LaVeyan Satanism

Convictions, morals, other societies and religions.
User avatar
Nefastos
Frater
Posts: 3551
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

LaVeyan Satanism

Postby Nefastos » Fri Apr 19, 2013 10:59 am

Azoth wrote:The runners up's prize goes to Anton LaVey for inventing a religion in the name of something he didn't believe in.


Very apt way to put it. :)

Still, I think we can thank LaVey for giving Satanism less horrid cultural associations it otherwise might still (or, again) have. It's good if people can more easily see that being a Satanist won't mean one prefers eating babies.

[Edit: Discussion moved here from the topic The Most Questionable Occult Authorities.]
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
Wyrmfang
Frater
Posts: 1131
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 10:22 pm
Location: Espoo

Re: The Most Questionable Occult Authorities

Postby Wyrmfang » Fri Apr 19, 2013 3:42 pm

Nefastos wrote:
Azoth wrote:The runners up's prize goes to Anton LaVey for inventing a religion in the name of something he didn't believe in.


Very apt way to put it. :)

Still, I think we can thank LaVey for giving Satanism less horrid cultural associations it otherwise might still (or, again) have. It's good if people can more easily see that being a Satanist won't mean one prefers eating babies.
I also think that there is a sort of strain in LaVey´s thinking at this very base point. But this kind of talk is not fair: everyone is a quasi-ist in something and believes in reduction in some matter. Therefore the use of Satan´s name without believing in an entity in any sense is not contradictory as such.
User avatar
Nefastos
Frater
Posts: 3551
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: The Most Questionable Occult Authorities

Postby Nefastos » Sat Apr 20, 2013 12:47 pm

Wyrmfang wrote:everyone is a quasi-ist in something and believes in reduction in some matter. Therefore the use of Satan´s name without believing in an entity in any sense is not contradictory as such.


Of course, but still, there are different shades of grey. As with LaVey, he really stressed that reduction.

We can compare to those Christians who do not follow their Christ's teachings in any way: is that kind of doctrine "Christian"? Culturally speaking, yes; but in context of spirituality, no. However, "Christianity" is so deep-rooted a term that it would be folly to try to say after these two thousand years that Christians are not actually entitled to their name culturally. But as with atheistic Satanism I still have hope that it might be approved by the larger audience that "Satanism" is not accurate term for LaVeyan philosophy.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
Wyrmfang
Frater
Posts: 1131
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 10:22 pm
Location: Espoo

Re: The Most Questionable Occult Authorities

Postby Wyrmfang » Sat Apr 20, 2013 1:49 pm

Nefastos wrote:
Wyrmfang wrote:everyone is a quasi-ist in something and believes in reduction in some matter. Therefore the use of Satan´s name without believing in an entity in any sense is not contradictory as such.


We can compare to those Christians who do not follow their Christ's teachings in any way: is that kind of doctrine "Christian"? Culturally speaking, yes; but in context of spirituality, no. However, "Christianity" is so deep-rooted a term that it would be folly to try to say after these two thousand years that Christians are not actually entitled to their name culturally.
Yes, but this already assumes our viewpoint, namely, that there are archetypical essences behind religions. From LaVey´s viewpoint, religions are entirely man-made constructions, and therefore the use of religious terms is cultural - in present cultural situation an anti-Christian thinking can be called Satanism.

The schism between our and LaVey´s conception of Satanism is the issue between any form of theism and atheism. In my opinion, we should still call both forms Satanism because they share the satanic aspect when it comes to dogmatic Christianity. We sever LaVey´s conception of Satanism already by introducing our conception, which after all is, or so I would say, something closer to the intuition of masses. I think it is widely recognized by "ordinary people" that there is something strange in the conception of atheistic Satanism, and that´s because relativism is not intuitive to most people (outside universities).
User avatar
Nefastos
Frater
Posts: 3551
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: The Most Questionable Occult Authorities

Postby Nefastos » Sat Apr 20, 2013 2:35 pm

You are not wrong, but there is another kind of struggle going on besides of that.

What I propose assumes that one should not use terminology in opportunistic way, which clearly is the way with LaVeyan Satanism. Those opportunistical versus philosophical nuances were the ones I spoke of as "different shades of grey": some shades are linguistic and formal (and so there is no need to judge them) but some are based on seeking of personal profit (and so there is need to reprimand them in order to establish culturally healthier use for the word). LaVey didn't make it secret that he used certain terms because it was profitable; actually, opportunism as opposed to spiritual ethos is one of the major points - if not THE major point - of that kind of Satanism.

From that basis we can see that there are two types of using this term, Satanism (or any other such name):

1) Using it as spiritual and/or philosophical term, whether or not we actually believe there are "archetypical essences behind religions". Only "must" is that we really think there is a "Satan".

2) Using it because such a naming gives us material profit, cool status, &c.

I oppose the latter.

