Author Topic: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?  (Read 451 times)

pi_ramesses

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #30 on: November 27, 2017, 06:52:25 am »
Isn't it conceivable for a Satanist to be acosmic but not anticosmic?
Pro omnis dominos viae sinistra, sic itur ad astra
Nylfmedli14

Kapalika

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #31 on: November 27, 2017, 07:01:25 am »
Okay finally! Phew, last one.

While I see your point, there is one issue I have with this ranking - how to know that the tradition that the first is an expert in is actually valid and not just itself dogma conserved only due to being traditional?

That's something I asked myself when writing it but that basally deserves it's own topic all-together.

Basically the line between the "high" and "middle" are really fuzzy. Actually the whole scale is really fuzzy. I only chose to do it on three levels as it was the smallest number you need to establish a pattern or scale (and I was going for a short explanation not an essay).

Not saying that this is necessarily the case in the tradition you are probably hinting at,

Truthfully I wasn't hinting at anything. I had 4 'religions' or come to mind when I described the layers; Christianity, Satanism, Hinduism and Buddhism. This is probably due to the fact that those are the ones I know most about than anything else however. I've seen what I described in all of them. I wouldn't consider myself an expert in any of those, although I know a lot on some aspects of them.

but how would one even be able to know, let alone as an outsider to it?

I think it's possible for an outsider to know. Perhaps your questions in this post deserve an entire article or topic about it... I could actually breakdown my own process for it.

One important point of Satanism is the questioning of inherited traditions, so I'm not surprised when this is actually done.

That's a good point, and one I try to keep in mind. But this is also an important part of streams of Hinduism, in it's own way, and yet those can exist alongside other views in how it sees things.

I think a larger part of the problem overall is just general illiteracy on the subjects. This is really true sadly, actually, of many Indian religions as regionalism can makes a view just a few hundred miles away confusing to them or alien even though they share so much in common. I think in a lot of ways we are seeing something similar with Satanism. As I responded catching up to everyone, it dawned on me once or twice that parts of the "anti-cosmic" or "acosmic" view of Satanism as presented here isn't totally different from parts of my beliefs.

To what degree there is common ground once the language is stripped away I'm still trying to figure out.

Isn't it conceivable for a Satanist to be acosmic but not anticosmic?

*shrugs*
My Music and Blog // My Chatroom
My religion is Satanism & Trika via Vāmācāra (Left Hand path)
"God and the individual are one, to realize this is the essence of Shaivism.” - Lakshman Joo

King Mob

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #32 on: November 27, 2017, 01:00:56 pm »
@Liu  I think most of us take a more Platonic approach to the mind. It is one of the forms that exist that you can really only know through death such as a beauty and truth. You literally have to cross the abyss to die. I also find clever analysis of "There Is Never A Moment In Which You Are Not" recieved from Apep by Kelly to be a logical reasonining of conciousness exists in the void. And yes, I agree that the void is something that exists in the universe. Well, doesn't exist. You know what I mean. I think referring to Khaos instead of Chaos here might help clear up some confusion on that part.

@Kapalika It's a straw man to say that someone who uses multiple systems cherrypicks without due diligence and research. Any chaos magician worth their approach immerses themselves in their paradigm researching it and believing it fully then letting go of it(save stuff that works in a bind) when time to paradig shift.


One last thing to say is Norse Mythology, which I consider myself quite well versed in, tells us that things exist in the void. Musphelehim and Neiphelheim are the sparks of creation that came from Ginnungagap, the void, which links the idea to Khaos even farther. They created the universe but the fire-giants and ice giants that reside there are Anticosmic. If Anticosmic creatures can exist in the void, why cant our conciousness?
"Be goodly therefore: dress ye all in fine apparel; eat rich foods and drink sweet wines and wines that foam! Also, take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where and with whom ye will! But always unto me."- Nuit, Book of the Law.

Kapalika

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #33 on: December 03, 2017, 07:12:51 am »
@Liu  I think most of us take a more Platonic approach to the mind.

Well I don't take a platonic view of the mind. I don't see what the fact that "most" people think one way has anything to do with the truth of the matter unless you subscribe to the consensus theory of truth which I assume you don't (it's a rather stupid and lazy cop-out IMO).

It is one of the forms that exist that you can really only know through death such as a beauty and truth. You literally have to cross the abyss to die.

What is the "Abyss" and why do you have to "literally cross it" and why is death necessary? If you have to die (in a literal sense) to cross it how could anyone living know of it?

I also find clever analysis of "There Is Never A Moment In Which You Are Not" recieved from Apep by Kelly to be a logical reasonining of conciousness exists in the void. And yes, I agree that the void is something that exists in the universe. Well, doesn't exist. You know what I mean. I think referring to Khaos instead of Chaos here might help clear up some confusion on that part.

This section is for Satanists and I don't know of any compelling reason why Apep of all gods would be related to Satan. I've never heard of a Michael Kelly outside of the actor so I don't know why he's considered important. Also what is "Khaos" as like, I don't see how chaos isn't chaos. The only reason "Magick" was a thing was to distinguish it from stage magic in writings at the time. What the hell are you trying to distinguish? I don't know of any other kind of chaos that could cause confusion.

