Loading...

Church of Satan - The Separatist from Dark Enlightenment's blog

Either I'm completely and totally missing the point, or almost every god damn person that thinks they are doing it, is doing it wrong. 

There's no praying in Satanism. There's no mysticism, occultism, spiritualism, or the dark imagery associated that weird smelling store you never realized you were being taken to.

Conflation. Confabulation. Immersion into other forms. Yeah, I know how it started. With an initial crop of Hollywood congiscenti singing pretty songs and not knowing what they mean.   

Oh sure, my fellow 'satanist', nothing is more satanic then licking my asshole. Oh, you have an altar you say? Did you put the white candle to the right?

The most respectable thing about Anton LaVey is his ability to pwn people posthumously.

What was hinted at, what he plagiarized Might Is Right for, the whole crux of all he intended was lost by the last half of that book when consumed by those without an ability to recognize Irony, which turns out is almost everyone. 

From the "proto-popular-satanism" it evolved into the divergent thing it has become. A joke in and of itself, where ability to step back and note the irony of even the "ritual psychodrama" evaporates into the same old horde gathering upon the same altar, only this one is painted black.

The original model, the one Anton ripped off from; Nietzsche, Redbeard, Crowley, Rand, Jung, a demonology index, Dianetics and turned it into a 'way' that you either got or didn't - now has demoninations, obviously the later sculpted it from 1969. 


It became things that frighten the mother in Detroit Rock City, which at least has the right spirit, but hot topic has that 'spirit' too.  And that doesn't do anything anymore. Oh, you played D&D, neat!

It doesn't really need imagery anyway. That just leads to it becoming a philosophy of swinger orgies, cocaine, ans macabre ceremonies.  Fun, but..

Well maybe this image:



And it needs no explaining. You can take from the imagery of the painting what you wan't and form your own subjective opinion, but I am willing to bet among the former all interpretations would be compatible.

But that's a few courses away, Non-Linear Esoterics and Anarchistic Associations

First you must kill this fact: It's not whatever you want it to be because it doesn't deal with ideas but actions. Exoteric dogma is a non starter.

To put it in metaphor: It is every fucking fight for independence from an authoritarian figure or nation state, and the motivation to fight for independence reduced to a single person.

Skepticism, non-belief, selfishness, a need to be left to captain your own ship, entertaining even ideas that beg to be discredited, trial and error. Doing anything and everything it takes to keep the horizon in front of you open to the destination of your choosing.

And even now the latter are still saying, "I don't see how that is any different". Probably a feel thing.

Vegetables and such.


Share:
Previous post     
     Next post
     Blog home

The Wall

AK Mod
Oct 12
Every person that is doing it thinks everyone else that is doing something else but calling it it is doing it wrong.

We have a word that has a meaning: “the worship of Satan, typically involving a travesty of Christian symbols and practices, such as placing a cross upside down.” someone decides they don't agree with the dictionary on this one and goes off and creates their own alternate definition with varying degrees of success. We're either left to either 1) defend which alternate definition is most thematically consistent or 2) decide that we're just as entitled to manufacture our own meaning as anyone else – also with varying amounts of success. What determines success? As with any other word, whichever meaning is most commonly accepted. In this sense it becomes a vie for common acceptance, all the while eschewing both notions of commonality and acceptance.

There's a smirk-worthy irony to this game.

None-the-less, the dictionary definition still has acceptance, as is to be expected. How could one expect communicate in any language if the dictionary was just “wrong” some of the time? LaVey strongly de-emphasized the worship part convincingly by asserting that a “Satanist” is to emulate the devil – or at least a Miltonian and, to some extent, Faustian concept of the devil. Arguably this is also in keeping with Islamic tradition, but only superficially as there are convincing arguments that bowing before man would violate his original vow to prostrate only to Allah; in this light he's more of a jilted lover, jealous older sibling, and exceedingly ardent worshiper than a usurper.

Whatever the case, one has to decide from where they derive their inspiration for what Satan represents. If you stick solely to the big three (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), you're going to have a very hard time finding instances where he is directly in opposition to God in any sort of exegetical sense – you'd have to branch out into literary works or other religions entirely for that, which itself not only gets “culty” and “weird”, but also requires some strange leaps.

If you factor in the literary Satan of Milton, Byron, Goethe, you'd have a stronger case for Satan as a sort of cosmic cynic or Angra Mainyu – the later of which posits a dualism that is flatly incompatible with the monotheism from whence Satan proper has come to be known as such.

Still, some people “do” worship Satan, and they call it Satanism. We can decimate why that's the wrong thing to call it all day and with crushing success, but as it goes with language, the commonly accepted definitions and meanings are the order of the day. There's nothing about this word “Satanism” that makes it somehow different than any other word in the English language.

Even so. Most of us here agree that the dictionary definition could do without the whole “worship” aspect, so let's move on to the second part: “typically involving a travesty of Christian symbols and practices, such as placing a cross upside down”

The travesty of Christian symbols and practices is important here, because that's exactly where the term “Satanism” arose. A broad pejorative cast upon those whose practices undermined the intent of the Church. Before we rush in, it is important to consider the merits of the Church. I think anyone who dismisses it has a very, very tenuous grasp of history and does not know what they are up against in the slightest.

From a Jungian perspective, what the church did was take the contents of its adherent's copy of the collective unconscious – one's individual and subjective symbol-set primarily individual, familial, and tribal, and through one-size-fits-all prefabricated rituals and indoctrination aligned them into a cohesion with one's neighbors and, essentially, the masses (pun intended) rendering these meanings external. In doing so it coerced uniform polarity in the same way one can magnetize a piece of steel – for the same reasons and by the same methods. This benefits civilization. All the oars are rowing in the same direction +. Now, if you want to fight against this for your own reasons - as a sort of self-liberation - that's one thing. If you're out to rid the world of this notion, you're going to end up sawing off the very tree branch you are perched in. The bough will break. Like with anarchy - it'll only work for a select few individuals. It's not meant to be a global thing. TL;DR: these idiots doing it "wrong" assist my aims.

Now, any ritual that deviates from this objective of homogeneity within civilization is indeed a travesty of what Pauline Christianity was intended to accomplish. Any ritual that reclaims your unconscious trappings and biases as your own, is very much a travesty to these ends. That which defies unity with the Godhead – the asymptote of mankind's aspirations as a collective – is very much a travesty. Individuation is a travesty of the whole purpose of Christian symbols and practices, and how one chooses to go about this is entirely up to them.

Personally, I enjoy ritual. I am loathe to participate with others, however. It's a form of undoing and disentanglement. Moreover, it is questionable with how much deliberation one can act in the world without first confronting, alone, their own idiosyncrasies, hang-ups, kleshas, etc.


In that sense, sure, Satanism is compatible with ritual. Just the same, I prefer to keep my veggies and meat separate. The occult is just the occult. And I agree “it's all in your head... you just have no idea how big your head is”
Every person that is doing it thinks everyone else that is doing something else but calling it it is doing it wrong.

We have a word that has a meaning: “the worship of Satan, typically...See more
You need to sign in to comment
Certain features and pages can only be viewed by registered users.

Join Now

Donate

This site is largely funded by donations. You can show your support by donating. Thanks. Every dollar helps.

Like and Share