Have at it.

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: Sinasbin

La Vey took what may be described as the popular/media conception of Satanism - the black-robed, Mephistophelean figure - together with the â??pleasure principleâ?? and some simple magic(k), mixed it with the qabala and various historical myths and legends pertaining to the dark side, and served the whole lot up to a gullible audience. The whole thing was pretty pathetic - although it did provide some with a few thrills. There was no substance to either La Vey or his â??Churchâ??: no inner path, direction or way. Nothing original.

The wolves draw near.

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: Venus666

OK, alright
so he wasnt much of a "ture satanist" , but still, who defines the standard of a true and perfect satanist? I say, he did what he wanted to do, made a living at it and attracted many followers in his wake. It says in his book, that he opened the floodgate for satanisim. 1966 ce. Age of aquarius.
*
If you look at it froma historical perspective, he was the beginning of being able to be a satanist in a social way. Besides, what fun would it be without some disorder and chaos within the coven. It is anti-religion, anti-society's dictates, ect after all.
*
Who can deny that Lavey was the satanist's Crowley, for our generation?
consiering that, why isnt satanisim organized now, if it should be at all?
Is this why satanisim seems to not have a structure, when it's disorder is its natural state ......
*
We are the voice of satanisim, for our generation. I hope were not kown as the "foolish generatiion who just couldnt get it together...did nothing but argue over who was true.."
Im tired of arguing over whether Lavey was right...that was sooo..90's

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: m1thr0s

It's a curious sort of thing but when I look at the kind of people responsible for initiating a movement of one kind or another I often find that they really aren't the most expert in their own fields so much as they were the ones who were willing to take on the establishment of their times. Freud was a complete nitemare of a shrink, just to cite a quick example and I'm sure that LaVey was NOT the best educated occultist in the universe by half. In a lot of ways, that wasn't his job...that's our job and those to follow after us. So there is a lot to be said for just letting it go and getting on with your life. Unless you are somehow expecting that you have to comply with LaVey's dogma for some reason, in which case I am sure he has a freshly brewed caldron of boiling hot goo awaiting your arrival...hehe...

m1thr0s

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: Sinasbin

Anyone here on this forum familiar with pseudo-Satanism or have ever had the enthralling experience of meeting a pseudo-Satanist?

[not to deter from the topic at hand--rather an addendum--contributions on the main article are still welcome]

Preferrably Satanists only on this one. (Lest you're a rather open-minded individual)

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: m1thr0s

Sure I guess...only I don't really think they were ANY kind of Satanist to begin with. If somebody pretends to be something they are not I consider them to be a superficial person...not pseudo something or other. If some misguided white boy pretends to be black, dresses like blacks, tries to talk like blacks, etc...do you call him a pseudo-black? I just call him a deluded white boy who doesn't know who he is...

Satanism is like that too. So I don't really know what you are talking about exactly...What do YOU consider a pseudo-Satanist?

m1thr0s

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: visceral/spagyrical

[QUOTE=m1thr0s]If some misguided white boy pretends to be black, dresses like blacks, tries to talk like blacks, etc...do you call him a pseudo-black? I just call him a deluded white boy who doesn't know who he is...[/QUOTE]I apologize for eavesdropping, but that was awesome!

v/s

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: Sinasbin

"Satanism is understood by its genuine adherents as a particular Occult way or method. That is, it is a specific path or way toward a specific goal, the following of which involves a particular way of living.

---

Fundamentally, Satanism is opposed to the meekness of conventional religion.Conventional religion (invariably Occidental) means submission - to a deity and its 'appointed' authority/church, or to some dogma derived from the words of some 'prophet'/savious. Conventional religion also means a certain way of 'viewing the world' - a certain outlook. The Occidental religious way is the way of dogma, of revelation, and ultimately, of fear - there is concern with reward and retribution; with concepts of guilt and sin. There is and must be faith - faith comes before personal wisdom derived from direct experience of livng.
The way of Satanism is the total opposite of this - it is the way of liberation, internally and externally. There is a desire to know based on personal experience. There is a desire to be proud - to exult and revel in life and so fulfill the possibilities that life offers. In other words, there is an exploration of frontiers - an extending of those frontiers. There is a desire to excel, to achieve, to set the standards for others to follow rather than follow the standards set by someone else. This, of course, is not easy - it requires a certain type of person: someone imbued with spirit, with an urge to conquer and defy. Someone with character.

---

Satanism - on the personal level - is an individualzed quest, involving individuals striving to experience their own limits and go beyond those limits. Satanism applies the principle of evolution to human practice - the strong survive and win through, while the weak fail or perish.

