Where is the Satainist section?

Bruce Michael

Well-Known Member
Messages
797
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Trans-Himalayas
Representative_of_humanity.gif


It is right to place Satan/Shaitan as the spirit who endlessly denies spirit (as Goethe says). Satan seeks to bind us to the Earth and so is the agent behind Atheism.

Satan is also known as Ahriman.

The Ahrimanic stream, the force of materialism and cutting off from the spiritual worlds, works to make things more heavy and dense, until eventually the world becomes so dense that man, and particularly the new man, the spiritual man of the future evolutionary stages, is unable to exist on it.

http://www.kheper.net/topics/Anthroposophy/Steiner-3streams.htm

Lucifer is really a separate being to Ahriman/Satan:

The Luciferic stream is the opposite. It strives to prevent man from incarnating on the Earth (the true theatre of divine evolution) by creating secondary worlds that are so attractive that people don't want to incarnate on the Earth..... This would prevent the Earth from having humanity on it; humanity being precisely the carrier of the Christ impulse which is to bring about the spiritualisation of the Earth.

The Influence of Lucifer & Ahriman by Rudolf Steiner

Bobby comments:
Can we escape Ahriman and Lucifer by avoiding both of them? Steiner's answer is a firm, "No!" and he instead argues for us to maintain a balance.

[page 34] But the truth of the matter is that Lucifer and Ahriman must be regarded as two scales of a balance and it is we who must hold the beam in equipoise.
[page 34] And how can we train ourselves to do this? By permeating what takes ahrimanic form within us with a strongly luciferic element.


God Bless,
Br.Bruce
 

path_of_one

Embracing the Mystery
Messages
2,906
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Under the Stars
Hmmm... never heard of Lucifer and Satan described in that way before, and not sure I'd go along with the labels, but I understand and agree with the concept I think you're putting out there, Bruce, of balance.

The concept of balance between focus on the Otherworld(s) and spirit, and focus on this life and earth here and now, is very much how I practice Druidry. I found it a useful path for keeping me more grounded, encouraging me to find myself and spirituality in the earth, the now, in my own body and the richness of our senses. And yet it also explicitly focuses on the Otherworld and engaging it as well. I find the balance to be healthy for me. Can't speak for others, but when I am too grounded, I become restless, bored, and... tired. When I fail to meditate and do ritual and so forth over long periods of time, I literally feel more fatigued in my body. When I am too focused on the Otherworld, I begin to despair and feel caged in my body. I forget what is good about incarnation and only feel the limitations, failing to see the gifts.

For whatever reason, Christianity was really quite good at getting me to connect and focus with the Otherworld (in its own way), and it encouraged me in service to others during this life, but it was not good at helping me rejoice in this life, this earth, now. I fully acknowledge that is an individual thing, and not a fault with Christianity, but my solution to become a Druid as well as a Christian was exactly what I needed to become appreciative of my body and block much of the despair I was feeling.

I still feel the bars of the cage, but I can appreciate that it is the contrast between bondage and freedom in the process of incarnation and release that provides for some deep need I have.
 

Francis king

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,318
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
oopmehownerse
for me, I despair when people think that being satanists is a good thing...

I am aware that the new age intellectual appreciation of satan society suggests that satan is not this "evil" being, but instead an "illuminating" and gnosis bearing individual, but then, why not just be pagans, and see Lucifer as another Pan?

Yes, it is right that we have an awareness of death, and decay, and disease, but not so we can promote and engender them, but so that we can transcend them... that is the role of gnosis, after all- to give knowledge, and we would be fools not to utilise that knowledge...

Lucifer, the shining one, the resplendent one, gives us a message which reminds me of Neitzche: **** the order, do what you want for pure motives- be honest, shine, do not be modest for the sake of fake morality, shout loud, you do not have to be meek and humble, and above all...enjoy...

and yet... to my uncultured mind modern satanism and its variants, these days, are either- overrun by kids or a cunning ruse to commit acts which you feel are more authenticated when stamped with a satanic seal. So far, most of those I have met who have felt an affinity for satan have been- child abusers, stalkers, people desperate for kinky sex, people desperate for power, so long as it feels a little subversive, and the same general type u find in any religious organisation: sheep who will go along with things so they can feel better than all the other sheep in the office... and I'm not trying to be inflammatory here deliberately- this is my truth...

I feel that most of what people think of as satanism is not. It is just tantra, and a little bible madness. Before Eliphas Levi there was no goat headed Baphomet to worship. He didn't exist.