Now pardon as I'm no expert in Egyptian mythology (and I doubt you are either) but as I understand it as of this post Apep mostly cover darkness and chaos but Satan isn't chaos. Traditionally (as in ancient Hebrew/Jewish sources) he, when a he, is part of an ordered hierarchy. There isn't anything inherently chaotic about Satan. Darkness I'd agree with, but not chaos. At least with Set, he's acting as the counter to Horus. Satan to me as opposition would mean I'd call them both aspects of Satan, if I were to adopt any Egyptian symbolism (remember here Satan is the conflict itself).

So IMO Set would fall into that kind of harmony between order and disorder whereas Apep was just against the whole system. Set and Horus were in opposition working to balance the Nile and desert. Apep was against truth itself and supposed to be the embodiment of evil itself in context of the original religion. Satan was not and the Christian view is more of a perversion out of hatred for truth.

Anyways with Satan being the conflict itself, that's why I oppose, dare I say, be a "devil's advocate", with posts like my one about love and forgiveness. Simply for the sake of balance and considering both sides.

(If I've misunderstood any of the mythology I invite anyone to send me some info otherwise).

@Kapalika It's a straw man to say that someone who uses multiple systems cherrypicks without due diligence and research.

Uh, IMO cherry picking is a very good example of poor research because 90% of cherry picking makes no sense in context. It only seems to make sense to someone ignorant enough to not know better. An example is Christians who are against abortion on grounds that it's "infanticide" aren't aware of Psalms 137:9 or Numbers 5:11-31). They cherry pick because it's easier to point to one thing instead of trying to understand the text as an inter-related whole and the subtext and implications of the rest of the text in relation to the cherry picked part.

In that sense, cherry picking from multiple systems is extremely prone to poor research because that means one needs to understand multiple systems thoroughly to avoid being a total dumbass about it, instead of just one.

Any chaos magician worth their approach immerses themselves in their paradigm researching it and believing it fully then letting go of it(save stuff that works in a bind) when time to paradig shift.

Well chaos magicians are very upfront about what they are doing. They are honest so we know we can't take it as a serious representation of the system. Particularly if it's involving fictional religions :P For that reason I don't think it's comparable.

One last thing to say is Norse Mythology, which I consider myself quite well versed in, tells us that things exist in the void. Musphelehim and Neiphelheim are the sparks of creation that came from Ginnungagap, the void, which links the idea to Khaos even farther. They created the universe but the fire-giants and ice giants that reside there are Anticosmic. If Anticosmic creatures can exist in the void, why cant our conciousness?

Why should I care what the vikings thought? As far as I'm aware they don't have any LHP history (the LHP comes from Hinduism so at least i got an excuse). Neither of those names mean anything to me. Also wouldn't you say that, being well versed in it, their idea of the cosmos was not at all like our modern scientific understanding? Didn't they think that an eagle caused winds and that the different worlds were traveled to by just going a certain direction long enough? Why would we think that their "void" is anything like what someone today would think.

In the simplest way to put it, there is no "void" outside of the Universe or between hypothetical multi-verses. There are visual representations of that but it's because it's not possible to depict how reality really is, which is a self-contained closed system. Reality is bound not by impenetrable "boundaries" so much as it wraps back in on itself. It would be like trying to go to space by walking around the earth, except imagine that there is not a "nothing" beyond the earth.

That's why a lot of multiple universe models require higher dimensions, everything needs to be "touching" as there can't be "space inbetween". With more dimensions means more ways that the "universes" can connect. There just isn't anything "inbetween" to be had, not even a "void".

I say all that assuming you don't mean this, which is totally in the Universe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Void_(astronomy)

Also, in the vein of them saying the different worlds were places they could travel, seems even 600 years ago they thought it was an actual place on earth:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginnungagap#Geographic_rationalization

Quote from: wikipedia 12/3/17
Scandinavian cartographers from the early 15th century attempted to localise or identify Ginnungagap as a real geographic location from which the creation myth derived. A fragment from a 15th-century (pre-Columbus) Old Norse encyclopedic text entitled Gripla (Little Compendium) places Ginnungagap between Greenland and Vinland:

Now is to be told what lies opposite Greenland, out from the bay, which was before named: Furdustrandir hight a land; there are so strong frosts that it is not habitable, so far as one knows; south from thence is Helluland, which is called Skrellingsland; from thence it is not far to Vinland the Good, which some think goes out from Africa; between Vinland and Greenland is Ginnungagap, which flows from the sea called Mare oceanum, and surrounds the whole earth.[5]

A scholion in a 15th-century manuscript of Adam of Bremen's Gesta Hammaburgensis Ecclesiae Pontificum similarly refers to Ghimmendegop as the Norse word for the abyss in the far north.[6]

Later the 17th-century Icelandic bishop Guðbrandur Thorlaksson also used the name Ginnungegap to refer to a narrow body of water, possibly the Davis Strait, separating the southern tip of Greenland from Estotelandia, pars America extrema, probably Baffin Island.[7]

So ya, sure, we can exist there because it's on the damn planet.  It seems this "void" stuff has more to do with bad fantasy and science fiction tropes giving a misconception about cosmology/astrophysics than anything dealing with reality or religion.

