

Personally, I'd rather have various parties cooperating than have one viewpoint making all the decisions.

It's time to move away from the naive, left party, hippie movement which govern parts of the world today.

This is a pretty weird comment because there aren't many governments that I would describe as "naïve" or "hippy." In fact, I can't think of any. As far as "left" goes, here in the good ol' USA, political pundits tend to call any politician in the center (or just right of center) a "socialist."


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5703
 
"Kharlatan" wrote:
Norway was governed by a left sided government...

When was that? Forbes tells us "Norway ... ranked 1st overall on the 2012 Legatum Institute Prosperity Index. It also ranked 1st in Social Capital and 2nd in Economy."

Germany was, if I remember right ...

What? You're equating Nazis with Hippies?

Sweden is on it's way into one.

Forbes (again) says, "Sweden's overall rank has climbed from 7th [in happiest countries] in 2009 to 3rd this year. The nation ranks 2nd in Entrepreneurship and Opportunity."
Leftist Hippies are happy people, er, countries?

... the political systems aren't efficient and too much is left to chance ...

(^) This description sort of describes almost every political sysyem. The only ones that are "efficient" are those that clamp down hard and stay in rigid, dictatorial control. For example, see North Korea (efficient, no chance to buck the system, brutal).

(the market is dictating too much which - I know - traditionally is a result of right wing politics).

The "market" governs (almost) everything, everywhere. Even godless China is seeking Market Superiority. The only guys who don't care about the market are those Jihadists ... and maybe some indigenous folks in the Amazon, in deepest Afrika, and way up north in Eskimo land.

But where are the Hippies governing? I may want to go there. I thought the American Hippie 60s were just great.


Those were the days my friend ... I thought they'd never end
But they did[/align:1pzi3sn6]

And what does this have to do with Satanist LaVey? Ha! They (the evil "they") call Crowley a Satanist, but that's a joke ... compared to LaVey.

[/align:1pzi3sn6]


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Shiva" wrote:
And what does this have to do with Satanist LaVey? Ha! They (the evil "they") call Crowley a Satanist, but that's a joke ... compared to LaVey.

[.jpg[/img]

"Shiva" wrote:
"david" wrote:
Does anyone see LaVeyan Satanism as a subset of Thelema?

No - not in my temple.

Wikipedia: "... the founder of LaVeyan Satanism, a synthesized system of his understanding of human nature and the insights of philosophers who advocated materialism and individualism, for which he claimed no supernatural or theistic inspiration."

No supernatural, no Aiwass, no HGA, No Thelema, No "Subset."

Ok but what about any similarities in the philosophies?  Do you see any?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Michael Staley" wrote:
"Kharlatan" wrote:
It's time to move away from the naive, left party, hippie movement which govern parts of the world today.

As a matter of interest, Kharlatan, which countries do you regard as being governed today by "the naive, left party, hippie movement"?

Are there any, "leftist" countries now?  Britain certainly isn't.  The shell of the once predominantly union funded party now accepts corporate funding.  Once Maggie sold off the utility monopolies, democratized union ballots and encouraged the bolstering of a newer lower middle entrepreneurial class we were completely Americanized.  Anyone who spouts leftist views now in Britain is laughed off as a dinosaur.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Los" wrote:
But technically speaking, Satanism can't be a "subset" of Thelema because Satanism doesn't specifically have the idea of a "True Will." I'd say it's a compatible philosophy. Personally, I like some aspects of Satanism, and I dislike other aspects of it (the name, for starters....).

Yes there is no definite "True Will" concept in Satanism as far as I can see however as I said in the OP,  Satanism's end seems to be the elimination of all psychical repression and Crowley himself described the attainment of the HGA as peeling back the repressions in the mind.  Can those two processes be equated therefore?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Shiva" wrote:
But where are the Hippies governing? I may want to go there. I thought the American Hippie 60s were just great.
Those were the days my friend ... I thought they'd never end

You are a Thelemite I think it would be fair to categorize you in that way would it not?  You say the 60s and the hippies were great.  If you go to 45m50s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ltr2-JkDfOA in the interview, Schreck explains a ceremony he and others performed which celebrated the Tate murders and the death of the 60s hippy movement. The celebration represented, for them an end to a movement which promoted,"compassion for the weak, peace for it's own sake and pacifism that breeds stagnation."  Do you think that those ceremonial principles could be said to have been wholly Thelemic, totally in alignment with Liber Al? 


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

In terms of the True Self (whose dynamic aspect is the True Will) Schreck describes ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ltr2-JkDfOA  47m25s) the next evolutionary step.  This is the new, "demonic way of life" brought on by Satanism and Occultism in which he describes the resurgence of Plato's daemon, its energy, its fire and how most people (automatons ) don't have it.  Sounds like Crowley's HGA concept and this also echoes the elitist concepts in Liber Al.

By the way apparently Schreck eventually renounced Satanism for Tibetan Buddhism.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4119
 
"david" wrote:
"Michael Staley" wrote:
"Kharlatan" wrote:
It's time to move away from the naive, left party, hippie movement which govern parts of the world today.

As a matter of interest, Kharlatan, which countries do you regard as being governed today by "the naive, left party, hippie movement"?

Are there any, "leftist" countries now?  Britain certainly isn't.  The shell of the once predominantly union funded party now accepts corporate funding.  Once Maggie sold off the utility monopolies, democratized union ballots and encouraged the bolstering of a newer lower middle entrepreneurial class we were completely Americanized.  Anyone who spouts leftist views now in Britain is laughed off as a dinosaur.

What rubbish you talk. Go to the Guardian website and you will see plenty of what yoiu call "leftist" views articulated without anyone labelling them "dinosaur". Christ, you sound like a tabloid newspaper.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5703
 
"david" wrote:
Ok but what about any similarities in the philosophies?  Do you see any?

Only that of "Individualism." The existential folks are into that.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5703
 
"david" wrote:
Satanism's end seems to be the elimination of all psychical repression.