As for rituals... LeVey, Crowley, the OTO... sex, nastiness, and general mayhem...

hardly a path to greatness... unless ur a rock star...

oh, of course I appreciate the whole- yin yang thing, the two sides to the coin, etc, but that does not mean I think I need sex drugs or rock and roll to go and meet my God...

maybe things satanic have become more sanitised, and hey, we just utilise the concepts, but for what end?

Yes, things change, wither, decay, this is part of life, but the Princes of darkness have retinues which are cancers, and plagues, and you have to decide which side you are on- do you want to fight disease, misery, decay, sickness, or do you want to make it worse?

Yes, our stupid religions are hardly perfect, but still... within them all are paths to greatness... this other path? Is it not the same?
 

noctuary

Mercurial Goddess
Messages
77
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
here, with you
So far, most of those I have met who have felt an affinity for satan have been- child abusers, stalkers, people desperate for kinky sex, people desperate for power, so long as it feels a little subversive, and the same general type u find in any religious organisation: sheep who will go along with things so they can feel better than all the other sheep in the office... and I'm not trying to be inflammatory here deliberately- this is my truth...
I know many a person who could fit those descriptions. None of which are Satanist. Please don't generalize. It's ignorant.
 

Snoopy

zennish
Messages
5,317
Reaction score
45
Points
48
Hi noctuary,

As per your intro, I have no cookies but I do have a question! You say that you are a Laveyan Satanist and I’d not heard of this so I did the usual and Wiki’d it:

LaVeyan Satanism is a religion founded in 1966 by Anton LaVey. Its teachings are based on individualism, social Darwinism, self-indulgence, and "eye for an eye" morality, with influence from Friedrich Nietzsche and Ayn Rand, while its rituals and magic draw heavily from occultists such as Aleister Crowley. Borrowing Crowley's terminology, its adherents define Satanism as a "Left-Hand Path" religion, rejecting traditional "Right-Hand Path" religions such as Christianity for their perceived denial of life and emphasis on guilt and abstinence. Unlike Theistic Satanism, which is rejected by the Church of Satan as Christian heresy rather than Satanism, it does not literally worship Satan, but rather uses "Satan" as a symbol for people's natural inner desires.

LaVeyan Satanism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Would you say that this is fairly in accordance with your understanding?


s.
 

noctuary

Mercurial Goddess
Messages
77
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
here, with you
Yeah, it pretty much is how I believe. Of course it varies person to person since we aren't in the sheep frame of mind.
 

Bruce Michael

Well-Known Member
Messages
797
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Trans-Himalayas
Hmmm... never heard of Lucifer and Satan described in that way before, and not sure I'd go along with the labels, but I understand and agree with the concept I think you're putting out there, Bruce, of balance.

The founder of the Hermetic Society: Dr. Anna Kingsford spoke about the distinction too.
Here's Steiner's lecture:
Lecture I: The Balance in the World and Man, Lucifer and Ahriman


The concept of balance between focus on the Otherworld(s) and spirit, and focus on this life and earth here and now, is very much how I practice Druidry. I found it a useful path for keeping me more grounded, encouraging me to find myself and spirituality in the earth, the now, in my own body and the richness of our senses. And yet it also explicitly focuses on the Otherworld and engaging it as well. I find the balance to be healthy for me. Can't speak for others, but when I am too grounded, I become restless, bored, and... tired. When I fail to meditate and do ritual and so forth over long periods of time, I literally feel more fatigued in my body. When I am too focused on the Otherworld, I begin to despair and feel caged in my body. I forget what is good about incarnation and only feel the limitations, failing to see the gifts.

For whatever reason, Christianity was really quite good at getting me to connect and focus with the Otherworld (in its own way), and it encouraged me in service to others during this life, but it was not good at helping me rejoice in this life, this earth, now. I fully acknowledge that is an individual thing, and not a fault with Christianity, but my solution to become a Druid as well as a Christian was exactly what I needed to become appreciative of my body and block much of the despair I was feeling.

I still feel the bars of the cage, but I can appreciate that it is the contrast between bondage and freedom in the process of incarnation and release that provides for some deep need I have.


Christianity should develop joy in life.

As my Teachers have said:
Christianity must foremostly provoke enthusiasm, great love known and great desire answered, so that the accordance with life itself be felt, known and welcomed. We need not maintain that this enthusiasm must be joined in upon; but we do maintain our own right to hold it. Otherwise we should be lustreless and coddled in sin, or perfect and sour, resulting in further and greater sin to come.

