Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Mindmaster

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15]
General LHP Discussion / Re: "We vs. I"
« on: November 03, 2017, 06:13:30 pm »
As normal I went to go discuss LHP and Setian ideology with my friends religion and philosophy classes. We were debating mind body Dualism for his class and it came up that people like materialists and some Buddhists believe that there is no "I," just a "we", a collection of different processes.

I wasn't sure how to get out of that, it was kind of a stale mate. How can we be certain that something metaphysical is needed to explain how we are? In this case a mind/soul specifically, and within the context of the mind body problem?

Sounds like some of the things I've read in Ouspensky's works. His assertion being that we say, "I", it is more like a choir of thought processes we identify as ourselves, but it's really like a choir of mini-me's that inhabit the same body. :D

Anyway, to describe my view it is more like there is a "we" with many "I"''s as in individualities divided in such a way as to give depth to the experience. I dislike the language of meta-physical, and often the semantics, especially in this regard, are part of the problem. The reality of course is that we are unable to separate our subjective reality from the objective one, so one can logically conclude that these things are impossible to divide.  Both realities are real and intertwined, so to speak, and the absurdity is often in trying to make a example of the division of this or that at the expense of one or the other. Often our subjective impressions and spiritual inklings are the very impetus that leads us to the real understandings of the objective and vice versa.

As far as debates and certainty, ultimately such conversations should be had because without them we will never know the reality but they are just conversations or MODELS of that reality, not the real thing. The very nature of the debate you had is subjective in itself, and there is no side to win as it presumes you agree to one of the base assumptions posited as a position. While the position may seem unresolvable it not possible to prove either assertion without buying into one or the other wholly.

General LHP Discussion / Re: How long are your rituals usually?
« on: November 03, 2017, 08:48:39 am »
I'm writing a song intended for rituals, with 3 distinct movements (and some smaller sub movements) to mark a opening, invocation and working and closing ect.

I know how long my rituals normally last and I was aiming for 15 minutes long but I need to hear from others so that it can more match an average. The idea behind the song is to match one's ritual to each part or movement to act as a powerful tool in the ritual amplifying everything else going on.

Sort of an interesting question, but I've always felt that the answer is somewhat between whatever it takes to get in the mood and actually do it. For me, I'd say somewhere between 15-60 minutes, it just varies on days. Shorter than that and it's hard to get into the mood so to speak, for me. It's sort of like sex - there is definitely a bit of psycho-spiritual foreplay that has to happen for the right vibe. :D

Satanism / Re: Is image important to satanism?
« on: November 02, 2017, 02:40:40 pm »
I think what qualifies someone is a Satanist opposed to the general LHP is simple. Are you involved in spiritually with Satan?
Fair enough. Just, define "spiritually" and define "Satan" ;)

I mean, more-or-less pantheists like @Kapalika and me have a pretty different concept of what we mean by Satan than you as a polytheist seem to have. It might be that our deities nevertheless are one and the same entity, or that two polytheistic Satanists' deities are actually two different entities, who can tell?

I don't view it particularly different as I feel these differences are more of a product of what you can grok. As far as spiritually, I just mean that you know Satan exists in your mind. Whether you feel that in a more syncretic sense or not your execution (the actual practice of your beliefs) is probably no different than mine. Mostly when you get into the contrasts of poly/pantheism it is a lot of arguing for nothing - these views are the product of your exploration more than anything. Ultimately, nothing is stopping us from succumbing to a reduction to the absurd - that my Satan is not your Satan, or because you see things pantheistically or syncretically you are less spiritual about things - nothing could be further from the truth in my view. I simply don't jive with a pantheistic view because I have a more onion like view of existence, in that many layers exist and there certainly walls between them yet they are connected. My impression doesn't mean that I feel others are invalid, but someone may be spiritually drawn to that which is in front of their face. :D

First of all, someone recommended Modern Demonolatry a while back and it was very helpful, after pursuing their website, I noticed they have a book called modified. It's how to alter practice for people suffering various conditions: blindness, deafness, wheelchair, etc. which I thought was nice to see. Only field I've seen that in honestly.