Why that's exactly the declared aim of Scientology. It's interesting how many concepts are alike ... we can even add Psychology.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Michael Staley" wrote:
"david" wrote:
"Michael Staley" wrote:
"Kharlatan" wrote:
It's time to move away from the naive, left party, hippie movement which govern parts of the world today.

As a matter of interest, Kharlatan, which countries do you regard as being governed today by "the naive, left party, hippie movement"?

Are there any, "leftist" countries now?  Britain certainly isn't.  The shell of the once predominantly union funded party now accepts corporate funding.  Once Maggie sold off the utility monopolies, democratized union ballots and encouraged the bolstering of a newer lower middle entrepreneurial class we were completely Americanized.  Anyone who spouts leftist views now in Britain is laughed off as a dinosaur.

What rubbish you talk. Go to the Guardian website and you will see plenty of what yoiu call "leftist" views articulated without anyone labelling them "dinosaur". Christ, you sound like a tabloid newspaper.

What are you on about?  That was a bit knee-jerk of you.  There was nothing reactionary in what I said and duh, if I find my way to a leftist niche magazine then of course I'm going to find fringe views.  I was talking about realistic political forums.

Let me elaborate, reversing the privatization of the utility monopolies is cloud cuckoo land.  Old style state socialism is of the diplodocus.  Those middle class Guardian journalists are a bit hilarious really.  There is no popular  socialistic party in the UK anymore.  You remember Bliar,right?  We now have a two-tier big business Americanized political system.

Anyway maybe getting a bit away from the OP here.  Manson, Schreck, Satanism and whether they have anything to do with Thelema.  How about your views on that?


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4119
 

quote="david"]Those middle class Guardian journalists are a bit hilarious really.

Nowhere near as hilarious as you, with your sweeping generalisations.

"david" wrote:
Anyway maybe getting a bit away from the OP here.  Manson, Schreck, Satanism and whether they have anything to do with Thelema.  How about your views on that?

No, I don't believe there is a connection.

Why do you mention Manson in this context? Elsewhere you seemed to suggest that the Sharon Tate murders were somehow the outcome of the "hippie movement". If Manson had been a banker, would that have tied in the Sharon Tate murders to banking?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Michael Staley" wrote:
q
Why do you mention Manson in this context? Elsewhere you seemed to suggest that the Sharon Tate murders were somehow the outcome of the "hippie movement". If Manson had been a banker, would that have tied in the Sharon Tate murders to banking?

Eh? They're not my theories or beliefs.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Michael Staley" wrote:
Why do you mention Manson in this context? Elsewhere you seemed to suggest that the Sharon Tate murders were somehow the outcome of the "hippie movement". If Manson had been a banker, would that have tied in the Sharon Tate murders to banking?

That guy Shreck, a LaVeyan Satanist spokesperson said that Manson was ,"one of the greatest thinkers of the 20th century."  I assume that Schreck thinks that Manson must be some sort of Satanist's ideal.  As you know LaVey was inspired by Crowley.  Maybe you never saw the bit in the video interview where Schreck discusses how the hippy movement was killed off along with Tate.  Satanism and hippies are each other's antithesis as hippy ideals are perceived as Satanists to be another version of Christian pity, compassion and peace.  This sounds very similar to the anti Christian passages in Liber Al wouldn't you say?  I'm not telling you I'm asking you. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh6my9e0NOw  53m51s  shows the connections between Sharon Tate (who was initiated as a witch by Alex Sanders during the making of an English move, "Eye of the devil") and Susan Atkins who acted as a vampire in  a performance given by the Church of Satan.  When I say connection I mean coincidence/alleged connection.  It is said that LaVey acted out a curse against the hippy movement the exact time of the Tate murders.  That is most probably BS after- the- event mystique mongering.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"david" wrote:
That guy Shreck, a LaVeyan Satanist spokesperson said that Manson was ,"one of the greatest thinkers of the 20th century."

lol. The guy who carves symbols into his forehead and gibbers incoherently when he's interviewed?

the hippy movement was killed off along with Tate. Satanism and hippies are each other's antithesis as hippy ideals are perceived as Satanists to be another version of Christian pity, compassion and peace.

Ai yai yai. See, these are the sort of "Satanic" ideas that I think are unbearably stupid.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Los" wrote:

the hippy movement was killed off along with Tate. Satanism and hippies are each other's antithesis as hippy ideals are perceived as Satanists to be another version of Christian pity, compassion and peace.

Ai yai yai. See, these are the sort of "Satanic" ideas that I think are unbearably stupid.

I think he was speaking metaphorically not literally as in investing some sort of metaphysical causality in the event.  Having said that I'm guessing that a lot of Satanists although materialistic and god-denying do seem to apply metaphysical causality to their spells.  Anyway, I mean, culturally speaking , the Tate murders (and the Altamont festival) did put major dampeners on the naivety of hippy dreams of achieving immanent, total change.  It was a shocking realization that not all of these folk- singing drop outs were playing naked in the mud and happily distributing flowers.  I guesse it was kind of like the Lord of the Flies novel come real.   


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

On the metaphysical causality issue in Satanism I have found The Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth, the seventh of which is
7. Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained

http://www.churchofsatan.com/eleven-rules-of-earth.php


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4119
 
"Los" wrote:
"david" wrote:
That guy Shreck, a LaVeyan Satanist spokesperson said that Manson was ,"one of the greatest thinkers of the 20th century."

lol. The guy who carves symbols into his forehead and gibbers incoherently when he's interviewed?

the hippy movement was killed off along with Tate. Satanism and hippies are each other's antithesis as hippy ideals are perceived as Satanists to be another version of Christian pity, compassion and peace.

Ai yai yai. See, these are the sort of "Satanic" ideas that I think are unbearably stupid.

"david" wrote:
"Los" wrote:

the hippy movement was killed off along with Tate. Satanism and hippies are each other's antithesis as hippy ideals are perceived as Satanists to be another version of Christian pity, compassion and peace.

Ai yai yai. See, these are the sort of "Satanic" ideas that I think are unbearably stupid.