That's why some of us ask "where the fuck do you go???" There isn't a place for it to be. As you said yourself, existence precedes essence. Nonexistence can't exist; if it was a place you could go it wouldn't be the "void" you are describing and so not acosmic or anticosmic but part of the cosmos, since it would exist.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2017, 07:24:37 am by Kapalika »
My Music and Blog // My Chatroom
My religion is Satanism & Trika via Vāmācāra (Left Hand path)
"God and the individual are one, to realize this is the essence of Shaivism.” - Lakshman Joo

Kapalika

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #34 on: December 03, 2017, 07:23:48 am »
I am curious though on what @Setamontet has written in the Imperishable Star and am taking some time to read over it and think about it today to give that take on it a fair review for myself of what I think about it. I realize there is a lot of different types of acosmic or anti cosmic Satanism and what I might be against in some aspects of the various kinds might not be something clear here as honestly I'm not sure myself where the distinctions are. I've just been taking various points as they come to me.

It isn't my intention to be abrasive with where I'm coming from but sometimes I just feel annoyed.
My Music and Blog // My Chatroom
My religion is Satanism & Trika via Vāmācāra (Left Hand path)
"God and the individual are one, to realize this is the essence of Shaivism.” - Lakshman Joo

Setamorphosis

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #35 on: December 03, 2017, 08:03:54 am »
Alright, this is my final response to you, @Kapalika

1. Everything you want to know is accessible. Research. You criticized me for not researching before I made that blunder post, which is fine, yet here you are doing the same thing as I did.

2. You fail to realize that magick and spirituality are subjective. Symbols and archetypes do not have objective meanings. There is consensus meaning, but in magickal communities, even that is arguable. We are here to make history, not repeat it. We take what works, discard what doesn't. We also discard superstition. We couldn't care less how Christians interpreted Satan. As a matter of fact, we don't care about how you interpret Satan either. You have your own interpretations, and we have ours. Welcome to the occult and magick, where objectivity goes out the window.

3. You moaning and whining about something you don't like is not going to change it. You dislike Acosmic Satanism? No problem, it isn't a path for everyone. But going out of your way to bitch about it will just result in you getting half-arsed responses (namely from me) or no responses at all (which is what I will do from now on).

I don't really care about your feelings. You are obnoxious. You can say you don't mean to be obnoxious, but that does not change the fact that you are indeed obnoxious. Then again, seeing your "crazy satanic cat lady" description, I expected no more or less from you.

I am done. Have fun writing me a huge rant.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2017, 08:05:25 am by Setamorphosis »
"Darkness is just light turned inside out."
  --Beelzebub

pi_ramesses

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #36 on: December 03, 2017, 08:42:46 am »
Guys...  :facepalm: Let's keep things mature and friendly in the forums. From henceforth, make an effort to adhere to forum guidelines. Epistemologic friendliness, as @Xepera maSet would say.  :)
Pro omnis dominos viae sinistra, sic itur ad astra
Nylfmedli14

Kapalika

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #37 on: December 03, 2017, 09:32:38 am »
Alright, this is my final response to you, @Kapalika

1. Everything you want to know is accessible. Research. You criticized me for not researching before I made that blunder post, which is fine, yet here you are doing the same thing as I did.

My opening had "my opinion" language and was literally a question inviting the other side. There's a million blogs about every form of Satanism, so who better to filter it through than people who are familiar with it and can give me contextual answers based on where I'm coming from?

Debate is a way to start research. If we all only did the approach to research you're suggesting we wouldn't have anything to discuss on the forum.

You moaning and whining about something you don't like is not going to change it.

If I was jut here to whine I wouldn't of thanked everyone for their replies in chatbox or read materials suggested to me.

Or did you just not read the topic and my replies?

Then again, seeing your "crazy satanic cat lady" description, I expected no more or less from you.

[tounge in cheek]Wow you monster! You're not just a sexist but worse! You don't like cats![/tongue in cheek]

But really remark is a little fucked up (in a hilarious way) if you're for real. Do you have no sense of humor?

Anyways if you can't stand the fire don't get close to Hell. If you don't want to debate don't post on my debate topics.
My Music and Blog // My Chatroom
My religion is Satanism & Trika via Vāmācāra (Left Hand path)
"God and the individual are one, to realize this is the essence of Shaivism.” - Lakshman Joo

King Mob

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #38 on: December 03, 2017, 02:17:54 pm »
@Kapalika  There's a lot of assumptions and personal attacks there and I take offense to it. There's a lot of bias on your side which is really hypocritic.

I've actually studied mythology in a scholarly sense of various cultures since I was in elementary school and it helped decide my career path and education choice so yes, you are no expert in Egyptian mythology so you're opinions are flat out wrong with aspects of the truth cherry picked :p  I certianly know more than you. Set as the devil role didn't really come until Temple of Set. He was actually the one who kept Apep at bay in certain stories by fighting against him.

Set was slightly demonized but his role was accepted as natural and needed, like almost every Pagan go with a few notable exceptions. He was originally God of the foriegners, desert, chaos among other things but the general scholarly consensus is Horus and Set each represented the Upper and Lower Kingdoms of Egypt and the myths were a way of recording and dramatizing history. Apep was really the only one considered anyting adversarial and priests went to great lengths to build and destroy effegies of him every day to hold him back.