However, they have a small section including depression and it recommended elemental balancing rituals(which definitely seems like a good idea) as well as some cleansing ones occasionally. I do have some problems with depression but I honestly only know the Golden Dawn/Thelemic rituals when it comes to cleaning and elemental balancing. Would love something more in terms with a Satanic bent.

Most of the "elemental balancing" jazz started through the hype of Franz Bardon. While his books certainly are an interesting read, I don't know that most of this is necessary in a Demonolatry setting because things aren't viewed necessarily in a classical hermetic context. Demonolaters do associate various daemonic divinities to the four quarters, but certainly the ritual structure in the book you've mentioned is simple enough. What you generally will not find in theistic rituals is a lot of rote type repetition as you would in GD/OTO material, because the focus of such rituals is not to teach a complicated set of order materials, but rather to "get something done". Typically, we will not banish anything, for example, as we generally feel no need. This makes a lot of these "balancing" concepts whether it is "polarities" or "elements" useless for us.

The Demonolatry method would be simpler - you'd petition the divinity associated to your need, do the rite, and note the results. The hub-bub of other magical systems, as you will see working one of these rites is unnecessary and that's why there isn't a Satanic/Demonolatry equivalent. You feel depressed, you'd do a rite to Verrine (divinity associate to health) or Verrier (if you were looking for an herbal treatment), but if it was because of something you didn't understand maybe your rite would be to Ronwe. :D  There is also nothing wrong with combining all three, as I have done in the past. The sigils of the demonic divine are basically the keys of the force you incorporate, thus in this context using anything else is just a useless burden. It is far simpler to work the method provided, rather than address the issue in the context of over-complicated occultniks and slower methods.

How would you know that you are elementally unbalanced anyway, for example? Presuming you were successful at manipulating such forces in the first place, you may do more damage than good. That's why I feel in some cases this method of operation is more viable, as you don't need to know what you don't know - you will be led to it by the nose. :D (trust me, it'll feel that way..)

Satanism / Re: Is image important to satanism?
« on: November 02, 2017, 02:53:27 am »
On the one hand, I fullheartedly agree with this - Satanism is about following one's own will, and so basically pure adogmatism.
On the other hand however, such a definition makes it extremely difficult to determine whether anyone is a Satanist or not. Only oneself could really tell, and even then one might be mistaken due to self-delusions.
Also, in what way would Satanism then differ from the LHP in general? I mean, personally I use these two terms interchangably anyway, at least when referring to myself. Well, there are "Satanists" that are too dogmatic to be LHPers, and LHPers whom to call Satanists would be strange as they work with completely different cultural references and not with anything they would refer to as Satan ever.

And then, there is the question of how far one is on one's path, and how easy or difficult to attain one's individual will is.

I think what qualifies someone is a Satanist opposed to the general LHP is simple. Are you involved in spiritually with Satan? I mean that's simply it, and while there are certainly a lot of atheistic Satanists that would disagree because they feel "symbolic" Satanism is enough one could question whether they need to have any Satan in their speak at all. That's why most modern people seem confused on the matter, and it's understandable why. I personally don't see the reasons to involve Satan in your scope of LHP if he's merely a prop. IF these things are seen as props why bother with any of them anyway? :D When I feel snarky I generally refer to these folks as pseudo-Satanists because I don't really see what the point of it is. You can be a Nietzsche-ian objectivist who admires the concept of Lex Talonis, Epicureanism, and dabbles in the occult, for example. Sure, it's easier to say Satanist than all that, but let's be honest in that Satan doesn't really bring value to you other than for shock in this case. Ultimately, I feel that is why "LaVey Satanism" grows more unpopular in that the shock value of Satan is virtually nil outside of the bible belt.

In regard to theistic Satanism, I feel that it's simply easier to figure out who the Satanist is and who isn't and that's because we can draw from whatever inspirations we'd like and still at the end of the day be a Satanist. Whereas I usually get the impression that most LaVey Satanists would eat their own if they didn't represent EXACTLY what TSB and other mouthpieces proclaim. I think one expression is simply a healthier expression of Satanism, as a whole.