In strictly philosophical way it can be said that LaVeyan Satanism is as much Satanism as, say, Star of Azazel's or Order of Nine Angles' Satanism. That's fine, as long as the thing is not turned other way around: namely, that theistic worship of Satan is not "true" Satanism. That kind of talk was awfully common ten-fifteen years ago. Let's not forget that articles like "Satanism or Satan worship" was written to oppose that kind of COS-dominated thinking.

...What say you if we move this subtopic under another name?
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
Wyrmfang
Frater
Posts: 1131
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 10:22 pm
Location: Espoo

Re: The Most Questionable Occult Authorities

Postby Wyrmfang » Sat Apr 20, 2013 2:56 pm

Nefastos wrote:
What I propose assumes that one should not use terminology in opportunistic way, which clearly is the way with LaVeyan Satanism. Those opportunistical versus philosophical nuances were the ones I spoke of as "different shades of grey": some shades are linguistic and formal (and so there is no need to judge them) but some are based on seeking of personal profit (and so there is need to reprimand them in order to establish culturally healthier use for the word). LaVey didn't make it secret that he used certain terms because it was profitable
Ok, this is a good point. Seeking material profit must not be the reason for any kind of philosophy. Actually, when it comes to such atheistic philosophy, which could quite well be called Satanism, I appreciate Nietzsche much higher than LaVey.
Nefastos wrote:
...What say you if we move this subtopic under another name?
A good idea.
User avatar
Azoth
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:36 am

Re: The Most Questionable Occult Authorities

Postby Azoth » Sat Apr 20, 2013 3:01 pm

Wyrmfang wrote:Yes, but this already assumes our viewpoint, namely, that there are archetypical essences behind religions. From LaVey´s viewpoint, religions are entirely man-made constructions, and therefore the use of religious terms is cultural - in present cultural situation an anti-Christian thinking can be called Satanism.

The schism between our and LaVey´s conception of Satanism is the issue between any form of theism and atheism. In my opinion, we should still call both forms Satanism because they share the satanic aspect when it comes to dogmatic Christianity. We sever LaVey´s conception of Satanism already by introducing our conception, which after all is, or so I would say, something closer to the intuition of masses. I think it is widely recognized by "ordinary people" that there is something strange in the conception of atheistic Satanism, and that´s because relativism is not intuitive to most people (outside universities).
It's correct that this does assume our viewpoint. Its also relevant, however, that the topic of 'The Most Questionable Occult Authority' is also addressed from this viewpoint, and LaVey fits that title from that viewpoint, as do the other authorities cited here do (apart from Gardner, I would say), in that he touched on something real with his psyche, expressed it quite well initially, then failed to grasp the reality of the archetype that he expressed. In LaVey's case, what he had touched was something his rational mind could not come to terms with, perhaps, so he explains it from a purely rational point of view in the guise of 'Objectivism with horns' as I once heard it called.

Then,as Nefastos just said, the man's own materialist nature takes over the whole venture so that the whole thing can be seen as an exercise in making cash, fame and fortune out of religion, which in the Satanism espoused by LaVey himself is very Satanic indeed. Ask any other type of Satanist though, those with true, deep religious motives for instance, and they'd probably disagree in the ways of LaVey in the same way that a Franciscan friar would disagree with the methods of a TV evangelist.

Interestingly though, and as an aside, Aquino always seemed to be under the impression that LaVey did believe in Satan as a real entity. Whether this comes from his own interpretation of LaVey's words and actions, something implicitly or explicitly stated to him by LaVey, or just as a way to legitimise his own movement, it's hard to say.

[Quotation corrected - JN ed.]
Barbarism is the natural state of mankind. Civilization is unnatural. It is a whim of circumstance. And barbarism must always ultimately triumph - Robert E. Howard, Beyond the Black River.
Necrosophiacos
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:08 pm