Flaming Door - Google Book Search

-Br.Bruce
 

path_of_one

Embracing the Mystery
Messages
2,906
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Under the Stars
I agree that Christianity should produce joy, and in its own way it did, but not for incarnation and daily life itself (for me). I felt joy in being close to Christ, and I have always felt great love for others (since I was a child) and great love from God. But none of that connected me to being joyful about incarnation. You can be very much rejoicing in your relationship with God, while fully feeling the limitations of being in a body and being rather unhappy about it. From the earliest time I can remember, I felt a bit betrayed by being in a body. It still doesn't feel like me. I just feel now more of an affection for this clunky thing I inhabit, rather than only frustration.

I suspect that much of my need for Druidry was to have a sense of community. I tried for most of my life to go to many different Christian churches, and most were outright intolerant or ignorant of the heart of my own spiritual experience, and none I found ever offered the sort of guidance in an earth-based path the way Druidry did.

The amount of focus on the negative aspects of the world in Christian churches made me despair even further, since I am naturally prone to depression and have no trouble feeling deeply the pain of the earth and living beings under the current malestrom of violence, war, intolerance, and greed. Christianity did not offer me any useful techniques for mastering my own response to these things, to turning down the volume on empathy, which comes naturally to me but can be agonizing. Christianity, as I see it, offered many wonderful things to me but little practical instruction and going to church, at best, feels that I am partaking a wonderful walking meditation. It does not feel like I am fellowshipping with people who understand me.

Druidry offered a community of people who had many of the same spiritual experiences I had and a number of guidances on mastering how I interact with the world in a way that does not deny the chief work of Christianity- the growth of the love of Christ- but is much more specific and practical if you do naturally experience empathy, sense spirits, and so forth (which many Christians simply condemn, as if some of us can so easily switch it off).

In short, the combination works very well for me. Returning to your concept of balance, I rarely found a Christian church that condoned balance. I found many that condoned an almost exclusive focus on the afterlife and attaining heaven, to the extent that even the most basic of Christ's concerns (for the poor, the downtrodden, etc.) rarely made it into the sermon, and forget any rejoicing in the pleasures of this earth. The focus was so often on end-times or on producing guilt by reinforcing that none of us were really good at all, and this may be useful for some but is like pouring salt in a wound if you're already a sensitive, self-reflective perfectionist like me.

In short, perhaps Christianity should be sufficient on its own as my religion, but so far it never has been and the times that I try very hard to fit in solely with Christianity, I end up feeling very much like I am denying my true self and acting in a role. Which then leads to my becoming entirely overwhelmed with life, since it is quite tiring to be acting all the time.

I hope that responds without being too terribly off topic, but I think there is something to it with regards to Satanism. The few Satanists I have met have been the Laveyan sort, and I've had a hard time distinguishing what made them distinctive Satanist outside of using the symbols of Christianity, but turned on their head, so to speak. Otherwise, they seemed like atheistic high magicians, which I mean clearly as a classification. They didn't worship any deities, and they practiced high magic, not unlike some witches.

The little bit I have read about Lavey (interviews and some anthropological articles) made me think he was a pretty normal guy, but kind of ego-centric and really brilliant at marketing. He manipulated the media and Christians because by using the very term "Satanism," he created a media storm that continues to this day, despite his ideas having little to do with Satan in the personalistic sense. A long shot argument could be made that he inadvertently serves Satan since he argues for atheism and self-indulgence, but that's not what the media is normally spewing.

From my understanding, splinter groups that really did worship Satan as a personalistic deity may be more problematic, but Lavey was fairly innocuous on his own. He had children and a ton of pets, and while having an odd house in decor and dressing weird, he did not seem to pose much of a real threat to anyone. In interviews he often stresses that he was staunchly against harming children or animals in any way, because he viewed these as most nearing something sacred, because they were closest to the raw animal instinct by which he advocated living. I never did hear a final word on whether or not his gatherings involved sex, but if they did, it would still fail to distinguish him as being particularly Satanic in the ways the media supposes he (and his followers) were/are.

In short, I think he was very good at manipulating others, and the media and Christians dumbly played along, making him far more famous and significant than he otherwise would have been. It was his use of "Satan" and his tendency to lay all his cards on the media table that led to his infamy, for otherwise, he'd probably be chalked up as just one more weird-dressing oddball from California. Interestingly, so far as I know, no one really knows who the guy was, since he sort of invented himself as a character. I'm willing to bet he'd make a colorful, but ultimately kind of predictable, dinner party guest. But then, wouldn't many?
 

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
446
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
Kindest Regards, noctuary!

Thank you for your reply!

I was raised in a household where my mother was a Catholic and my father was just a spiritual person who read the bible...

