Author Topic: LaVey loving both dogma AND nature  (Read 170 times)

Xepera maSet

  • O.S. Co-founder | OSM Founder
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 2207
  • Total likes: 2212
  • 𓆣𓏏𓏛𓀺𓏇𓃩 𓐣𓂛𓁵𓆖
    • View Profile
    • My Book on Setianism
LaVey loving both dogma AND nature
« on: April 21, 2019, 03:41:05 am »
In the Satanic Bible, LaVey says:

"Man needs ritual and dogma... Satanism has both ceremony and dogma. Dogma, as will be explained, is necessary... There is nothing wrong with dogma, providing it is not based on ideas and actions which go completely against human nature."

I don't see how there's any question on if L.Satanism is RHP or LHP. Dogma and adherence to nature, those are pretty defining traits.

"That which bends, break it down
That which breaks, burn it down
That which withers, seal its tomb"
- Junius

Inlustratus

Re: LaVey loving both dogma AND nature
« Reply #1 on: April 21, 2019, 08:13:52 am »
To be honest LHP and RHP definitions are pretty vague. One may say it's either about shunning or glorifying the fall. Other may say it's about using black or white magic. It might would make more sense if he used "doctrine" instead of "dogma", but who am I to judge. LaVey was goofy as fucking, but after watching that interview on Jon Pine Show he seems like a good man. His writings might have contradictions and probably are plagiarized but I mostly blame todays CoS and its members for making CoS look like a bunch of edgelord teens. LaVey was nonetheless a good start for an occult journey.
*scary satanic text*

Kapalika

Re: LaVey loving both dogma AND nature
« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2019, 06:51:29 pm »
What's inherently wrong with nature, or even specifically human nature? I've always seen the shunning of nature as a Christian thing. They say that nature is "fallen" due to sin and therefore undesirable and corrupt. Satanism takes the stance that "sin" and the natural world are not inherently evil or "fallen".

I mean, Satanism without veneration of at least the nature of the self... doesn't make sense to me. That's kind of one of the defining features.

Also @Inlustratus touched on this but Left Hand Path doesn't have one monolithic "true" definition of form (not even in Tantra or Sanskrit)... one might say that to try to make it so would be dogmatic. Thinking about it, doctrine probably would be a better word than "dogma" here but it seems the modern CoS has taken the "dogma" stance to heart, literally xD
« Last Edit: April 21, 2019, 06:56:48 pm by Kapalika »
https://kapalika.com

My religion is Satanism & Kashmir Shaivism via Vāmācāra

"We have none but evidence for the prosecution [against Satan] and yet we have rendered the verdict. To my mind, this is irregular. It is un-English. It is un-American; it is French." ... "We may not pay him reverence, for that would be indiscreet, but we can at least respect his talents." - Mark Twain
"God and the individual are one. To realize this is the essence of Shaivism." - Swami Lakshmanjoo

idgo

Re: LaVey loving both dogma AND nature
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2019, 03:08:03 pm »
I personally gloss RHP as the desire to subsume oneself within a higher power, and LHP as a desire to become a higher power. More poetically, though less rigorously, RHP could be called the desire to change the self to conform with the order of the world, and LHP the desire to change that worldly order to conform with the self. There are as many LHPs as practitioners, but most RHPs are relatively close cousins to one another.

What forbids one from venerating the self as the epitome of natural progress? It seems to me that such a position would be consistent with most definitions of LHP, and agreeing with nature as an afterthought to strengthen the core argument of personal importance.