When Temple of Set came into the picture, splinting from Church of Satan, they received the Diabolicon and Leviathan was part of it. Leviathan is a standard symbol of serpent of the void from judeochristian mythology that most LHP who cast circles to focus power use. Apep is literally just another serpent in the void.

Here's where your cherry picking argument falls apart. If you had every literally read one page of one book that even off-handedly mentions syncretism instead of relying on your own pre-determined opinion, you'd realize that they don't treat all Gods the same even if they're similar. They usually warn against it. It goes into Jungian theory of archetypes which leaves PLENTY of room for individuality.

And this is what really gets me: You're comparing Judeochristian mythology(which you're presumably against as a Satanism) to older pre-dating religions that don't work the same. It's highly offensive to pagans and it's highly offensive to historians and furthers no one's will but the Judeo-Christian dominance on society. Like, do you honestly thing Pagans from Ancient Greece went around reading every singly myth in existence(and thousands) and worshiped every single God? Are you not aware of the existence of cults? You know, like having a whole city named after and worship one God or Goddess? Like Athens? What the hell do you call that? Oh, I guess they're cherry picking so they practiced their religion long.

I like how you completely write off an entire Pagan religion as not being Left Hand Path without reading or understanding myths. Speaking confidently with ignorance is worse than cherry picking. Religion was usually used as a method of control back then except some civilizations, like Ancient Greece and Rome, priortized Individualism above all and arragned their religion to promote that which is very in line with LHP philosophy. This is honestly like freshman level world history. 

Really though, I respect you as a person but you need to be more educated on the matters you speak of before you criticize others apparant lack of knowledge. Oh yeah, I guess cause I practice as a chaos magician though my scholarly studies from historical and sociological points of view are worthless /s Your judgementalness also reeks of Christianity. It is fine to say your opinion, regardless of your knoweldge. It is not fine to tear down others opinion to make yours feel more important and authoritarian.

After-life is speculation, I assumed that's a granted. I also assume you think it's okay for people to believe in things you don't as someone who values individualism. I also assume as an Occultist, you can think metaphorically about imagery. In which case, you'd realize that the Abyss can be a metaphor for a specific type of existential, or absurdist, crisis and that validity or lack of validity of that furtherings one's path is up to the individual to decide if it harms or furthers their ego. Also, if you're so against cherry picking than one would need to understand the beliefs of a path from their point of persspective and talk as if it was real to understand it rather than try to filter it through one's understanding which automatically cherry picks. Entertain thoughts without accepting them.

Yes, this is the Satanism board. On a forum that promotes individuality and different ideas. You're not the only Satanist. Make more posts along the lines of Satanism you want to see posted about if Anticosmic and Acosmic Satanism upsets you. You're free to debate about it as well but debate involves listening to the other person and responding instead of trying to discredit them with the same tactics repeatedly.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2017, 02:23:15 pm by King Mob »
"Be goodly therefore: dress ye all in fine apparel; eat rich foods and drink sweet wines and wines that foam! Also, take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where and with whom ye will! But always unto me."- Nuit, Book of the Law.

Liu

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #39 on: December 06, 2017, 04:26:42 pm »
What a mess...
In the hopes that you all have calmed down by now, let me take that apart a bit as there are some valid questions asked but not answered yet.
I won't expand on all that you wrote, please don't consider me ignoring parts of your comments as me fully agreeing (or disagreeing) with those.

A lot of @Kapalika's questions are based on the fact that she hasn't read Michael Kelly's books. But while I would recommend them it's not exactly required reading, especially not for a Shaivite (or any other non-Setian).

I can try to explain some points, but there are a few that I would like to ask @King Mob (or whoever else feels so inclined) to answer them in my stead as I don't really know the answers either.

@Liu  I think most of us take a more Platonic approach to the mind.
As this was brought up again, could you please elaborate a bit on it?

It is one of the forms that exist that you can really only know through death such as a beauty and truth. You literally have to cross the abyss to die.

What is the "Abyss" and why do you have to "literally cross it" and why is death necessary? If you have to die (in a literal sense) to cross it how could anyone living know of it?
That part would interest me as well as "abyss" means very different things to different people in occult contexts.

Quote
I also find clever analysis of "There Is Never A Moment In Which You Are Not" recieved from Apep by Kelly to be a logical reasonining of conciousness exists in the void. And yes, I agree that the void is something that exists in the universe. Well, doesn't exist. You know what I mean. I think referring to Khaos instead of Chaos here might help clear up some confusion on that part.

This section is for Satanists and I don't know of any compelling reason why Apep of all gods would be related to Satan. I've never heard of a Michael Kelly outside of the actor so I don't know why he's considered important. Also what is "Khaos" as like, I don't see how chaos isn't chaos. The only reason "Magick" was a thing was to distinguish it from stage magic in writings at the time. What the hell are you trying to distinguish? I don't know of any other kind of chaos that could cause confusion.
I would guess that the distinction between chaos and khaos is that by chaos we mean disorder, by khaos we refer to the Ancient Greek concept of what was before creation. But that doesn't really make sense here, either.

Regarding Apep, if I'm informed correctly in later Egyption religion Set was demonized and equated with Apep. Setians normally relate to the older, not demonized version of Set, but that doesn't hinder some to nevertheless take inspiration from the concept of Apep, e.g. by equating it with dragons of other mythologies.

Quote
Well chaos magicians are very upfront about what they are doing. They are honest so we know we can't take it as a serious representation of the system. Particularly if it's involving fictional religions :P For that reason I don't think it's comparable.
Chaos-gnostics seem to tend to be quite an antisocial bunch, so don't be surprised if they don't bother being upfront about their exact beliefs. If you want to read a book by a chaos-gnostic that does include a chaos magick approach, read Panparadox by Vexior (there's a copy of it floating around on the interwebs). It's been a while since I read it, but if I recall it correctly he's pretty clear about using beliefs as tools in this book at least. (EDIT: Leafed through it again and well, really clear he's only on 1 page close to the beginning, afterwards it is pretty much UPGs presented religiously, but well, the disclaimer is there).

Quote
In the simplest way to put it, there is no "void" outside of the Universe or between hypothetical multi-verses. There are visual representations of that but it's because it's not possible to depict how reality really is, which is a self-contained closed system. Reality is bound not by impenetrable "boundaries" so much as it wraps back in on itself. It would be like trying to go to space by walking around the earth, except imagine that there is not a "nothing" beyond the earth.
Here we get into faith-realm. Qliphotic texts are most "clear" about this question what chaos-gnostics believe the "void" beyond the universe is like - namely it's beyond the duality of existence and non-existence, outside of the realm of not even the laws of physics but even logic. You can't argue with that, it's mysticism.

Quote
Also, in the vein of them saying the different worlds were places they could travel, seems even 600 years ago they thought it was an actual place on earth:
I agree with you that we needn't put anything on what the Vikings believed, but that is a tad unfair. 600 years ago, there was not much left of Germanic religion.
In the Edda for example (christianized as it might be), Ginnungagap is clearly stated to be the nothing that was before anything was and in whose midst earth was created (after a bunch of other stuff happened) out of the corpse of Ymir (similar to Purusha or Tiamat). If in the middle ages some Christians misinterpreted this then to refer to some place on the earth that doesn't mean that the story was already bullshit at pagan times.

Are you not aware of the existence of cults? You know, like having a whole city named after and worship one God or Goddess? Like Athens?
I thought Athena was named after the city of Athens and not the other way round? Also, it's not like they only worshipped her there. But I agree there were people also worshipping only one deity at that time.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2017, 04:58:46 pm by Liu »

King Mob

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #40 on: December 06, 2017, 05:36:01 pm »
@Liu

I do tend to refer to stuff simply because I assume it's fundamentals- the truth is I just read way too damn much and western occultism in general as way too much cross-over. It's actually grating having to read an interpetation of Thelema repeatedly to find stuff with new stuff to say. Like, just publish the different stuff without the recap.


Anyways, rant aside: Paganism doesn't really have the morality that Christianity has. There's usually nothing demonized at least to any extent. Apep is a huge exception. While Set and Horus did have conflicts in the myth, which side you're on probably depended on what area you lived. Set was good in the sense that he was the one who guarded existence from Apep. However, any aspects of him being demonized came from him representing the foriegners, not chaos. They're ultimately reconciled in the ending myth as well. You can apply my Ragnarok article about shadow selve to Horus/Set as well. In fact, Kenneth Grant as well as Michael Aquino have made some links between Set and Horus in a similar fashion. My knowlege of Egyptian Religion is primarily from Western Civ and Archeology classes so I have a more anthropological view.

How is Panparadox?! I really love the author's Thursatru books so I've been meaning to read it. I stay away from a lot of anticosmics but I truly appreciate Vexior/Ekortu's views and work in Thursatru.

You know, I actually don't the historical origin of Athens, only the Mythological origins now that you bring it up. You could very well be right. But I do know a lot of cities were named after their respective cults back in the day, at least the capitals. We're talking like Akkhadian Empire times. I simply assumed the tradition continued which could very well be erroneous of me.

The abyss is such a complicated subject. There's various beliefs on it, all with grains of truth to it. The tricky part is they very well describe each other symbolically or emotionally.

Chaos Magick theism to me is very similar the powers of Fire(creation) and Ice(destruction) that arrived out of Giggungangap. On places you could physically travel, there's an astral plane. There's also symbolism in myths. I'm actually a mythology geek and have a natural talent in reading so I have a habit of getting ahead in interpretations. I think there's an argument for separating myth from it's literal belief and analyzing what the story could mean. Hell, Lenord Cohen's Hallelujah is breath takingly beautiful due it's biblical allusions describing the human experience of love.

This creation/destruction paradigm is better described by your definition, @Liu

You see this in a lot of religions. Dao. The breath philosophy of the yogis.


So on the abyss, there's different areas to describe. Usually in a Thelemic sense, it referrs to the period in which you give up your practice to study philosophy. This results in a huge existential crisis known as crossing the abyss. There's a reactionary urge to refer to this as not the real abyss but people who have done this, including myself, will argue this is far more terrifying and potentially harmful than any abyss meditation.

The difference between this and Buddhist Nirvana is you have strengthened your will to survive and have, not a desire per se, but some kind of realization in what's left of your conciousness that you can't exsist like this. The crossing comes from finding your own personal truth. Crowleyanity and a good bit of Occultists who followed would say you invoke your HGA or Daemon here for your own personal truth. I honestly disagree, I'm more akin to Peter J Carrol's view on magick which is more existentialist in nature.

My own personal truth is that of absurdist philosophy. You can't know anything for sure but humanity is conditioned to search for meaning and truth. The condition of the human experience and indifference of the universe creates the absurdity. Camus defines the realization of the absurd of seeing the stage of the world and it's players as stripped of all illusion. This is very similar to the philosophical abyss.In this metaphor, Choronzon is the self that searches for meaning in any place it can and to me, HGA is the realization of your core conciousness. I, however, just read a good argument by Carrol against core conciousness today.

This doesn't necesarrily discount the idea of an astral or literal abyss. my understanding is that the abyss doesn't exist in the world, rather it's the "source wall". If anyone wants to see the Godhead in RHP belief, they must break through the abyss. This is why you often hear ego death as a spiritual experience or how people see God on psychadelics. There are various occult school of thoughts that use the abyss and void meditations for magick. Draconian is just one of them. Necromancy is a huge one, in some traditions. Hell, there's even a black metal band called Void Meditation Cult. Even after Crowley crossed the philosophical abyss, he trie to penetrate the mysteries of a literal abyss through Enochian Magick which can be read in Vision in the Voice.

It is of my understanding that the literal abyss can refer to two things: Khaos its self to those who believe there is no Godhead on the other side of the universe hence the dichotomy of Dao. Or a complete void devoid of anything, the womb in which the Godhead(or magicians) impregnate to cause creation.

Of the various occult labels you could give me, I'm primarily an absurdist so I'll have a bias torwards the philosophical because while I can say it can be experienced in all of these forms, I can't attribute truth or cause to any of them. It's fun to forget that and play along though which is the whole basis of chaos magick. So I guess part of the confusion is that I see these as all of different aspects of the same abyss and equally valid and false.

I need to read more on Qlipoth. It is my understanding that it's more akin to Universe B than the abyss? Or is there no difference? I'd love to to know, a lot of the better Qlipothic books are long out of print...

As for the Platonic form approach. I know nothing of Temple of Set's philosophy on forms. But Plato is quite clear that "Truth", "Beauty" and the like were forms that we can not know in this world. They exist elsewhere and we must leave the physical world to know them fully. It's from the dialogue of socrates before he was poisoned. I highly recommend to anyone trying to understand the abyss. Socrates, filtered or even fictionalized by Plato, makes arguments for reincarnation.

However, mind as a form would come from Descartes' and "Er Cogito Er Sum" or "I think therefore I am." He sat out to disprove everything so that he could rebuild the truth up. He questioned if God existed and if he existed, could be an evil demon or mad creator tricking Descartes to believe reality- sound familar? Demiurge? His first discovery of truth was in any of this scenario, he had to exist. I got corrected harshly on my quiz for saying brain instead of mind because mind would be conciousness which we can not exists bioligically in Descartes' arguments.

My chaos beliefs are influenced from Atheistic Chaos Magic paradigm and Ekortu/Vexior moreso than Draconian philosophy. What I like about Draconian philosophy is that it emphasizes creating from the abyss and using passion as the driving force. The purpose of destroying the world is to create a new one in which you play which is very Satanic and LHP in philosophy. But Leviathan is linked directly to Satan theologically as well and only strengthened through various occult schools of thought. I think many spiritual schools, LHP and RHP, encourage an indifference to the universe at various phases. Well, at least the absurd nature of it. This differs from most Anticosmicism as they want to destroy the universe, they believe it bad. Ekortu's Thursatru can fall into this- However, most Thursatru and Nightside Norse practicioners disagree with him.

Ultimately, it comes down as I don't see the universe as bad or good, real, unreal, or ascribe moral value. I simply choose the illusion I want to live in and make it real. However, there's so many arguments for how they could be literally destruction and creation of the universe. Quantam Mechanics actually raises a lot of questions on how much this is true- For example, look at the Quantam Suicide Thought Expiriment wikipedia page. Now, apply this to spiritual theory or theory of magick.

There's a huge difference between rejection of the universe and rejection of the multiverse- the latter of which I don't believe a lot of acosmicists reject(hell even the ones that want to destroy the universe work with Universe B forces). I think this metaphor would make it easier for a Shaivite to understand since multiverse is a big deal in Hinduism(and one of the main things I love about that religion despite some personal problems with personal experiences when putting that religion into practice). In this way, one can still live by Satanic prinicples in various senses.

My own Unverified Personal Gnosis that the my philosophical crossing of the abyss was the most challenging time of my whole life and permanently changed me in undoable ways and that philosophy along with imagery and astral abysses used in ritual has significantly boosted my magick in various ways to make it a lot stronger than it was previously. Setian and Draconian philsophy also mention an abyss between two people which, while may not be literal, is a good thing to keep in mind about how things can be lost in translation or how magick on another person can create a link that goes both ways.

I hope this was helpful and answered your questions, Liu. You did a great job at communicating the confusion. You in no way have to agree with my theories and I'm not even saying I full believe in all of them. But, hey, I'm an antrhopologist who's very interest in mythology and religion: I like collecting knowledge of various beliefs and interpretations. I'd actually be interested in a Shaivite's understanding of any of this if you have the time to answer it, if there is any equivalent. I always wonderd if the abyss could be the bleed between the universes in a multiverse but never really knew where to look for a mysticism perspective of that.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2017, 05:43:01 pm by King Mob »
"Be goodly therefore: dress ye all in fine apparel; eat rich foods and drink sweet wines and wines that foam! Also, take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where and with whom ye will! But always unto me."- Nuit, Book of the Law.

King Mob

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #41 on: December 06, 2017, 05:45:23 pm »
This thread brings up a question I've had for a long time though, what the hell do Gnostics believe about Satan or Lucifer? Were there any LHP Gnostics that believed Gnosticism but decided to stay in the material world? You'd think every belief creates an opposite.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2017, 11:45:52 pm by pi_ramesses »
"Be goodly therefore: dress ye all in fine apparel; eat rich foods and drink sweet wines and wines that foam! Also, take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where and with whom ye will! But always unto me."- Nuit, Book of the Law.

Kapalika

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #42 on: December 07, 2017, 02:42:49 am »
I originally had a longer response ready for each point (that I didn't submit) but i think something to the point might be better.

I really feel your last response to me @King Mob didn't represent what I actually said. I actually respect Chaos Magick and was giving it points for its honesty. I also was comparing Set and Apep to a Talmudic and pre-second temple period Satan, not a Jeudo-Christian one (either as the perceived similarities or supercession of Christianity) hence my somewhat tongue in cheek comment about the Christian idea being a corruption.

Actually I agree with your summaries of Egypt and my main point was that we can't treat Apep as being another name for Satan. I was comparing Satan as the concept of harmonic opposition and the Set-Horus dynamic as being similar. The other point was how I could see an argument for Set being similar to Satan as an entity (angel/god) but not for Apep and Satan. I wasn't saying they were the same thing. I relied on the Wikipedia pages (which seemed to have good citations) to refresh a lot of what I said about the Egyptian mythology admittedly but I don't see where I contradicted any of what you said in your last post. (edit: Meaning post #38 in regards to Egypt)

My point about cherry picking was when someone takes something out of context or ignore other things that should contextualize it, not when they have a focus on an aspect of it (such as your henotheism example).

Also the entire point of this topic wasn't to discredit anything but rather directly challenge it and its assumptions.  I said early on I was willing to engage in a counter debate on the merits of pro cosmic Satanism as I presented it. So I didn't come here to dismiss anything but rather engage in a mutually beneficial debate hence the title being put as a question and my first post having "to me" and "in my opinion" in it as I've had in other posts in the topic.

That said I admit in my last post I made a miscalculation in my tone and it was one that wasn't warranted. Despite that I had went back and reread my last post to you twice and still can't find where I personally attacked you or anyone else in it.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2017, 02:14:15 pm by pi_ramesses »
My Music and Blog // My Chatroom
My religion is Satanism & Trika via Vāmācāra (Left Hand path)
"God and the individual are one, to realize this is the essence of Shaivism.” - Lakshman Joo

Kapalika

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #43 on: December 07, 2017, 03:02:26 am »
I'd actually be interested in a Shaivite's understanding of any of this if you have the time to answer it, if there is any equivalent.

I know you are asking @Liu but I wanted to point out it's gonna vary a lot. You could get a really different answer depending on if it's say Puranic or Non Puranic, or even in the non-puranic (such as the Tantras) dualistic or nondual.
My Music and Blog // My Chatroom
My religion is Satanism & Trika via Vāmācāra (Left Hand path)
"God and the individual are one, to realize this is the essence of Shaivism.” - Lakshman Joo

Liu

Re: Shouldn't Satanism be pro-cosmic?
« Reply #44 on: December 07, 2017, 03:12:41 pm »
How is Panparadox?! I really love the author's Thursatru books so I've been meaning to read it. I stay away from a lot of anticosmics but I truly appreciate Vexior/Ekortu's views and work in Thursatru.
It's very emotional, a lot of UPGs as I said. Heavy on mythology, too. I enjoyed it, from what I remember. If I recall it right I read it all in one sitting or two, actually, so not that much of it stuck.

Quote
You know, I actually don't the historical origin of Athens, only the Mythological origins now that you bring it up. You could very well be right. But I do know a lot of cities were named after their respective cults back in the day, at least the capitals. We're talking like Akkhadian Empire times. I simply assumed the tradition continued which could very well be erroneous of me.
Not surprising when the priesthood and the government are the same people. Each city had their own deity who was basically the personification of it. Even that one city which had two deities (don't recall the name atm) only did so because it originally were two cities close to each other which had merged together.


Quote
So on the abyss, there's different areas to describe. Usually in a Thelemic sense, it referrs to the period in which you give up your practice to study philosophy. This results in a huge existential crisis known as crossing the abyss. There's a reactionary urge to refer to this as not the real abyss but people who have done this, including myself, will argue this is far more terrifying and potentially harmful than any abyss meditation.
Thanks, that makes it much clearer.
Well, strange, if anything I could say I'm struggling to reduce my studying in order to actually practice. But I guess each one has their own internal abyss to cross.

Quote
This doesn't necesarrily discount the idea of an astral or literal abyss. my understanding is that the abyss doesn't exist in the world, rather it's the "source wall". If anyone wants to see the Godhead in RHP belief, they must break through the abyss. This is why you often hear ego death as a spiritual experience or how people see God on psychadelics. There are various occult school of thoughts that use the abyss and void meditations for magick. Draconian is just one of them. Necromancy is a huge one, in some traditions. Hell, there's even a black metal band called Void Meditation Cult. Even after Crowley crossed the philosophical abyss, he trie to penetrate the mysteries of a literal abyss through Enochian Magick which can be read in Vision in the Voice.
Yeah, there's certainly at least some parallels between the psychological and the astral abyss.

Quote
As for the Platonic form approach. I know nothing of Temple of Set's philosophy on forms. But Plato is quite clear that "Truth", "Beauty" and the like were forms that we can not know in this world. They exist elsewhere and we must leave the physical world to know them fully. It's from the dialogue of socrates before he was poisoned. I highly recommend to anyone trying to understand the abyss. Socrates, filtered or even fictionalized by Plato, makes arguments for reincarnation.
I think I read that back in school, but that's been quite a while... never been that much of a fan of Platon, though. I mean, I love Socrates' praise of Eros in the Symposion, and also some of the allegories are top-notch, but regarding much of the rest I'm like meh, not convinced. Also, not like that would be a deal-breaker, but Platon was very nomistic and not really into personal freedom - hell, when Socrates was given the chance to escape his death sentence he even forwent his own will of continuing to live as he considered law more important, or that's at least how it's justified in Platon's writings.

Quote
However, mind as a form would come from Descartes' and "Er Cogito Er Sum" or "I think therefore I am." He sat out to disprove everything so that he could rebuild the truth up. He questioned if God existed and if he existed, could be an evil demon or mad creator tricking Descartes to believe reality- sound familar? Demiurge? His first discovery of truth was in any of this scenario, he had to exist. I got corrected harshly on my quiz for saying brain instead of mind because mind would be conciousness which we can not exists bioligically in Descartes' arguments.
Sure, I'm familiar with that. And now I'm also getting where you're coming from when you use the terms mind and consciousness interchangably. Still would keep them separate concepts, though.

Quote
My chaos beliefs are influenced from Atheistic Chaos Magic paradigm and Ekortu/Vexior moreso than Draconian philosophy. What I like about Draconian philosophy is that it emphasizes creating from the abyss and using passion as the driving force. The purpose of destroying the world is to create a new one in which you play which is very Satanic and LHP in philosophy. But Leviathan is linked directly to Satan theologically as well and only strengthened through various occult schools of thought. I think many spiritual schools, LHP and RHP, encourage an indifference to the universe at various phases. Well, at least the absurd nature of it. This differs from most Anticosmicism as they want to destroy the universe, they believe it bad. Ekortu's Thursatru can fall into this- However, most Thursatru and Nightside Norse practicioners disagree with him.
Technically also the anti-cosmics want to create something new - just so unlike the cosmos that it can't be really compared to it.

Quote
Ultimately, it comes down as I don't see the universe as bad or good, real, unreal, or ascribe moral value. I simply choose the illusion I want to live in and make it real. However, there's so many arguments for how they could be literally destruction and creation of the universe. Quantam Mechanics actually raises a lot of questions on how much this is true- For example, look at the Quantam Suicide Thought Expiriment wikipedia page. Now, apply this to spiritual theory or theory of magick.
Fascinating - I don't think I ever heard of that thought experiment before but the idea doesn't seem knew to me, like I already had that idea myself once.

Quote
I'd actually be interested in a Shaivite's understanding of any of this if you have the time to answer it, if there is any equivalent. I always wonderd if the abyss could be the bleed between the universes in a multiverse but never really knew where to look for a mysticism perspective of that.
I've never been much into multiverse theory (too little real-life-applicability I guess), so I can't really help you with that.
Also, while I'll gladly try to reply, too, Kapalika is the expert here on Shaivism - honestly, I'm too much of a syncretist and cherry-picker to be an expert on anything ;)

From what else you wrote, I can confirm that
Quote
many spiritual schools, LHP and RHP, encourage an indifference to the universe at various phases. Well, at least the absurd nature of it.
is at least true for the kind of Shaivism I can relate to best.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2017, 05:31:44 pm by Liu »


xx
Brief Introduction to Satanism

Started by Xepera maSet on Satanism

0 Replies
68 Views
Last post November 15, 2017, 01:37:00 am
by Xepera maSet
xx
Is image important to satanism?

Started by Kapalika on Satanism

12 Replies
180 Views
Last post November 03, 2017, 02:11:33 pm
by pi_ramesses
xx
Opinions on LaVeyan Satanism?

Started by Ave Baphomet! on General LHP Discussion

10 Replies
310 Views
Last post September 09, 2017, 12:45:37 am
by Xepera maSet
xx
Epicureanism vs. Hedonism within Satanism

Started by Cabshear on Satanism

4 Replies
70 Views
Last post December 04, 2017, 02:42:44 am
by Cabshear