However, this does not mean what most people assume it to measn - a license for anarchic self-indulgence and a wallowing in lust/depravity/excess and so on. A Satanist has a goal - an ulterior motive beyond the satisfaction of their own ego and beyond indulging in and giving way to, of unconscious impulses. This goal is to excel - to go beyond what one is. To do this requires a self-mastery, a real self-discipline. Self-mastery and self-discipline can only be acquired by self-experience: by experience of real life. A Satanist desires to evolve - and this evolution this requires resolve and thus a certain strength of character. What a genuine Satanist does, in real-life or in the learning experiences that are magickal/Occult rituals, is to explore - to find the limits of themselves and the world; they experience and so grow, and so fulfill their latent, diabolical potential. Everything is a means to this - rituals, other people, society itself.

---

There is nothing - and no one - to aid the Satanist in his/her quest. There is nothing to make it easier, less difficult, less dangerous. There is only his/her determination, and the learning from experience: the gradual development of character from experience. Only thus is there a real, a genuine, evolution of the individual. Anything less is mere pose - an affectation."

---

A perspective on the other side of pseudo-Satanism may be offered if so requested. For now feel free to rip this to shreds.

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: ReapeR

Yeah, this is ONA's traditionall look on satanism which I agree with.

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: m1thr0s

I like this definition of Satanism, personally. Is it your own or did you find it someplace? In either case, it's quite good I think...

We have a trap here to avoid though, and this is the notion of "true" or "real" Satanism. The obvious problem is that Satanism is a highly individualized path and not only are people on different sides of the fence on various issues, but they are also at different places in their own development. A "poser" today may become a very dedicated practitioner tomorrow, and it's difficult to know how things will play out for any of us in the end.

Similarly, your definition should make it clear that Satanists are not particularly impacted by the herd on any level, since it really is about the self and not about the herd. Nevertheless, I think we all know that there do exist such posers and there are certainly those who have only defined their path in negative relation to the status quo etc. I would agree that such individuals are missing the point of Satanism as I understand it at least. I would be hesitant to place a stamp of any kind upon them nevertheless for reasons cited. In a sense, it doesn't really matter anyway, since Satanism has pretty much ALWAYS been misapprehended by the herd and possibly always will be. Sometimes this works to good advantage despite itself since it serves to create a kind of smoke screen that may actually help to repulse the majority so that Satanism does not become some sort of popular "fad" - or if it does so anyway - to act as the public face for that fad, behind which lies a much deeper and more sober core that needn't announce or defend itself since there really is no need to do so.

So I am hesitant to belabor superficiality within Satanic ranks. It's kind of a non-issue so far as I am concerned. People are what they are. There will always be posers no matter what...

ReapeR: didn't see your post...so ONA strikes again...interesting...

m1thr0s

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: evilsock

Maybe a psuedo-Satanist is someone who resonates deeply with many aspects of the path but doesn't subscribe to it as a whole?

For example, the idea of the 'herd' resonates powerfully as a truth for me, as does the notion of 'submission of will' - I can even appreciate Laveys approach as far as 'taking the piss' out of Christian dogma by playing up to it, (revelling in it?) which from the little I know seems to have debunked alot of myth and scaremongering (a case of banishing with laughter?).

Maybe I've just mis-interpreted what's been said, but that definition of Satanism seems pretty reasonable to me as a philosophical approach. After all, being a Chaote is about results. The path doesn't necessarily reflect prefectly my ideas and philosophy on life.

I have a very hard time understanding why someone would want to completely 'resolve' their ego in the sense that they wish to 'mantra' it out of existence. I don't see it that way at all. I'd rather resolve things through philosophy and understanding.

Good thread, sorry to interrupt.

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: m1thr0s

I think Satanism is more about refining and exalting ego rather than dispelling or dissolving it. Ego gets a bad rap in contemporary new-age circles. Satanism is a great defender of the ego in my view. Why destroy a thing when you can just as easily trade up? It's not at all clear that the ego can ever be destroyed anyway...

m1thr0s

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: evilsock

It's not at all clear that the ego can ever be destroyed anyway...

I wasn't referring to Satanism in relation to dissolution of the ego (just in case you thought that's what I meant) - I had my mind on Christianity and a few Eastern approaches for that.

It's this idea of retaining the ego, exalting the ego, understanding the ego and how it can work for you that wins my interest every time

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: Sinasbin

"Other groups have tried to 'intellectualize' Satanism - to take away the real experiences by which genuine Satanic character is formed. Or they wallow in the weaknesses of those addicted to impulses they cannot understand and do not have the strength to control. They have tried and continue to try and make Satanism respectable and safe - just another 'religion'. They fantasize, and play games. They simply do not understand Satanism as a means to create new, more highly evolved, individuals.

---

Thus, because of human nature, there will be few who will possess the desire to become real Satanists - to actually undertake the tasks, ordeals and challenges. Most who profess an interest - and a large number who actually go ahead with Initiation be such ceremonial or hermetic - will soon turn away when they realize the real difficulties involved, when they understand that they are expected to work toward their own development. Most of these will all too easily find excuses to justify their turning away. They will perhaps be easily seduced, such is their weakness of character, by others who promise 'easy solutions' some kind of 'magical' way to Adeptship, by organizations which take away the pain, suffering and delight that self-effort 'on the edge' entails and which provide security for their members, which keep them in thrall to self delusion. Or many will just be too lazy, too enured to their comfortable existence to change.