True. But talk to the older women. They use non Christian ideas still to this day. They use midwife lore to cure illnesses. Catholicism is wrapped in sensual religion and ritual. A perfect jump to other beliefs.

I noticed a bit of this. Of course, I was a teenager and a male, so there was a great deal kept out of my view that I only learned of indirectly. I did see a lot of conflict between what I understood Catholic teaching to be versus what I witnessed being called Catholic. But then, I have seen similar conflicts elsewhere even with other denominations of Christianity, now I accept such as the rule rather than the exception.

Old wives tales had to come from somewhere, and have to be carried forward by someone. There must be something to them, or they wouldn't continue.

Maybe its just me, and I mean no disrespect, but I don't think I would consider a "symbolic satanist" a satanist in the sense that a Christian would generally think. I haven't looked very deeply into LeVey, but it seems from what little I have seen and heard that he tended to use the term more for the shock value than anything, that at root what he promoted could be equated fairly well with most nature religions. Would you consider this to be fairly accurate, or am I way off base?
 

path_of_one

Embracing the Mystery
Messages
2,906
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Under the Stars
I haven't looked very deeply into LeVey, but it seems from what little I have seen and heard that he tended to use the term more for the shock value than anything, that at root what he promoted could be equated fairly well with most nature religions. Would you consider this to be fairly accurate, or am I way off base?

I think the "Satan" symbol was for shock value, but I think his religion is not much like other nature religions, in part because it is atheistic.

Perhaps Noctuary can elaborate, but having studied Druidry and Wicca more, but having read a bit of Lavey's work and interviews, his religion did seem distinctive, certainly more distinctive than the differences between Druidry and Wicca.
 

noctuary

Mercurial Goddess
Messages
77
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
here, with you
I use Satan as a symbol to represent what I personally think I want to be. I want to be the head of my own self and consious. I want to be my own leader. I want to live free of guilt placed on me to enslave me so to speak. When I choose to do something I want it to be on my merits and reasoning. Not because I am 'supposed' to. I want to be inviting, alluring, tempting, brave and curious. Satan, for me, represents those things. As for shock value? I am an extreme woman. I have tattoos, look the way I look, speak the way I speak, because I have made myself into the being I have wanted to be. There is a reason Medusa is on me. You fear her, but you cannot look away.

In short: I like to stand out, stand up, stand apart and stand above. Sue me:p
 

path_of_one

Embracing the Mystery
Messages
2,906
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Under the Stars
I get attention. Tell me someone who doesn't want attention and I'll show you a liar.;)

I know a few really shy people... :rolleyes:

Anyhoo, what is funny is that you don't sound much different from me. Or many of the people I know. Except for the Satan as a symbol part and the atheism.

But in terms of your description, I'd guess many individualistic types fit. What I find funny is what people consider extreme. I've met people who think I'm extreme and people who don't and it seems to be a sliding scale based on whatever they are used to. I find almost no one extreme, but then I grew up in southern California in a family of socialists, punks, and flower children. LOL So having tattoos and challenging authority is the norm and encouraged in my family, rather than the exception. I can't really imagine what extreme would be in my context, unless it is either insane or very irresponsible or unethical (in that it harms others). Practically everything else is par for course.

As for greater society, I usually am going for the "just odd enough" look. That is, I want to stand out enough for people to confront their stereotypes and have to wonder about their own categories. Is she goth? Is she Christian? Is she Pagan? What is going on?

The greatest compliment I have ever had was from one of my students. Toward the end of one of my anthro courses we were doing Q&A and he said "You're not American or anything, are you?" To which I basically said, "Huh?" And he replied, "You don't get in groups. You're just you, and you see all humanity as your group." That's about what I'm going for...
 

noctuary

Mercurial Goddess
Messages
77
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
here, with you
I really am not much different then most people. I am a good person, I go to work, I take care of my elderly mom. Except for the baby eating...that might be different. :p

ok ok. I have to sleeeeep.
Long day at work!
 

path_of_one

Embracing the Mystery
Messages
2,906
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Under the Stars
I suppose it feels good. I want lots of things. You asked if I want attention. I said yes. I also want pink nail polish, a cheese hot dog and even a good night sleep. If you wonder why, you can ask.

Of course attention feels good. That's why so many people want to be famous. For some people, standing out significantly makes them feel attention in a negative way. For others, it feels positive.

I went nail polish shopping today! :D No pink though- black and dark red-orange. I do have pink somewhere in my linen closet...

Is there anything better than a really good night's sleep? With some really nifty dreams? I love sleep. I could seriously sleep about 12 hours a day if I was a lazy bum and didn't have to go to work.
 
Top