I think he was speaking metaphorically not literally as in investing some sort of metaphysical causality in the event.  Having said that I'm guessing that a lot of Satanists although materialistic and god-denying do seem to apply metaphysical causality to their spells.  Anyway, I mean, culturally speaking , the Tate murders (and the Altamont festival) did put major dampeners on the naivety of hippy dreams of achieving immanent, total change.  It was a shocking realization that not all of these folk- singing drop outs were playing naked in the mud and happily distributing flowers.  I guesse it was kind of like the Lord of the Flies novel come real.   

I doubt that he was speaking metaphorically. I'd like to think however that he was being sarcastic when referring to Manson as "one of the greatest thinkers of the 20th century", but then again perhaps not.

I only encountered the man once, many years ago, at the launch of Sandy Robertson's Aleister Crowley Scrapbook at the Compendium Bookshop in Camden Town, London, in the late 1980s I think it was. Enter a man in Gothic evening dress with his face powdered white. He was inroduced to me by the owner of the bookshop, and stared at me as if I was supposed to be impressed. I remember thinking at the time "tosser", and nothing by or about him I've read since has ameliorated my view.

By the way, david, I'm sorry that in my haste I conflated his views on Manson and the Sharon Tate butchery with your own. I would, though, like to point out that not all hippies were "folk-singing drop-outs", though this was probably a smidgeon of satire on your part rather than yet another of those sweeping generalisations of which you are so enamoured.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"david" wrote:
I think he was speaking metaphorically not literally as in investing some sort of metaphysical causality in the event.

The stupid part isn't just the implication of "metaphysical causality," although sure that's part of it. It's also this rush to conflate any notion of "compassion and peace" with "hippy ideals" or "Christian ideals." It's almost as bad as what that clod Keith418 occasionally does around these parts: declare that any progressive or peaceful politics -- any "liberal leftist values," as he likes to say -- are somehow Christian. It's silly. Confucius stated the essence of Christ's Golden Rule long before there was a Christ. Was Confucius a Christian, then? A "hippy"? Words stop having any meaning when we paint with so broad and stupid a brush.

culturally speaking , the Tate murders (and the Altamont festival) did put major dampeners on the naivety of hippy dreams of achieving immanent, total change.

Did it? I really don't know enough about the cultural history, but I would have thought that lots and lots of social factors went into the transformations that moved the world out of the utopian dreams of the 60s. 


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

Christianity gets used as an umbrella term yes.

"Los" wrote:

culturally speaking , the Tate murders (and the Altamont festival) did put major dampeners on the naivety of hippy dreams of achieving immanent, total change.

Did it? I really don't know enough about the cultural history, but I would have thought that lots and lots of social factors went into the transformations that moved the world out of the utopian dreams of the 60s. 

I'd say it has been argued that it was a kind of nail in the coffin.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
 

OP by david on September 14, 2014, 02:54:49 pm :

Although both are advocates of  scepticism there is one point of contention though which is that Satanists take credit for any metaphysical curse that appears to have worked which, to me reneges upon their sceptical objectivism.

Yes, that would be cheating there! 😮

OP by david on September 14, 2014, 02:54:49 pm :

[…] Nazism was a rare moment in the 20th century when humanity's full potential (the predatory instinct in man) was fully unleashed and since 1945 the world has declined into weakness, corruption and decadence and he is optimistic about the return of order and authoritareanism.

Why, yes – Nazism/ totalitarianism means every individual following their own path – their own true will if you like (rather than that of the state) – I don't think!

OP by david on September 14, 2014, 02:54:49 pm :

Anyway here is a list of the official Nine Satanic Sins

"david" wrote:
On the metaphysical causality issue in Satanism I have found The Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth, the seventh of which is [...]

You and your lists!  You seem to go a bundle on them, don’t you david?!  How about letting us see one listing your top twelve lists? (joking)

OP by david on September 14, 2014, 02:54:49 pm :

Stupidity

The top of the list for Satanic Sins. The Cardinal Sin of Satanism. […]

Straight in at number one with a bullet… is Stupidity Silliness’s big brother??

OP by david on September 14, 2014, 02:54:49 pm :

2. Pretentiousness

Empty posturing can be most irritating and isn’t applying the cardinal rules of Lesser Magic. On equal footing with stupidity for what keeps the money in circulation these days. Everyone’s made to feel like a big shot, whether they can come up with the goods or not.

And dropping straight down from last week’s number one…
Ain’t that really a sort of productive Pride, though?

OP by david on September 14, 2014, 02:54:49 pm :

6. Lack of Perspective

Again, this one can lead to a lot of pain for a Satanist. You must never lose sight of who and what you are, and what a threat you can be, by your very existence. We are making history right now, every day. Always keep the wider historical and social picture in mind. That is an important key to both Lesser and Greater Magic. See the patterns and fit things together as you want the pieces to fall into place. Do not be swayed by herd constraints—know that you are working on another level entirely from the rest of the world.

Entering the charts at number six…  Seriously though, david, what do you see as the Lesser and Greater Magic here?  Any chance of some brief examples?

Reply #7 by Los on September 14, 2014, 09:22:50 pm:

Personally, I'd rather have various parties cooperating than have one viewpoint making all the decisions.

A bit like the O.T.O. (and the A.’. A.’.) ?! ;D

Reply #7 by Los on September 14, 2014, 09:22:50 pm:

As far as "left" goes, here in the good ol' USA, political pundits tend to call any politician in the center (or just right of center) a "socialist."

Yes, political pundits can be very stupid sometimes, can’t they?  (Don’t you mean “left of center”, or can this be some obscure witticism?)

Reply #8 by Shiva on September 14, 2014, 09:46:06 pm:
Quote
Germany was, if I remember right ...

What? You're equating Nazis with Hippies?

Surely Kharlatan was referring to a Post-war government here?  Or do you think he really equated Nazis with hippies – but if so, how??

Reply #8 by Shiva on September 14, 2014, 09:46:06 pm:

But where are the Hippies governing? I may want to go there.

Wasn’t that someplace called “Nutopia”? (I think John Lennon might have namechecked it on a record sleeve somewhere...)

"david" wrote:
[...] Schreck explains a ceremony he and others performed which celebrated the Tate murders [...] Do you think that those ceremonial principles could be said to have been wholly Thelemic, totally in alignment with Liber Al?

No, of course not.  How can “a ceremony […] performed which celebrated the Tate murders” be compatible and in alignment with the message of Life, Love, Liberty and Light?  Although Shreck would seem to be advocating an extreme perversion of the “git well ‘ard” school of magic, which is basically immature & adolescent (if that wasn’t an insult and unfair to adolescents.)  And not to trivialize or downsize the matter, to paraphrase David Bowie: that wasn’t rock’n’roll, that was homicide.  It was an atrocity, there can be no other word for it, and arguably anybody “celebrating” it cannot therefore be a true Thelemite.  How can you justify it?

"Los" wrote:

culturally speaking , the Tate murders (and the Altamont festival) did put major dampeners on the naivety of hippy dreams of achieving immanent, total change.

Did it? I really don't know enough about the cultural history, but I would have thought that lots and lots of social factors went into the transformations that moved the world out of the utopian dreams of the 60s.

As I remarked in my Reply #1 to the “Bobby Beausoleil: Redemption songs” thread on Crowley Clippings, although there is an element of truth in the quote that

"These murders were the [death-knell] against the counter-culture: like this is what happens when people take LSD and listen to the Beatles," [Beausoleil] said today. “The promise of a profound change in society has been discredited in this crazy story, it's sad that I was linked to it. …”

there was possibly a slight oversimplification there also, I think.  (♫ "Heroes and Villains, Just see what you've done"… ♫ )

Reply #6 by Los on September 14, 2014, 09:11:42 pm:

Personally, I like some aspects of Satanism, and I dislike other aspects of it (the name, for starters....)

Stop me if you think I’ve said this before (as the saying goes – I’m not really seriously expecting you to do this, & it’s far too late now anyway), but Satanism would catch on a lot more if it dumped the first ‘A’ and instead became known as “Stanism”.  Doesn’t that name immediately come across as being a lot more user-fiendly, huggy-feely and approachable?  (not that they want to be at all huggy-feely of course; that must be sheer anathema to them.)  Why, you feel you could almost become mates with him, with a name like that!  There was even a pop song by a band named Slade in the ‘70s called “My friend Stan” (not one of their better ditties incidentally, imho).  But without going into it any further, you get my point here I hope, david.

Stan has had a lot of bad press over the years – more so even than that Mr. Crowley.  I can’t ever see him being rehabilitated really, to be honest, with folk rolling up to their neighbourhood Church of Satan of a weekend.  Over the years he has certainly become ‘demonised’ and detached – nay, debased – from his Horned God/ Pan-ic origins, which although that is a very fascinating subject and full of interesting factoids in its own right I won’t go into here.

(I certainly seem to upset Satanists to whom I have made this proposition in all sincerity, though, for some peculiar reason.  And that’s another thing I’ve noticed too – some Satanists don’t seem to have much of a sense of humour & have something of a self-deprecation bypass.)

Tant pis!
Norma N Joy Conquest.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5703
 
"jamie barter" wrote:

Reply #8 by Shiva on September 14, 2014, 09:46:06 pm:
What? You're equating Nazis with Hippies?

Surely Kharlatan was referring to a Post-war government here?  Or do you think he really equated Nazis with hippies – but if so, how??

I'm not thinking - I'm asking a question. The various governments were identified as "was," and not by any year or era.

Germany was "hippie-like" after the war II?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Michael Staley" wrote:
By the way, david, I'm sorry that in my haste I conflated his views on Manson and the Sharon Tate butchery with your own. I would, though, like to point out that not all hippies were "folk-singing drop-outs", though this was probably a smidgeon of satire on your part rather than yet another of those sweeping generalisations of which you are so enamoured.

What were hippies?  That would make a good subject for a 25 page dissertation in a sociology degree course.  Hipppy" is an umbrella term as is,"redneck."


ReplyQuote
William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1091
 

on this subject you might find Joshua Adam Sharp's discussion of "The Principle of Satan in Thelema" of interest

http://speechinthesilence.com/program-54-solstice-in-cancer-year-110


ReplyQuote
steve_wilson
(@steve_wilson)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 155
 

Quote:

"The Norwegian central government is in a net asset position, i.e. the government’s total financial assets exceed the total debt."

Compare that to the USA and UK.

Norway saved its oil and gas revenue in a "social fund" until it could fund itself without borrowing, and nowadays only uses debt for investment and cashflow.

So much for "wasteful" leftist countries and "fiscally responsible" rightists!


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
but Satanism would catch on a lot more if it dumped the first ‘A’ and instead became known as “Stanism”.  Doesn’t that name immediately come across as being a lot more user-fiendly, huggy-feely and approachable?  (not that they want to be at all huggy-feely of course; that must be sheer anathema to them.)  Why, you feel you could almost become mates with him, with a name like that!  There was even a pop song by a band named Slade in the ‘70s called “My friend Stan” (not one of their better ditties incidentally, imho).  But without going into it any further, you get my point here I hope, david.

It's a good point.  If the Church of Satan were to change it's name as The temple of psychic Youth were forced to then it would basically be a a philosophical  objectivism club intent on dismantling all influences of Judeao Christian conditioning (with some mock masses and rituals here and there).  I mean, people naturally associate Satan with all things nasty and un Christ like but they (the COS)  complain that they get bad publicity and/or undesirables identifying with them.    However they are proud of their name it would seem as Satan's etymological root is, "adversary".


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"WilliamThirteen" wrote:
on this subject you might find Joshua Adam Sharp's discussion of "The Principle of Satan in Thelema" of interest

http://speechinthesilence.com/program-54-solstice-in-cancer-year-110

Did you listen to it?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Michael Staley" wrote:
. He was inroduced to me by the owner of the bookshop, and stared at me as if I was supposed to be impressed. I remember thinking at the time "tosser", and nothing by or about him I've read since has ameliorated my view.