---

For the dilettantes, for the role-playing fantasy mongers, for the self-indulgent too lacking in self-discipline' there are plenty of pseudo-Satanic organizations around, plenty of pseudo-Satanic 'masters' who require sycophancy, who act out of role and who will be only too pleased to welcome another pupil or student."

---â?¡



More fuel to the fire of the thread. This is to clear up some slight misconception on my basis for inquiry concerning pseudo-Satanists. Also your thoughts on the ego [with relation to Satanism] are fascinating, mind you if I were to ask for a little bit more in regards to this?

Also, Venus666 to quote some of your post:

If you look at it froma historical perspective, he was the beginning of being able to be a satanist in a social way.

This has provoked curiosity within me. Are you saying that for true evolution [or the practice thereof] of Satanism to take place it needs to be socially accepted by--as a Satanist might conclude--the ineptitude of the masses?

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: Sinasbin

I would say I should have guessed, but I did and I was right.

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: Sinasbin

Massacre

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: m1thr0s

Massacre??? lol...is that why you pulled all those quotes? I don't agree with everything in ONA but that definition of Satanism was pretty good...some of the latter stuff was a bit weird...oh well...

I guess I can thank v/s for the compliment then...seemed a bit awkward before...

m1thr0s

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: Sinasbin

Pretty good, eh?

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: m1thr0s

These one line responses are actually against the rules Sinasbin - not that I care all that much about that, but it means you're not communicating...why did you pull your posts? Have you had some kind of epiphany or something?

m1thr0s

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: Sinasbin

A common misconception made by those few who follow the Seven-fold Sinister Way, is that it will, somehow, make their lives easier i.e. having drawn certain forces to them, they believe via â??satanic masteryâ?? to avoid Trauma City. The lonely realization that this is not so, is often enough to make the Initiate (or even in some cases, Adept) renounce their magickal quest altogether. This can occur for two reasons - 1) the individual becomes possessed and then disillusioned with a â??satanic roleâ?? (roles are useful only if understood as being simply a means to an end) and 2) via this realization, Sinister energies are revealed in a far more potent form than the playing of a role could invoke (these energies are, however, the culmination of that role). Quite simply Satanism is not an escape from, but the partaking in life. The challenge of living life as a self contained entity, creating a lifestyle that intuitively follows the path of individual Destiny (by this process Destiny becomes, gradually, consciously apparent) is just too disturbing for the majority of the human race to accept. So the failures crawl back to mediocrity, absolved of taking responsibility for their own lives. Mental and physical degeneracy follows as a way of dulling the guilt that their new/old lifestyle encourages within them. For those who remain on their quest, it is the rising to the challenge of the Sinister Way which creates the Adept and the stage(s) beyond. And this requires an understanding of what forces are in play, and how they all contribute towards self evolution.

One line outside the box: Forget the dualistic correspondance regarding christianity, it is no longer relevant.

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: m1thr0s

hmmm...that sounds pretty awful I must admit. Good lord, what have I done sort of thing...hehe...

This whole passage is hitting pretty hard and it's important that these things be said, so I respect that completely. It's not all some kind of morbid self-torture, however. If there is no joy in something...better dump that sh*t quick....

m1thr0s

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: Sinasbin

The joy is in the struggle. With pain comes pleasure, and vice versa.

In this experience. Pride is developed, through understanding of the Self and the strength accumulated by treading the path. Fearless and cunning is the warrior; is the Adept. With quiet understanding he knows.

Evolution of the self can only be achieved through movement forward, through facing peril and hardship, and--of course--a reveling of the rewards in which surpassing such hardship entails.

Occultic inertia.

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: m1thr0s

The joy is in the struggle. With pain comes pleasure, and vice versa.

In this experience. Pride is developed, through understanding of the Self and the strength accumulated by treading the path. Fearless and cunning is the warrior; is the Adept. With quiet understanding he knows.

Evolution of the self can only be achieved through movement forward, through facing peril and hardship, and--of course--a reveling of the rewards in which surpassing such hardship entails.

Occultic inertia.

Well said...I quite agree.

m1thr0s

[Occult Forum Archive]

Original post: KCh

The challenge of living life as a self contained entity, creating a lifestyle that intuitively follows the path of individual Destiny (by this process Destiny becomes, gradually, consciously apparent) is just too disturbing for the majority of the human race to accept. So the failures crawl back to mediocrity, absolved of taking responsibility for their own lives. Mental and physical degeneracy follows as a way of dulling the guilt that their new/old lifestyle encourages within them. For those who remain on their quest, it is the rising to the challenge of the Sinister Way which creates the Adept and the stage(s) beyond. And this requires an understanding of what forces are in play, and how they all contribute towards self evolution.

Personally, sounds like Thelema to me! But hey, so long as the original idea is there it matters not what it is called I suppose. Excellent stuff there.