Satan Is A Vampire

[Hapu]

As a general response:

This indeed is a passage from a Church of Satan Grotto Masters handbook.

Perhaps this is where (and I mean absolutely no offense) those who play spook show dress up while remaining faithful atheists miss the mark.

For strict atheists, greater workings are psychodrama aimed at catharsis. I've never been in that category but I get it.

All of these deities, symbols, names, etc have been used for centuries because they work.

Whether or not you believe that the Devil exists or not, every time that you hold a ritual using His images, His names, His symbols, you are in effect feeding Him.  Think of how many have offered up their own energies similarly but with the belief that He is very real. You are raising up your own energy to add to that so you're belief/disbelief is irrelevant.

Feeding the Devil with the energies of one's own body is by no means a universal practice. To assess the rationality of this practice, I'd need to better understand the cost/benefit analysis. What am I really losing and what do I really stand to gain?

In this sense every deity does in fact have Vampiric nature. So to have all of their religions. They have enslaved human beings while feeding off of the energy raised and yes even the blood that has been shed in their name. Because of the length of time (centuries) that this has went on it is why their names, images, statues, symbols, all have power about them.

Dedicating the war-dead to a war-demon is very different from letting some demon feed off my energy, because the war-dead aren't me, they're someone else. Or if it turns out I'm one of them, I won't care.

Dedicating the state-executed criminal dead to some demon of law or death is likewise offering someone else, not me.

It's offering me that I have a problem with.

[Km Anu]

An archetype is a Platonic First Form and Satan is related to the devil or trickster archetype. Not until recently has Satan taken on his new 'positive' form, as he has usually been portrayed as something essentially destructive in nature. Thoughtforms are not archetypes, a thoughtform is a manifestation/extension of one's consciousness or more likely a group or even global consciousness. There has not been any objective manifestation of Satan as far I know of.

It becomes an archetype when the person gives it that form. It must be channeled using whatever modality the practitioner can most easily consider.

An archetype/first form exists regardless of whether we acknowledge it or not.

  I know, I'm agreeing. But it doesnt have to be called that to be used like one. Someone gets the same benifit from externalizing their anger as a war God archetype that they would worshiping the archetype as a theistic being. The faith in the externalization still compounds the will for people that strive to grow from their system.

Likewise, it was also pointed out in another post with references that the CoS did indeed have different perspectives on Vampyres other than the one essay that you cite in TSB.

I do hope that this information has been of use to you.

It's just a good metaphore for beings that require negative karma. Or emotional currency. A metaphore that is sometimes stretched unnecessarily beyond its usefulness to fit a specific aesthetic imo.

[W_Adam_Smythe]

Feeding the Devil with the energies of one's own body is by no means a universal practice. To assess the rationality of this practice, I'd need to better understand the cost/benefit analysis. What am I really losing and what do I really stand to gain?

My point here is one of believe it or not. If you are raising energy (using your own life-force, will, etc) for the Prince of Darkness (or for that matter any other deity) you are indeed feeding Him whether you believe that He is a sentient being or a metaphor only.

Of course, belief only strengthens that bond. However, even the atheistic LaVeyan's will tell you that during a ritual you are to suspend disbelief.   What they never follow that one through with is that when they do safely turn back to their "safe" state of disbelief is that disbelief is a belief..

This is why it is always best to thoroughly research exactly what it is that you are invoking, using, etc. rather than to just assume that you are putting on a spooky show that will shock your friends and parents.

From Dr. Aquino's Satanic Bible page 201 section 7 Sekhem:

Activation of the sekhem has another effect: every incident infuses the Initiate with more of the neter invoked, to the cumulative degree that the Initiate's personality becomes accented by the neter's: seeing as the neter sees, speaking as that neter would speak, acting as that neter would act. Hence it is the sekhem which makes possible, and ultimately consecrates the priesthood of a neter in the individual so aligned. Once this transformation has taken place, it cannot be undone; at most it may be sublimated or repressed, but only at great cost to the priest's or priestess' very sanity."

I also would offer the commentary from Nikolas Schreck and Zeena from the point that I have the video queued at to the 14:19 minute mark:

https://youtu.be/SEu1pXKEL8M?t=766

Dedicating the war-dead to a war-demon is very different from letting some demon feed off my energy, because the war-dead aren't me, they're someone else. Or if it turns out I'm one of them, I won't care.

Dedicating the state-executed criminal dead to some demon of law or death is likewise offering someone else, not me.

It's offering me that I have a problem with.

Are you then saying you are bargain shopping for something that you take seriously?

[W_Adam_Smythe]

It's just a good metaphore for beings that require negative karma. Or emotional currency. A metaphore that is sometimes stretched unnecessarily beyond its usefulness to fit a specific aesthetic imo.

I fully agree to use something that is useful to you.

As far as positive or negative, what is given or what is received is largely based in the eye of the beholder so to speak.

Since this post has been largely from a LaVey/CoS view point, lets for a moment turn to the Temple of Set and their own Order of the Vampyre.

From the Ruby Tablet of Set with regards to the OV:

The vampyre however nourishes its lifesource on its own terms. It is self-motivated, and takes what it needs from where it pleases,and is beholden to none. Self does not feed the Gods as a Setian.

This is the cornerstone of the heart of Vampyrism IMO.

As living Vampyres, we aspire to become exactly as those other deities have. Any lifeforce that we then would offer up would be in exchange for the guidance of those who have already put it in practice and have mastered it. 

[Km Anu]

This is the cornerstone of the heart of Vampyrism IMO.

As living Vampyres, we aspire to become exactly as those other deities have. Any lifeforce that we then would offer up would be in exchange for the guidance of those who have already put it in practice and have mastered it.