Re: LaVeyan Satanism

Postby Necrosophiacos » Mon May 27, 2013 10:37 pm

I am one of the Satanist who strongly oppose the philosophy which is attributed to Howard Stanton Levey (a.k.a Anton Lavey) his church, and his bible which is a paraphrase of collage from Ragnag Redbeard's book "Might is Right", along with some Christian Magick from the book of Abramelin the mage and the middle age gromoires which are most of them, a distortion of True Magick or Sorcery created in order to be accepted by the church of the Nazarene.
Its rituals are childish and ineffective, anybody with real experience in the occult knows it is absurd to command the Forces of Darkness, since man imprisoned in this clayborn shell is an insignificant creature before the eyes of Death and the Devil.
Laveyanism as it is taught by the Church of Lavey, nowadays is completely atheistic, creating the oxymoron "atheistic satanism". There is No Satanism without Satan, the Master.
The major problem with the church of Lavey and similar organizations, and individuals who confuse Magick, Sorcery, Left Hand Path or any other ideology/philosophy with Satanism. These wrong concepts often originate on the lack of apprehension:That Satanism is founded on Satan, not on the ego or the self. the Satanist put his or her devotion, the burning will to fulfill the Will of Satan above everything. Family, Carnal pleasures, fame, material possessions...even our own lives are meaningless. As it is stated on the slogan of our Cathechism, on the gnostic gospel of Jhon 12;25
Laveyanism was created to promote "Lavey" himself and the use of inverse christianity, which is Laveyanism to me, was used to create a shocking impact in the mind and consciousness of the masses of the age.
The Use of the sacred symbols of the occult in its dark aspect within Laveyanism was and it is used to sell that egostical animalistic ideology as part of the "alternative religions". I personal find the use of the sacred symbols of Master Satan, by materialists and atheists to be disrespectful.
Various people think that Laveyanism is a tool to purify the individual from the indoctrination of the Abrahamic Religion, of which i disagree, because a person who centers himself or herself on the Ego and Materialism is far more difficult to accept Satan and his Demons than which is for a pagan, witch, hougan, occultist...
Neither i believe that the daily life or the great work of the Satanists would be better by living in a world inhabited by atheists. Our adversrial stand against the abrahamic religions or any manifestation of the dreaded Demiurge, helps to give momentum and power to our Black Flames, as we fight the cause of the One and Unknown God. The Stigma of the Master, we carry with pride in this illusory world of veils of Maya, that we pierce with the trident of the inferno.
Laveyanism promotes the same dualistic view of the abrahamic or mystical religions, which try to put spirit over Matter. As explained in our Philosophy of Oneness " Polyharmonia" both matter and spirit are equal important, one cannot be put above the other, since both spirit and matter" are just ends of the same stick. Energetic manifestation vibrating at different levels of rhythm and resonance.
Another aspect is the odious, brutish minded practice of teh Laveyans and the so-called Left Hand Pathers of telling/ordering others that "worshiping Satan" is some kind of Sin, or their magick or sorcery works including their daily lifes will be ill affected, if people worship Satan His demons or anything besides the self.
Concerning, the obscure topic of witches or 'satanists" eating babies, it is well known that behind every tale or myth there is a spark of truth. The concept of the profane of witches "eating Babies" is hoax, if understood literally. What is true is that as part of the Black Magick, witchcraft and Vampyrism, the devouring of the pranic energy is practiced and comes since ancient civilations, such as the egyptian practices of the followers of Sekhmet to devour the "Bha/Akh" or soul. This practiced was continued by the witches on more recent times, what they do is, on a form of astral traveling is to send their "Khabit" or shadow on predatory acts. Babies or young ones it is well known possess great amount of pranic energy, thus it probably included as part of the practices. I.E. The tales of my spanish ancestors is full of stories about babies falling ill or diying by suppossed witches attracts. Nowadays obscure practices such those found within the Voodoo Bokhors, Brazilian Tatas, Philippine Makunkunlan, Energetic Vampires...are supposed to devour "souls" as part of their Path.
Finally, concerning the topic of Laveyanism, I must say that personally, Laveyanism and such materialistic or Hedonistic ideologies, opposes in great part to the foundations of my believes on the "Necrosophia" Death, as the ultimate form of self-indentification, Death the ultimate anticosmic/antidemiurgic Power, The Luciferian Gnosis that Master Lucifer the bright-side of Satan stands for the Death of matter and ascension of spirit, as the fumes that arises from organic matter when decomposing.
My soul for His glory ! Ad Maiorem Satanas Luciferi Gloriam !
obnoxion
Sodalis
Posts: 1992
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 7:59 pm

Re: LaVeyan Satanism

Postby obnoxion » Thu Jun 06, 2013 6:51 pm

I once owned few books by LaVey, and one of them was The Devil's Notebook. I bought the book because of one article dealing with trapzoids and haunted houses, which was very interesting. Then there was this other article about a man whose live's work centered around excrements. I don't rember how the story went exactly, but if I remembre correctly, this man had an active and quite healthy interest in things relating to excrement, and he made a livelihood out of it.

Again, if I remember correctly, as LaVey told the story, he paused several times to ponder if the reader might wonder why is he writing about this man. I haven't owned the book in years, but this story has somhow stuck with me. And latley i've wondered if in this article there was a hint of more spiritual approach, a sort of serach of mystic union to earth or dirt as a religious principle. In Theistic approach the Earth and the Excrement are seen as Satan, or Shakti, wherein lies hidden an unsurpassed sacredness.
One day of Brahma has 14 Indras; his life has 54 000 Indras. One day of Vishnu is the lifetime of Brahma. The lifetime of Vishnu is one day of Shiva.
Mera
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 12:43 am

Re: LaVeyan Satanism

Postby Mera » Fri Jan 03, 2014 8:48 pm

I don't know anything about Anton Laveyan, I saw his photo on google once and I felt very creepy energy from him.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests