the satanic bible

[CoryKS]

The Pirate in Atlas Shugged was named Ragnar Danneskjoldand no Lavey didn't base anything on him. He tried to ally himself with Ayn Rand (by plagarizing) at the time because she championed individualism but she was from an Arestotilian root while he was from a Nizchean root (wholly different ways at looking at the world). Yes he outright stole concepts from many sources into one great hodgpodge including Rand but he totally screws it.

Atlas Shrugged is my favorite book, I know these things.

Maybe I was careless with the pronoun "he". I didn't mean that Lavey based anything on Ragnar Danneskjold; I meant that Ragnar Redbeard was an inspiration for Rand in developing the character of Ragnar Danneskjold. Not as a basis for her philosophy, but as a fictional persona. I'm aware that Lavey's admiration of Rand was one-sided.

 

[tellner]

Every year I go to the HPL Film Festival. There's are big CoS contingent. What always amazes me about these rugged individualist Self-idolozing sorts is that they all dress and accessorize exactly alike. Same affect. Even a lot of the same mannerisms. Right across the space there's a group of the breakaway Temple of Set. Same thing. Same aesthetic. Their pentacles are a little different, but that's about it.

Something seems a tad contradictory there.

 

[CoryKS]

Every year I go to the HPL Film Festival. There's are big CoS contingent. What always amazes me about these rugged individualist Self-idolozing sorts is that they all dress and accessorize exactly alike. Same affect. Even a lot of the same mannerisms. Right across the space there's a group of the breakaway Temple of Set. Same thing. Same aesthetic. Their pentacles are a little different, but that's about it.

Something seems a tad contradictory there.

You find that in every community of "self-thinkers". They demonstrate their free-spiritedness in the only way they know how - by finding some other free spirits and aping their schtick. Because if people didn't have a template by which to identify you as artistic and thoughtful, you would just be that weird person who didn't fit in.

 

[Omar B]

The Keyword is ONLY THAT MATTER TO YOU. Which does not really show humility or compassion and empathy to others because the key to true compassion,humility and empathy is to be for all beings not the ones you pick and choose.
I truly feel a mans morals is to better serve his fellow man and the world if you or someone was in hard times would you want a stranger to help you or would you turn him down?

Well if that's how you feel then great. I'm no altruist nor will I ever be. Nor am I humble, in fact I'm the opposite, quite proud. If you think pride is bad then that's your feeling on the matter, I prefer walking with my head high. I don't find humility a good quality.

I don't live at for other nor from the alms of others so no, I don't go around asking/begging for help.

Do you ask what moral obligation I owe to my fellow men? None—except the obligation I owe to myself, to material objects and to all of existence: rationality. I deal with men as my nature and theirs demands: by means of reason. I seek or desire nothing from them except such relations as they care to enter of their own voluntary choice. It is only with their mind that I can deal and only for my own self-interest, when they see that my interest coincides with theirs. When they don’t, I enter no relationship; I let dissenters go their way and I do not swerve from mine. I win by means of nothing but logic and I surrender to nothing but logic. I do not surrender my reason or deal with men who surrender theirs.
The egoist in the absolute sense is not the man who sacrifices others. He is the man who stands above the need of using others in any manner. He does not function through them. He is not concerned with them in any primary matter. Not in his aim, not in his motive, not in his thinking, not in his desires, not in the source of his energy. He does not exist for any other man—and he asks no other man to exist for him. This is the only form of brotherhood and mutual respect possible between men. - Ayn Rand

 

[JadecloudAlchemist]

Ok Omar different opinions I can respect that.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Let us take a 'for instance'.

Let us say that you were in a boat with several other people, and you suddenly spotted a man floating in the water, obviously in distress. Any normal person would go to that man, pull him from the water, try to save him from the elements, take him to safety, and so on.

Now let us say that you are in a lifeboat, and it is riding so low in the water that it ships water over the sides every time the boat rocks slightly. In other words, it is on the bitter edge of sinking, due to overloading.

Now, same situation. You see the man. If you take him aboard, all will drown. If you do not, you and your compatriots may survive.

I posit that not only would you not offer the man assistance, if he tried to climb aboard your boat, you would beat him to death with an oar to prevent him swamping your boat.

The man is not different in either case. Only your circumstances change.

Christianity and other 'evolved' religions are silent on this. 'Turn the other cheek' and 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you' do not address such situations. In fact, they encourage people to to the exact wrong thing - to get out of the boat to let the man in, so to speak.

Some esoteric religions tear back the curtain, unveil the inherent unfairness of life, and point out that before you can help anyone else, you must help yourself. If you cannot save yourself, you cannot save anyone else. Enlightened self-interest is not evil - it is logic, the law of life and nature. It's just not pretty to think about.

 

[Omar B]

And in so doing act against your rational self interest. Something most religions gloss over.

 

[JadecloudAlchemist]

Concerning your story Bill this is from King of Samadhi sutra a little known story in Buddhism:

A story from a past life of the Buddha illustrates this. It is the story about a shipload of five hundred merchants on a ship traveling from India to the islands off the coast laden with riches. Among the travelers was a murderer named "Spear-wielding Criminal" who intended to kill everyone aboard the ship to keep the riches. The bodhisattva "Prince Fortitude," who was the ship captain, knew about this intention and thought, "If I kill him first, I can save him from the negative karma, from killing five hundred people." So the bodhisattva killed the criminal. Instead of creating negative karma from this act, he accumulated a vast amount of merit. So this story illustrates that, by using discriminating knowledge and pure motivation, a negative action can become virtuous. If our motivation is utterly free from disturbing emotions, the action can be carried out if it relieves the suffering of others or benefits a vast number of beings. Having described the precepts of body, speech and mind, the Buddha then gives three hundred listed topics of instructions. According to some of the pith instructions, we should regard the aggregates as being like a mirage, the sense-base as being like magical illusions.

A Bodhisattva would most likely see the man in the water and help him aboard and cast himself in the waters to drown because to the Bodhisattva every being is a wishfilling jewel.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

And in so doing act against your rational self interest. Something most religions gloss over.

When you get on the plane, the flight attendant always says to put your own oxygen mask on first, before helping others. If you cannot help yourself first, you won't be able to help anyone else.

"Do as thou shalt" means just that. If it is your will to save others, to be charitable, to work in a soup kitchen, do those things. No one can gainsay you, no one can criticize you.

It is interesting that people presume that those who choose to live precisely as they please will be evil people. Why make that assumption, unless one believes that people are only good because they are FORCED to be good by their God, that their religion so persecutes them with fear of eternal punishment that they must be good or suffer damnation?

Are the people who believe that actually good only because they fear God? Is that their entire motivation? (I'm being rhetorical, I realize that some religious people do good because they want to and it also happens to be the law of their religion - I'm just saying).

Or is it possible that people choose to be good because that's what they want to do, not because that's what some God or rule book told them to do?

If there are people in the world who are what we would call 'good' and they are that way because that's what they want to be and do, I would tend to place them on a higher pedestal than someone who was commanded by their religion to do good, and who do it for that reason alone.

'Do as thou shalt' means people are responsible for their own actions, good and bad. It means you break it you bought it. It means God doesn't visit pain and suffering on people - pain and suffering exist and some people get a lot of it, but what they choose to do about it is their choice and not in the hands of a Savior or a Creator.

'Do as thou shalt' means if you hurt someone, you live with what you have done, and if you feel badly about it, you do something to make it right. No prayers for intercession, no hope for a brighter tomorrow for that person you wronged. You get it all, the joy and the sadness, the ecstasy and agony. It means at the end of the day, you look in the mirror and realize that everything you did that day, good and bad, YOU did. No one else.

'Do as though shalt' is about personal responsibility as much as it is about personal freedom. It means do what you want to do, but if you hurt someone through your own actions, don't blame anyone else, bubba.

'Do as thou shalt' doesn't shift blame. It doesn't consider sin, sinner, savior, redemption, karma, dogma, catma or anything outside of the self. It means if you're a nasty old so-and-so, then that is what you are, and you did it, not your parents, not your God, and not Charlie who stole the handle.

'Do as thou shalt' is a line drive to the gut wearing a new baseball mitt. It means you, and only you, get to take responsibility for your actions. You might escape wrath, you might escape retribution. There will be no homework assignment, and no judgment after this life. It means going to your grave knowing exactly who and what you are. And if you die knowing you were an absolute ****, then that's what you are. No one waves a cross and you and absolves you of your sins. No one makes you redo your life, only this time as a bug or a cow. The punishment is here and now, just like the reward - you are who and what you are. Life sucks, get a helmet, and if you believe in doing as you will, remember others do too. It might be smart to be nice to others and get some reciprocation going there. That's enlightened self-interest, too.

 

[Makalakumu]

The thing about magic is that it always goes both ways. "Do what thou wilt" can lead to both good and evil. So can "do what thou wilt, if it harm none." All of this goes to show that both of these statements are a limited way of looking at humanity. They don't really do us justice because throughout the balance of our lives we tend to live in both, the right hand and the left hand, doing good and evil in both. In the end, it just doesn't matter. Even the good you think you do can be turned to evil simply by shifting the perspective.

I'll just be a human if you don't mind. I'm okay with embracing what I am in a biologic and evolutionary sense.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

The thing about magic is that it always goes both ways. "Do what thou wilt" can lead to both good and evil. So can "do what thou wilt, if it harm none." All of this goes to show that both of these statements are a limited way of looking at humanity. They don't really do us justice because throughout the balance of our lives we tend to live in both, the right hand and the left hand, doing good and evil in both. In the end, it just doesn't matter. Even the good you think you do can be turned to evil simply by shifting the perspective.

I'll just be a human if you don't mind. I'm okay with embracing what I am in a biologic and evolutionary sense.

Gruad the Greyface thanks you for your patience. All will become clear in time. There is no blame. Hexagram 23: Breaking Apart. When in doubt, consult your pineal gland.

 

[Makalakumu]

Gruad the Greyface thanks you for your patience. All will become clear in time. There is no blame. Hexagram 23: Breaking Apart. When in doubt, consult your pineal gland.

All hail Eris!

 

[Randy Strausbaugh]

Fnord?

 

[tellner]

Fnord?

Did you say something?

 

[Randy Strausbaugh]

Kind of an inside joke. Refer to the Principia Discordia or many works by Robert Anton Wilson.

 

[CoryKS]

Kind of an inside joke. Refer to the Principia Discordia or many works by Robert Anton Wilson.

I think he got it. According to the Illuminatus! Trilogy, the unenlightened can't see the word "Fnord". So he would have seen an empty post.

 

[Omar B]

My college g/f was obsessed with those books. And yes, I did see fnord everywhere, but it was in her handwriting.

 

[Cryozombie]

plus, i have to give levay credit: he founded a religion that was adamently individualistic, then charged membership to be associated with other individuals! great read, & a great con.

jf

Levay was a Carnie and a Huckster and a Bunko artist... that was just another of his "Big Cons"... somthing he Excelled at.

 

[harlan]

Quoted for truth.

Levay was a Carnie and a Huckster and a Bunko artist... that was just another of his "Big Cons"... somthing he Excelled at.

Read his 'bible' decades ago, and decided that it did nothing to contribute to the betterment of society. I recall putting it down, and getting a creepy awareness that this man was dangerous. Not because he was espousing new, challenging ideas, but because he was very good at reaching weak minds.

Alistair Crowley was unique. Levay was just another hedonistic opportunist.

 

[Joab]

While I have never read the "Satanic Bible" I'm rather amazed anyone would take this seriously. Do you really think the worship of evil can in any way bring about any good.? Many, of course, have dismissed LeVay as a con man and opportunist, and I applaud you for it, and many of you have pointed out the teachings really can't work, and I applaud you for that. Anyone finding any worth in Satanism is someone I want to steer clear of. There's too much evil in this world as it is.