He appears to have been a Nazi  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eS47cjbZkGM  7m45s  but bear in mind he was just one member of COS with his own racially pure opinions.  The best way to get info on COS is from the official website  http://www.churchofsatan.com/index.php

In terms of the OP is Satamism a subset of Thelema this is the official stance COS have on Crowley in their FAQ section; 

Was Aleister Crowley a Satanist?

Crowley was many things—a poet, a mountaineer, an occultist, an author and the founder of a religion based on the principle of Thelema, the Greek word for “will.” He was not a Satanist, and he did not consider himself to be one. His intention was to found a religion that employed the “method of science and the aim of religion.” It is a spiritual doctrine melding aspects of eastern and Western religion, ceremonial magic and it reveres ancient Egyptian deities as primary figures.

This brings me to the question can a Church be a subset of Thelema if it has no official connection with Liber Al?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

I've learnt that Schreck went on to join the Temple of Set which in my estimation was a splinter group for those who were dissatisfied with the scepticism of COS and needed to feel like important wizards interpreting subjective religious experience as gaining the dark power of the LHP etc etc.    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_sBVeSVFB4  TV interview, 23 minutes in on how, "Set made his presence known" etc etc

In fact from the wiki Lewis and Petersen describe the organization's philosophy of being the "intellectual wing of esoteric Satanism", and that it is heavily based on the writings of Aleister Crowley and Western esotericism in general


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"Shiva" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:

Reply #8 by Shiva on September 14, 2014, 09:46:06 pm:
What? You're equating Nazis with Hippies?

Surely Kharlatan was referring to a Post-war government here?  Or do you think he really equated Nazis with hippies – but if so, how??

I'm not thinking - I'm asking a question. The various governments were identified as "was," and not by any year or era.
Germany was "hippie-like" after the war II?

Yes, so you were Shiva (asking a question - as to whether you may have been unthinking about it as well, well I'll go by your word on that! 😀 ).  But I didn’t state otherwise – and actually phrased my point “If so [i.e., if you did happen to be thinking that Kharlatan equated Nazis with hippies], on what grounds would you have then drawn that supposition?”  But fair enough, you were asking a question here; similarly with whether Kharlatan was suggesting Germany was “hippie-like” after World War II.  Somewhere along the line, the phraseology has seemed to have gotten a little muzzy & the whole thing could do with some tightening up, in fact...  Kharlatan – to the rescue!?  Some clarification, if you could please be so kind.

"david" wrote:
"Michael Staley" wrote:
By the way, david, I'm sorry that in my haste I conflated his views on Manson and the Sharon Tate butchery with your own. I would, though, like to point out that not all hippies were "folk-singing drop-outs", though this was probably a smidgeon of satire on your part rather than yet another of those sweeping generalisations of which you are so enamoured.

What were hippies?  That would make a good subject for a 25 page dissertation in a sociology degree course.  Hipppy" is an umbrella term as is,"redneck."

A short answer:
“Beats” (beatniks) or “exies” (existentialists), but with longer hair and loons/bell bottom trews, but minus black polo neck sweaters. 
Drugs of choice shifting from alcohol and amphetamines to marijuana and psychedelics… 
Earnest countenances replaced by stoned expressions. 
Meanwhile however attitudes towards free love/ promiscuity and stream-of-consciousness rambling remaining relatively unchanged.

Tut, tut, david - your spelling!  Normally I would just ignore errors like these, but in your case it happens so often I just have to remark!  Please make up your mind whether to spell hippie with an -ie or a -y (but not ending with a -pppy!)  Are you just sloppy or incredibly inept at the keyboard, old scout?  (incidentally n.b., before you say, this is not an "argumentum ad hominem"...!)

"david" wrote:
[...] This brings me to the question can a Church be a subset of Thelema if it has no official connection with Liber Al?

In terms of the above,
(i)  “a” Church” could be a subset of Thelema, in the sense at least of the so-called “Church of Thelema” [my italics] run in California by Wilfred T Smith, Frater 132.
(ii)  An example of a Church which does have “official connection” could be considered to be the Gnostic Catholic Church - however these days it has just become an offshoot of the [Caliphornian] O.T.O..  I am not aware of any other.
(iii)  Churches usually propagate and spread the “gospel” of the religion involved; however Liber AL forbids argument and asks for no converts – from this point of view “any” Church, and especially if it had “no official connection with Liber AL”, could probably not be a subset of Thelema (- I'm not altogether quite sure what you intend to mean by “official” here, but shall we let that pass).  Liber AL is central to the propagation of the message of Thelema, however Thelema and Thelemites can exist quite independently in the world without being in the slightest bit aware of it (Liber AL).  In theory, any collection of such individuals working together could be described as an order, a church, a coven, a club, etc.: “Any” Church could then by implication naturally include the Church of Satan, which although as far as I am aware does not have “official” affiliation itself, probably agrees with some of the Book’s more Luciferian or ‘selfish’ concepts. 
Does this answer your question?

"david" wrote:
I've learnt that Schreck went on to join the Temple of Set which in my estimation was a splinter group for those who were dissatisfied with the scepticism of COS and needed to feel like important wizards interpreting subjective religious experience as gaining the dark power of the LHP etc etc.

Wasn’t it the Temple of Set who were involved with that “fourth Chapter of Liber AL” number, “The Book of Perfection sub fugura 440” (Does anybody know)?

Possibly you may have overlooked the following question from my previous post, david.  I would be interested to know exactly what you understood by these terms - for example: did you equate them with what Karl Germer called "lower" and "higher" magick?  What might the "higher magick" consist of in a (Satanic) system which does not recognize the HGA?  (Etc.)

"jamie barter" wrote:

OP by david on September 14, 2014, 02:54:49 pm :
6. Lack of Perspective
Again, this one can lead to a lot of pain for a Satanist. You must never lose sight of who and what you are, and what a threat you can be, by your very existence. We are making history right now, every day. Always keep the wider historical and social picture in mind. That is an important key to both Lesser and Greater Magic. See the patterns and fit things together as you want the pieces to fall into place. Do not be swayed by herd constraints—know that you are working on another level entirely from the rest of the world.