Satanism / Re: Is image important to satanism?
« on: October 31, 2017, 01:35:13 pm »
As with any sort of -ism, I agree that there is some posturing involved with keeping up an image. I wouldn't go as far as to call it Virtue signal when it comes to Satanism as with traditional orthodox groups. I do find it inauthentic when they claim their brand of Satanism as legitimate without it being possible for it to be others. In all seriousness, I would say that I encountered Satanism first while reading Lord Byron and Milton in high school. And I very much admire Lord Byron's work and ideation on the aristocratic rebel.

The only thing that makes all of these groups un-Satanic in my eye is dogma. As soon as you place a system of rules of what is valid and then you've marched right the hell out of what Satanism is at its core. Satanism for me represents a spiritual insurrection of sorts, in that you must have the freedom to practice and think in the way that leads to your ultimate development. What "development" means to you is, of course, highly subjective. Without that though, I feel you aren't doing any Satanism in the proper sense at all no matter what you are calling it. That's why I think many of the organizations mentioned in the OP are dead - dead as in the corpses of failed experiments. They didn't learn from their mistakes and evolve, so they've become dogmatic in approach and turned into a group of wannabes. Surest sign of the wannabeism is that there become certain conversations that be inapproachable, or looking like something becomes more important than doing anything. It becomes an identity rather than a path, so that's why I feel they are not real Satanists.

General LHP Discussion / Re: Worship
« on: October 31, 2017, 01:12:54 pm »
I have thought about things like that and where do common religions go wrong with it...

I view worship as a form of admiration and it does not even have to be directed towards a deity. Humans often worship other humans all the time. You might want to worship a deity of your choice for the same reason, you might want to say "thank you" to someone.

The very first problem that religions like christianity is that it says "you MUST worship".

The problem is not with the submission in any form. The problem is that someone says that everyone is supposed to do it. I believe that lhp means to say that you should have a free will and do what ever you want... any "you should do this" becomes the opposite of such idea. I view that one should pray to a deity is an example of what we are always taught we should do. Following that teaching would be a denial of free will... but following the idea "you should never do this" is effectively the same.

Just some thoughts for you to think about. You might be being effectively submissive towards lhp ideas. You might be making lhp into your doctorine. It might also be not a wrong thing to do. You might be LEARNING to cast aside what you LEARN.

Edit: interaction of needs with a free will is a separate topic to think about, separate from the topic of worship at least. I have some thoughts on it, I might share them if you are interested.

I concur with your statements here, but I find it strange to conflate worship with submission. The culture of my ancestors regularly venerated them, for example. Worship in the LHP is more of a process of celebrating a relationship, rather than master-slave relation. I simply view Satan and various "demon" energies as spiritual sages and conduits of a certain type of force. The real problem is dogma in that you MUST do things or you WILL get problems. It's shifting responsibility of your life to the divine, and thereby making your own personal actions relatively worthless, then the scale of the importance of such relationships is WAY out of whack and one-sided.

I'm theistic, but I am also personally responsible for my life. I do not expect that cosmic level beings are overly concerned with my mundane affairs, but if I seek deeper knowledge and I can work toward forging that relationship with them to gain it. In a way, I am always of the disposition a student should have with a teacher and very respectful but ultimately I have to take what I've learned and do something with it.

Lounge / Re: Sneaking in... Introduction...
« on: October 27, 2017, 06:45:38 pm »
RF will forever be important to, well honestly, the very existence of the O.S. and this (hopefully superior) forum. That said, it's very sad what happened to that site. I honestly feel the worst trolls are the freaking admins there, without naming names.

Undoubtedly, lol.

The inability to distinguish a troll from troll bait isn't helping them either. Anyway, no need to name names as I am completely aware of who you are talking about. It just became impossible to have a dissenting opinion of any kind even if the two people were just having a heated discussion. (Even if they were friends!) Lol, I was modded several times for having an argument with someone whom I considered fondly, yet other people would report me.  At that point, why talk? Many of them were pissed at me because of politics and not just going along with their program... Well, I have no program - I'm personal anarchist all government is whack to me but you gotta pick the best of the worst or you are really in trouble. Most people are not capable of handling the level of freedom anarchy means, so it's an idealistic thing rather than a reality and I am aware of it.

To be fair, RF did nothing to form O.S. - the product and the work of our discussions is what formed that. RF did nothing but collect money and spam people with popups and porn ads in their email. :D Years long friends did the heavily lifting, and to me that is where the credit is due. It was natural to seek another venue when the gestapo just couldn't get enough of itself... LHPers generally don't stomach tyranny well... Especially me.. :D

Lounge / Re: Sneaking in... Introduction...
« on: October 27, 2017, 01:25:29 am »
@Mindmaster Welcome, it has been a very long time seeing you. :)    I am not to terribly active on RF anymore, since so many Counter Productive Threads are quite tiresome.

I realized I'm not having discussions there just engaging with zealots whether they are political, religious, or whatever. Post quality went out the window as the mods flag every post that is even the slightest bit argumentative or disagreeable. It's so bad even the admins and mods are ghosts because they probably can't say anything without making themselves in violation of some rule or melting a snowflake as well. It's not that as I was looking for a fight so much as they were so intolerant of ideas outside of their bubble that invariably I'd become embroiled in one.  It just becomes a situation of being able to say nothing because all the things are banned.

Lounge / Re: Sneaking in... Introduction...
« on: October 26, 2017, 10:20:12 pm »
Welcome Mindmaster, you may not believe me but I'm glad to have you here :D

Why would you ever think that? :D

Lounge / Re: Sneaking in... Introduction...
« on: October 26, 2017, 07:00:48 pm »
Eh, I'm a lush, but tend towards the cheaper options. :mrgreen: Feel free to make new threads about what interests you, we like to throw ideas around. Thanks for signing up.

Heheh, I'm not a snob about the expense just the flavor.  For example, most spiced rum is nearly the same so save a buck is logical. Can't say the same thing about scotch or absinthe though, cost and quality still don't always go together BUT more often or not in that realm there is a correlation. Wine is all over the place as well, I've had $20 bottles taste as good as one that I paid $280 for.

Gaming / Re: What are you playing?
« on: October 26, 2017, 06:28:18 pm »
I thought we already had this thread, but I couldn't find it. Same as the other stickies but for games!

I just picked up Ghost Recon Wildlands, and my God I wish I had more vacation time to take. If you like tactical, stealth, and sniping games it should be next on your list.

Witcher 3, went $20 on Xbone... I'm hopelessly addicted with over eighty hours in... :D

I do like Skyrim too, but I destroyed the game (beat it all) never could bring myself to pay another $60 for a simply remastered version... Even though I know the new one supports mods on Xbox... I tried it and it's not THAT MUCH different from the old game.

Lounge / Sneaking in... Introduction...
« on: October 26, 2017, 06:27:04 pm »
I'll be lurking around here to see what's up from time to time... fair warning. :D Many here seem to know me.

If you don't:

I'm a Theistic Satanist/Demonolator who has friends in many pantheons and has an addiction to high nicotine vapes, heavy metal music, and expensive alcohol. Hopefully, we will have many interesting conversations.

General LHP Discussion / Re: Recommended start with demonalotry?
« on: October 26, 2017, 06:08:01 pm »
Hmmm so Demonlolatory seems esentially like worship of any other god from S Connolly's book and the theory about them just being forgotten obscure pagan Gods. I mean, I figured there was no need for goetic circles in satanic bent workings but it just seems so, informal and like any other ritual. Then again, I guess if you're invoking you don't necesarrily expect a physical appearance unlike evoking something against it's will which I would have to agree with treating something respectfully is probably the proper way.

So I have to ask, is there any advantage to choosing to work with them other than any other Pagan god?

I try not to over-intellectualize theistic things, but ultimately the method of working is faster and simpler. :D I find ceremonial methods pompous and frustrating, especially since they do not align with my vibe. Anyway, I've worked with many of the "Demonaltry" divinities as is were and feel they were well selected as well as well disposed to a theist in training, nevermind being absolutely effective in their scopes. In any case, I'd always recommend that with whatever you work with you work according to your psycho-spiritual nature for the best possible results. The daemonic have personalities, and just like people you can waste a lot of your personal time trying to make a trying relationship work.

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15]