I Like this. I would only add that there's a number of neteru held within my psyche, and I strive for traits of them. The usefulness of the externalization is the ability to pick and choose what traits you want and when you want them. I take exercise of this practice to be greater than the power of a Neter. The practitioner has a mind-body capable of holding conciousness and would be almost MORE vampiric than the Neteru or non-neter, feeding on their power freely while controlling how much of the self us given in return.

The metaphor is similar to a classic contract with the devil,  but unique in that the magician always sets the terms of the contract.

[W_Adam_Smythe]

This is the cornerstone of the heart of Vampyrism IMO.

As living Vampyres, we aspire to become exactly as those other deities have. Any lifeforce that we then would offer up would be in exchange for the guidance of those who have already put it in practice and have mastered it.

I Like this. I would only add that there's a number of neteru held within my psyche, and I strive for traits of them. The usefulness of the externalization is the ability to pick and choose what traits you want and when you want them. I take exercise of this practice to be greater than the power of a Neter. The practitioner has a mind-body capable of holding conciousness and would be almost MORE vampiric than the Neteru or non-neter, feeding on their power freely while controlling how much of the self us given in return.

Oh absolutely agreed completely. The only thing I would add is that with everything being a give/take as with any dealing the more you give the more you get. (That would also be in "normal world" circumstances as well. What I am saying here is say that you undertook a martial art but you only attended half of the classes. It may be enough to get you by, but there is also the understanding that you could have so much more if you committed to the entire course.)

That said, as you say it is pick and choose and that should always be based on what is most useful to you.

The metaphor is similar to a classic contract with the devil,  but unique in that the magician always sets the terms of the contract.

Now, I really REALLY like that!  

[Hapu]

I know, I'm agreeing. But it doesnt have to be called that to be used like one. Someone gets the same benifit from externalizing their anger as a war God archetype that they would worshiping the archetype as a theistic being. The faith in the externalization still compounds the will for people that strive to grow from their system.

Wm_Adam_Smythe says the game is fundamentally different if the war god actualy exists as a theistic beign, with its own independent awareness. will, and destiny. In that scenario, the war God take what it wants or needs from the practictioner, permission or not, mortal ignorance or not, contract or not, protection or not. Nothing stands between the practitioner and the entity's vampirism except the practitiioner's decision not to engage at all.

[Km Anu]

Wm_Adam_Smythe says the game is fundamentally different if the war god actualy exists as a theistic beign, with its own independent awareness. Will and destiny. In that scenario the war God takes what it wants or needs from the practictioner, permission or not, mortal ignorance or not, contract or not, protection or not. Nothing stands between the practitioner and the entity's vampirism except the practitiioner's decision not to engage at all.

My reply was aimed at Etu's reply, but I have some stuff I could add.

Theistic worship of an entity such as the above described practice appears to take belief as a pre-requisite. If the practitioner's system allows for controls in which the practitioner holds equal belief (or faith in their effectiveness) then control should still be attainable, just in a way that is really hard to prove to someone else.

Both theistic and atheistic examination of Vampyric traits place importance on control of the relationship. I find it interesting that compounding will (believing that you can so that you can which makes you believe you can more so you can more) is the primary modality of control. I find it equally interesting that this "Energy," just may be will itself. The method of control becomes the food source.

It fits nicely with the theme, like a glove really. A Hollywood vampire could be controlled via its food source (like how Sookie controls Bill in TrueBlood) and this archetype is no different.

By maintaining this control....Well the practitioner seems like more of a Vampyre for Sekhem than the practitioner, Holy crap. He has boundless power that builds itself and gives it to lesser beings (Those without physical bodies) in exchange for what Sekhem they have. Mind you this power is limited, and can only be gained through human beings. I'm thinking The Master in the strain controlling Palmer with his White. He dishes out his boundless power in drops, promising to convert him someday into a Strigoi, stringing him along for most of the show. I know its a little abstract, but its a fun flip to consider.

[Liu]

@Liu Quite correct it is a symbiotic relationship. In fact, that is exactly what it states in the Grotto Master's Handbook: Satan himself is a Vampire who will reward you only as long as you feed him.

That is the give/take.

Then the choice of the term vampire doesn't make much sense to me.
To me, a deity is vampiric if you don't get much out of your relationship with them.

That you have to put something into a relationship is nothing special.

[Km Anu]

@Liu Quite correct it is a symbiotic relationship. In fact, that is exactly what it states in the Grotto Master's Handbook: Satan himself is a Vampire who will reward you only as long as you feed him.

That is the give/take.

Satan is a symbiote

Does that make YHWH a parasite?

[Liu]

Satan is a symbiote

Does that make YHWH a parasite?

Well that's pretty much what I said in my previous post here.

[Onyx]

Most Satanists do not accept Satan as an anthropomorphic being with cloven hooves, a barbed tail, and horns. He merely represents a force in nature - the powers of darkness which have been named just that because no religion has taken these forces out of the darkness. Nor has science been able to apply technical terminology to this force. It is an untapped reservoir that few can make use of because they lack the ability use a tool without having to first break down and label all the parts which make it run. It is this incessant need to analyze which prohibits most people from taking advantage of this many faceted key to the unknown - which the Satanist chooses to call "Satan."

Given this symbolic definition, it's difficult for me to reconcile Satan as a vampire. "They are vampires; they feed off of you" makes sense ritualistically, but this part is confusing indeed:

Satan himself is a vampire who will reward you only as long as you feed him.

In my mind, "Satan as Vampire" only makes sense for the more extreme Satanisms which are into blood and other forms of sacrifice to a literal Satan.