... What do you see as the Lesser and Greater Magic here?  Any chance of some brief examples?

'N Joy


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

I'm just saying that the lefties can be perceived more hippylike than the righties :=) Naive immigration politics by the lefties for instance; just open the door to a whole bunch of immigrants with the goal of integrating them. In Norway this politic has failed miserably. What happens then? People turn to the right side. This has happened all over Europe. The parties to the right claims that only targeted immigration - "get in immigrants with resources we need" - gains the nation.

The same can be said about the hopeless outdated parliamentarism one finds in parts of Europe. The biggest party should rule with an ideal percentage of mandates in Stortinget. It's not a fascistic system i'm talking about here, just an updated version of the democratic system we already have. But of course it's a couple of inches towards fascism - a government should have enough power to govern properly, in my view, which isn't the case today. And interfering in the market when it's workings is unhealthy should be taken for granted. Just look around the world today. The market: In the US and other countries whole cities are crowded with over weighted people. In the end of the 70's Japan added Stevia to aproximately 70 % of the food. Stevia which contains zero calories. Consumers will choose Stevia over sugar - eventually - a bit too late; so much for freedom. Healthy food should also become cheaper than unhealthy food.
 

 


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
[ousness rambling remaining relatively unchanged.

Tut, tut, david - your spelling!  Normally I would just ignore errors like these, but in your case it happens so often I just have to remark!  Please make up your mind whether to spell hippie with an -ie or a -y (but not ending with a -pppy!)  Are you just sloppy or incredibly inept at the keyboard, old scout?  (incidentally n.b., before you say, this is not an "argumentum ad hominem"...!)

Hippy as in singular and hippies as in plural for Christ's sake y'know like poppy and poppies?

Seriously do you have some sort of official disability or condition?  If so, what?  It would help me to know this so I can treat you with special attention and compensate.

I'm sick of you trying to wind me up. 


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4119
 
"david" wrote:
In terms of the OP is Satamism a subset of Thelema . . .

No, it's not. For Satanism to be a subset of Thelema, you would need to demonstrate that all elements of Satanism derive from Thelema; not simply that there are affinities between the two, that they have some elements in common.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Michael Staley" wrote:
"david" wrote:
In terms of the OP is Satamism a subset of Thelema . . .

No, it's not. For Satanism to be a subset of Thelema, you would need to demonstrate that all elements of Satanism derive from Thelema; not simply that there are affinities between the two, that they have some elements in common.

That is a rational assessment.  I think Crowley's work and influence paved the way for LaVey though. 


ReplyQuote
k4n3
 k4n3
(@k4n3)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 27
 

in my humble opinion, satanism is focused primarily on ego and its gratification. Thelema, on the other hand, deals with the Self and how to align with It.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"k4n3" wrote:
in my humble opinion, satanism is focused primarily on ego and its gratification. Thelema, on the other hand, deals with the Self and how to align with It.

Could you elaborate on that?  Maybe you should read this COS statement first.

http://www.churchofsatan.com/

Anton LaVey explained in his classic work The Satanic Bible, Man—using his brain—invented all the Gods, doing so because many of our species cannot accept or control their personal egos, feeling compelled to conjure up one or a multiplicity of characters who can act without hindrance or guilt upon whims and desires. All Gods are thus externalized forms, magnified projections of the true nature of their creators, personifying aspects of the universe or personal temperaments which many of their followers find to be troubling. Worshipping any God is thus worshipping by proxy those who invented that God. Since the Satanist understands that all Gods are fiction, instead of bending a knee in worship to—or seeking friendship or unity with—such mythical entities, he places himself at the center of his own subjective universe as his own highest value.

We Satanists are thus our own “Gods,” and as beneficent “deities” we can offer love to those who deserve it and deliver our wrath (within reasonable limits) upon those who seek to cause us—or that which we cherish—harm.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4119
 

So do you count yourself a Satanist, david?


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"david" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
[ousness rambling remaining relatively unchanged.

Tut, tut, david - your spelling!  Normally I would just ignore errors like these, but in your case it happens so often I just have to remark!  Please make up your mind whether to spell hippie with an -ie or a -y (but not ending with a -pppy!)  Are you just sloppy or incredibly inept at the keyboard, old scout?  (incidentally n.b., before you say, this is not an "argumentum ad hominem"...!)

Hippy as in singular and hippies as in plural for Christ's sake y'know like poppy and poppies?

Seriously do you have some sort of official disability or condition?  If so, what?  It would help me to know this so I can treat you with special attention and compensate.

I'm sick of you trying to wind me up. 

Calm down, dear!  (It’s only a commercial…) No need to get so – hypersensitive – about me pointing out your idiosyncratic spelling.  Yes, you are correct in this particular instance you mention: hippy is singular, and hippies are plural.  Your spelling, though, was “hipppy”, which is neither, and as there is a bizarre or unorthodox spelling in almost every post you make it suggested that the problem might be more than merely typographical – perhaps indicative of a sloppy attitude and approach to things in general, which as I remarked is hopefully not reflected in your own magickal practice (for your own benefit).

And in your tetchiness you forgot to answer my question about the “lesser and greater magic” – sheesh, you’re turning out to be more like Los all the time! – i.e., you start a thread, ask for feedback and discussion, and then when you get it ignore the bits you don’t feel like answering.

This is not a good way; and particularly so when I have gone to the trouble of answering your own questions myself.  I therefore enquire again:

"jamie barter" wrote:
I would be interested to know exactly what you understood by these terms - for example: did you equate them with what Karl Germer called "lower" and "higher" magick?  What might the "Greater" magick consist of in a (Satanic) system which does not recognize the HGA?  (Etc.)

"jamie barter" wrote:

OP by david on September 14, 2014, 02:54:49 pm :
6. Lack of Perspective
Again, this one can lead to a lot of pain for a Satanist. You must never lose sight of who and what you are, and what a threat you can be, by your very existence. We are making history right now, every day. Always keep the wider historical and social picture in mind. That is an important key to both Lesser and Greater Magic. See the patterns and fit things together as you want the pieces to fall into place. Do not be swayed by herd constraints—know that you are working on another level entirely from the rest of the world.

... What do you see as the Lesser and Greater Magic here?  Any chance of some brief examples?

Recommending that you go and take a chillax pill, for a nice walk or maybe pull an asana ;D
N Joy


ReplyQuote
newneubergOuch2
(@newneubergouch2)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 287
 

Crowleys influence on LaVey is obvious when one actually reads LaVeys books, although it is a watered down simplistic misunderstood version. Then it gets further distorted when one gets to Shreck etc. Then his joining Aquinos ToS in another attempt at self myth building and ladder climbing ( a recent book was published by a ToS member about Crowley 'against the old gods'? -i havent read it )- plus the industrial culture influence and the Re-Search-ish influence of all things weird and underground/counter culture.

Lets finish with Crowley from MiTaP chp5:

'The exalted “Devil” (also the other secret Eye) by the formula of the Initiation of Horus elsewhere described in detail. This “Devil” is called Satan or Shaitan, and regarded with horror by people who are ignorant of his formula, and, imagining themselves to be evil, accuse Nature herself of their own phantasmal crime. Satan is Saturn, Set, Abrasax, Adad, Adonis, Attis, Adam, Adonai, etc. The most serious charge against him is that he is the Sun in the South. The Ancient Initiates, dwelling as they did in lands whose blood was the water of the Nile or the Euphrates, connected the South with life-withering heat, and cursed that quarter where the solar darts were deadliest. Even in the legend of Hiram, it is at high noon that he is stricken down and slain. Capricornus is moreover the sign which the sun enterers when he reaches his extreme Southern declination at the Winter Solstice, the season of the death of vegetation, for the folk of the Northern hemisphere. This gave them a second cause for cursing the south. A third; the tyranny of hot, dry, poisonous winds; the menace of deserts or oceans dreadful because mysterious and impassable; these also were connected in their minds with the South. But to us, aware of astronomical facts, this antagonism to the South is a silly superstition which the accidents of their local conditions suggested to our animistic ancestors. We see no enmity between Right and Left, Up and Down, and similar pairs of opposites. These antitheses are real only as a statement of relation; they are the conventions of an arbitrary device for representing our ideas in a pluralistic symbolism based on duality. “Good” must be defined in terms of human ideals and instincts. “East” has no meaning except with reference to the earth’s internal affairs; as an absolute direction in space it changes a degree every four minutes. “Up” is the same for no two men, unless one chance to be in the line joining the other with the centre of the earth. “Hard” is the private opinion of our muscles. “True” is an utterly unintelligible epithet which has proved refractory to the analysis of our ablest philosophers.

We have therefore no scruple in restoring the “devil-worship” of such ideas as those which the laws of sound, and the phenomena of speech and hearing, compel us to connect with the group of “Gods” whose names are based upon ShT, or D, vocalized by the free breath A. For these Names imply the qualities of courage, frankness, energy, pride, power and triumph; they are the words which express the creative and paternal will.

Thus “the Devil” is Capricornus, the Goat who leaps upon the loftiest mountains, the Godhead which, if it become manifest in man, makes him Aegipan, the All.

The Sun enters this sign when he turns to renew the year in the North. He is also the vowel O, proper to roar, to boom, and to command, being a forcible breath controlled by the firm circle of the mouth.

He is the Open Eye of the exalted Sun, before whom all shadows flee away: also that Secret Eye which makes an image of its God, the Light, and gives it power to utter oracles, enlightening the mind.

Thus, he is Man made God, exalted, eager; he has come consciously to his full stature, and so is ready to set out on his journey to redeem the world. But he may not appear in this true form; the Vision of Pan would drive men mad with fear. He must conceal Himself in his original guise.

He therefore becomes apparently the man that he was at the beginning; he lives the life of a man; indeed, he is wholly man. But his initiation has made him master of the Event by giving him the understanding that whatever happens to him is the execution of this true will. Thus the last stage of his initiation is expressed in our formula as the final:'.


ReplyQuote
Falcon
(@falcon)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 361
 

Discussion of LaVey, Aquino, Anger, Crowley, Thelema and Satanism:

http://www.lashtal.com/forum/http://www.lashtal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5703
 

Just to keep things in perspective, Book 4 - Part III tells us:

"Before leaving the subject of Black Magic, one may touch lightly on the question of Pacts with the Devil.
The Devil does not exist. It is a false name invented by the Black Brothers to imply a Unity in their ignorant muddle of dispersions. A devil who had unity would be a God.
“The Devil” is, historically, the God of any people that one personally dislikes. This has led to so much confusionof thought that THE BEAST 666 has preferred to let names stand as they are, and to proclaim simply that AIWAZ — the solar-phallic-hermetic “Lucifer” is His own Holy Guardian Angel, and “The Devil” SATAN or HADIT of our particular unit of the Starry Universe. This serpent, SATAN, is not the enemy of Man, but He who made Gods of our race, knowing Good and Evil; He bade “Know Thyself!” and taught Initiation. He is “the Devil” of the Book of Thoth, and His emblem is BAPHOMET, the Androgyne who is the hieroglyph of arcane perfection."


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Shiva" wrote:
Just to keep things in perspective, Book 4 - Part III tells us:

"Before leaving the subject of Black Magic, one may touch lightly on the question of Pacts with the Devil.
The Devil does not exist. It is a false name invented by the Black Brothers to imply a Unity in their ignorant muddle of dispersions. A devil who had unity would be a God.
“The Devil” is, historically, the God of any people that one personally dislikes. This has led to so much confusionof thought that THE BEAST 666 has preferred to let names stand as they are, and to proclaim simply that AIWAZ — the solar-phallic-hermetic “Lucifer” is His own Holy Guardian Angel, and “The Devil” SATAN or HADIT of our particular unit of the Starry Universe. This serpent, SATAN, is not the enemy of Man, but He who made Gods of our race, knowing Good and Evil; He bade “Know Thyself!” and taught Initiation. He is “the Devil” of the Book of Thoth, and His emblem is BAPHOMET, the Androgyne who is the hieroglyph of arcane perfection."

yeah exactly that sort of Crowley speak is totally in line with Satanism (apart from the AIWAZ HGA reference.)

"newneubergOuch2" wrote:
Crowleys influence on LaVey is obvious when one actually reads LaVeys books, although it is a watered down simplistic misunderstood version. Then it gets further distorted when one gets to Shreck etc. Then his joining Aquinos ToS in another attempt at self myth building and ladder climbing ( a recent book was published by a ToS member about Crowley 'against the old gods'? -i havent read it )- plus the industrial culture influence and the Re-Search-ish influence of all things weird and underground/counter culture.

Crowley and LaVey were both heavily influenced by Nietzsche.  Whose standing on whose shoulders?  Maybe it's explained by zeitgeist or if you like, the collapse of, "the old aeon."


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Michael Staley" wrote:
So do you count yourself a Satanist, david?

Good question.  The Temple of Set is too metaphysical for me.  Too newagey.  The original Satanism I agree with their materialistic (carnal) objective scepticism and dismantling of judeao-christianity (and Abrahamic cults)  as does Thelema I feel.  As Los said the name, "Satanist" is  silly and I'd say it's obviously employed for silly entertainment shock value even though the Satan myth was traditionally the individual who dared to question God etc etc.

Let's deconstruct the COS.  What would it be without the name?  An objectivist, antichristian/anti Abrahamic cult or club who have ceremonial get- togethers some of which have Nordic pagan overtones.  It's not  a racist club though.    I agree with their view of man as animal as did Nietzsche as did the idiotic (pagan) Nazis ("blonde beast" etc).     

By the way I found a good article on how the Nazis got this Nietzschean concept wrong.

http://www.stephenhicks.org/2010/01/24/on-the-blond-beast-and-racism/ 

Here's  a great excerpt.

But for those who have read the original Nietzsche, that interpretation clearly takes Nietzsche’s words out of context. In context, the “blond beast” that Nietzsche refers to is the lion, the great feline predator with the shaggy blond mane and the terrific roar. Nietzsche does believe that the Germans once, a long time ago, manifested the spirit of the lion—but they were not unique in that regard. The spirit and power of the lion have been manifested by peoples of many races.

To see this, let us put one of the quotations in full context. The quotation begins this way: “at the bottom of all these noble races the beast of prey, the splendid blond beast, prowling about avidly in search of spoil and victory; this hidden core needs to erupt from time to time, the animal has to get out again and go back to the wilderness …”

Now let us complete the sentence as Nietzsche wrote it: “the Roman, Arabian, Germanic, Japanese nobility, the Homeric heroes, the Scandinavian Vikings—they all shared this need.”[89]

So Nietzsche clearly is using the lion analogically and comparing its predatory power to the predatory power that humans of many different racial types have manifested. Nietzsche here lists six different racial and ethnic groups, and the Germans are not special in that list. So while Nietzsche does endorse a strongly biological basis for cultures, he does not endorse racism of the sort that says any one race is biologically necessarily superior to any other.

I'm curious as to how, in some cases Laveyan Satansim seems to have bred or attracted racist fascism notably that Shreck guy who was partnered to LaVey's very own daughter.  Interesting how a household (LaVey's) supposedly free of Judeao-Christian "poison" can foster fascist thought which , as Wilhelm Reich adequately demonstrated is the consequence of the very same poison.  Something doesn't add up there.  I checked out Schreck's former gothy band (LaVey's daughter was a backing singer) and some of his TV youtube interviews and they're utterly pseudo-intellectual, fascist and white supremacist.  They even did a creepy haunting song called, "Barbarossa" about the holy righteous Satanic knights of Germany or some such nonsense.  However creative and "spiritual people" can be racist if you consider the work of Wagner.

Although races have their differences ultimately, "every man and woman is a star (regardless of skin colour or background)" wouldn't you say?    Racism per se is fake will and nothing to do with True Will i.e. I feel it is the result of inclinations being twisted on an unconscious  level.  Schreck and Boyd Rice are clearly the twisted results of middle class repressive family upbringings no matter how articulate they are.  Nazism was after all driven by the middle classes (but obviously all classes can get sucked up by fascism). 

Wilhelm Reich analysed the ridiculous origins of Nazi blood- mysticism and how it stems from engrained repressions.  If I'm not mistaken Crowley said something similar about racism and repression when he talked about KKK lynchings in the Confessions.

The carnality of Satanic thought, as it were probably meets Reich's championing of Rousseau's, "noble savage".  I doubt that such a noble savage would be racist.  There's an interview where Schreck rambles about, "the werewolf myth as the beast in man unleashed" and how Hitler's state  did a good job of that.  It's laughable isn't it?  He states that the, "Satanic Master Race" (Caucasian that is) has always been around and they've been feared by the masses  and this is represented in the European vampire and werewolf myths.  However as I said none of this was official COS philosophy.    This notion that civilization and proper culture (and I guesse Thelema ) is solely white-European is dangerous.  Dangerously idiotic that is.    The same can be said of any racial group.       

In terms of COS ritual what about LRBP, GRP, Middle Pillar, Cabalistic ceremony, True Will, jugorum, chakras, LVX, meditation/yoga, Resh, Star Ruby, Path skrying, Samekh, Goetia, Angelic contact and divination?  Does the COS take such things and render them unnecessary?  Do they have adequate grounds for doing so? Who are you going to roll with?  A prolific academic Cambridge graduate or a lion tamer?

Anyway I have not sent off my $200 to the COS headquarters no.  If I ever did it would be with the sole intent of aiming to expand my social circle.

...but err, HAIL SATAN"!!

Baphomet...........  scary huh??


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 3
Share: