Hope you had a MERRY.
Post by nagasiva50041223 happy kaos day! viii om solstice!
Yes yes, and NOW the days will get LONGER - and the weather WARMER er, and
the beach WARMER and soon it will be SPRING and BEACHTIME again. YAY. I
hate daylight "standard" time. They should keep it on daylight savings time
always.
Post by nagasiva#> ...when is St. Lucy's day ...?
# It is always on the same day, the 13th December.
then belated happy birthday! I don't know all the saint-days.
I don't know any of them - but someone told me I was born on that day. I
looked it up - and was damned surprised at what I found about it being the
old solstice - as in "Lucy the Light Bringer's Day! Somehow, that is SO
apropo, LMAO.
Post by nagasiva<massive snippage, particularly the personal
driving away from the Satanism-related; my aim
is to winnow it from my expression and reflection>
All of it was related to satanism and LHP. Strange that you never pick up
on that. I illustrate via personal anecdote - which is the way oral
traditins are done, btw. It speaks to the feelings/guts - instead of to the
abstract head. Abstract head is definitely NOT a way to understand me or
anything in the DDocs. It's the way to NOT understand it! Really. It's
like trying to taste an orange by not tasting it, but thinking about it when
you have never tasted one and then forming these abstract ideas and YES,
trying to cubbyhole it into something you found that you THINK is similar.
Meanwhile, you are off by a mile. I can only deduce that we are two kinds
of animal - and there is a GULF that's unbridgeable.
Post by nagasiva#>#> it appears the
#>#> new anti-Satanism is a return to Christian "Shady Side"
#>#> (like the Dark Side of Thomas Merton or the scary shaky
#>#> parts of Augustine, the Dark Night of the Soul (gasp!)
#>#> and the eros of rapture (ack!).
#> there's very much you could learn about mysticism, then, Tani.
note my focus here on 'the new anti-Satanism', which would
be a departure from the new anti-Christianity of the CoS.
my point was about the 'next step' or 'next generation'
of Satanism which rails against its former capsule.
First of all, this is wholly dependent on you accepting that there is only
one satanism out there - which is something no one accepts except SOME
members in the org that tries to uh, copyright satanism - LMAO. I think
Karla might have a few words to say about that, since she ALSO got railed
against by them, libeled, trashed and the whole rest, even dragged into a
bitter court fight - and that shit IS real life! LOL.
Bobo, actually, no one would rail against them at all if they weren't the
ones who originally started RAILING at every other org out there and even
interfering real life with these orgs. Rails made in the past and
repeated now and then by ONE org against all other orgs: 1. they are riding
on ASL's coattails - said to any org using ASL's STUFF, but not liking the
particular ORG you mentioned too much, or its people. 2. There was never a
schizm, they think they are the new and improved ASL - (when in reality they
are NOT-ASL at all and OH YEAH there was a schizm alright - a BIG one and
now that MAA made book available, there is no doubt about it). 3. Attacks
against Karla - imo the only one really espousing the ORIGINAL ASL in the
first place. 4. Personal attacks against the ONLY satanic organization that
actually not only never used or uses their stuff or their symbols - but the
org that got OTHERS to stop using their stuff, too.
They used to complain endlessly that people used their stuff and pretended
it was copyrighted (actually, Morena Faust DID copyright it - "just so
they'd STOP FUCKING WITH HER" - go and ask her yourself or search her posts
Cat Asstrophy, or Luci Fur or Lucinda. Or just ask her. When they have
tried to FUCK with her, she has CLOSED DOWN SALES with that government real
copyright!, She had to do that to watch HER back. Why the need in the first
place?
So now very very few people and none connected to us use ANY of their stuff.
They are complaining people DO NOT use their stuff? Point being - that
NONE of the shit under "bad stuff" was on the SR until 2002. That's 5 years
after stuff was up at the SR. Why was it even put up there? Due to
constant harassment. Funny that objective people DO manage to wonder why
they harass so much - why do they even bother with it? Or us? Or ME? What
for? I don't understand it, not really. I mean, trashing me for what TV
shows I like? For buying a big ride on mower? For what I like to eat when
I didn't have to SHARE recipe with the person that ASKED me for it. Jesus
freaking christ man. How PETTY can it get? You tell me to kilfile them?
YOU are talking to THEM - about ME, Bobo. They know nothing about me - OR
OUR ORG! Does that make me INCLINED to talk to you? Ya think? Take a
guess, babe. You make inferences so off the wall that I'm not the ONLY SR
member wondering where the hell you even GET those inferences. We have over
600 members in the SR now, Bobo. I go to my email box and 4 more joined
today. I never heard of 99% of the people in the org from ANYWHERE on
usenet or from chat rooms. NONE of them have any misunderstandings about
exactly what the org is about - or about what DDocs are about. But you do.
Just GO READ it like all those people did. They had the brains to read ALL
of it (the serious stuff) before asking for an application with very few
exceptions. Me? I'm nothing but IMPRESSED thru the ceiling by some of
those people - and I DO NOT impress easily, Bobo.
Post by nagasivayour contention that what I meant was the CoS doing a
regurgitation of Christian religion is therefore misplaced,
but I can certainly agree with it to a point (it is even
described as to its character and its support in mainstay
CoSatanist texts to which both of us have made reference).
But you are talking to me about THEM again. What for? No one in the Sr
bothers about them at all - and I literally mean that. NONE do it. They
are irrelevant. We don't use a SINGLE THING, not even a single IDEA from
them. Nothing. Nada. Shiva is posting right on here. Why don't you talk
to HER about the organization she's in? She's not an asshole, either -
she's a pretty nice person - imo, one of the few. She's also friendly. Talk
to her about her org; NOT TO ME or I'll give you a sig file again.
Post by nagasiva#># That's what LaVeyan satanism in fact IS - and always was.
# ...it doesn't differ from it at all. Theirs is about the
# "Christian shady side" inversed
there's a confusion of terms here. 'inversion' in religion,
and especially within Satanism as a reply to or response to
the overt religious context within which it develops (note
the lack of identifying temporal or geopolitical qualifier)
is a REJECTION of its original orientation in favour of some
perturbation or destruction of it, i.e. its 'inversion'.
Well, since the founders of OUR org (not some OTHER org) are not
inversionist in any way shape or form - and pursue our own LHP stuff in our
own way as if "the world and fuss of other shit" doesn't exist - there is no
inversionism - nor can we relate to it. Bobo, it all just sounds like
wailing, like this: "I HATE MY MA AND PA" blown way out of proportion.
Or "I WAS AN OMEGA WOLF IN HIGH SCHOOL,
NOW I CAN BE ELITE AND BE AN ALPHA AND
DUMP ON PEOPLE."
Or "I WAS A BIG OBESE FUCKING STUPID LOSER
TIMES TEN BUT NOW I KNOW THE REASON WAS
THAT I AM REALLY ELITE AND EVERYONE WAS JEALOUS"
That is what we HEAR, Bobo. 99% of it is THAT, them screaming that.
Sr is NOT that. I don't want to hear that, be near that, or KNOW that, or
as an empath even begin to tune into the black pit of awfulness that is
THEMSELVES or their lives. It's bad enough I get to hear what HAPPENED to
them, which I find unbelievable and even atrocious - but now I get to hear
their Big Pompous Escapes from Reality. The BIG vacation from their selves
that they all tend to take. Sure they hate me. I punch a hole in their
fantasy balloons and when they next look in the mirror they see the same old
fucking stupid loser. I don't even tend to TRY to do that - it just blurts
out. You know, we say it in the DDocs. You can either BE what you are - or
you can BE NOTHING - and being nothing is not gonna be too pleasant when the
aristocratic fantasy castles come crashing down by the Big Bad Reality out
there. That is what I have seen in 90% of "satanists" for over a decade,
Bobo. And yes, THEY HATE ME. And their attacks and methods of attack are
SO petty that I have wonder that you don't notice it.
Post by nagasivawhat I'm talking about here as regards the 'via negativa' is
an ACCEPTED CHRISTIAN RELIGIOUS FACET, extends beyond mere
Christian religious tradition, and has NOT, to my knowledge,
been inverted in any realistic sense. for this reason I was
attempting to point you to some good sources on it, but I'm
content to follow up with citation and some text to help.
Why would you burden me with things I'm not interested in? I don't give a
SHIT about christianity, right side up, inside out, inverted or what. I
find some things about historical people INTERESTING, sure - and what the
hey, Bobo I had to read it since I did the HTML, duh. But I'd NOT have read
something like that OTHERWISE. Grasp that!
I know what humans do with religion and ideologies. It doesn't need a text
the size of Dostoyevsky to explain it, either. that one article I pointed to
on the GoD site that I wrote explains it ALL, Bobo - ALL. It's synthetic.
Post by nagasivaI can't find something summary-oriented in Happold for you,
but a simple search with key terms
"via negativa" mysticism
at Google.com can show you something of what I mean. it
is primarily a Christian contemplative tradition which is
sometimes associated with the Left Hand Path of Tantra,
From my own personal experiences and cultural experiences - what western
people define as LHP is a pack of baloney. LHP is YIN. That is ALL it is.
It is NOT opposed to RHP at all. To think that is a BIG mistake.
See http://www.geocities.com/satanicreds/lhp-rhp.html
and
http://www.geocities.com/satanicreds/lhp-rhp2.html
Post by nagasivabut adheres in abundance around the writings of mystics
whose interest in ascetic reforms gained them widespread
popularity (these being John 'of the Cross', Teresa
d'Avila 'the shoeless', and later, Thomas Merton,
who I mentioned in our previous conversation, remember?).
Yah, I remember, but I never heard of these people and am not interested in
them.
Post by nagasivahaving done that, we might be on the same page regarding
your contentions about the Church of Satan, but I doubt
very much that most of what you maintain here will stand
in the face of what I'd originally meant about you,
primarily because you didn't understand what I meant.
What I said they represent is in their SB and it IS what they represent.
Might is right, strong ruling over weak, etc etc - all of that which you
snipped out. WHY are you bringing THEM up to me again? So that my enemies
can flame me for talking about THEM again? Jesus fucking christ, Bobo. TALK
TO SHIVA. Or just search all her posts and understand that she is one of
the BEST members in that org - and read what she has to say on her level. Go
ahead.
Post by nagasiva# and all that, their particular "sins" and all,
# elaborated on and tish tish, or even their ceremonies
# even if only in a spoof (movie Satanas) but imo sometimes
# they aren't spoofs keeping in mind that the late-coming
# atheist clique are the ones claiming Satanas was just a
# spoof. Next comes Addam's Family kitch (horror movie
# spoofing), much ado about the horrors of christianity
# and such murderous doings, as if Christians are the
# ONLY people that did such things "in the name of Gawd."
all very interesting, but doesn't touch the Via Negativa.
I can see this is your latest "thing." The Via Negativa. Sigh. Lemme give
you my via affirmativa, LMAO - I affirm that I don't give a shit about any
of that mysticism in other religions - which can be summed up in a few
synthetic words (already did that). Do you hear me insisting that you
SHOULD watch Star Trek Enterprise and TNG and Voyager and etc. and repeating
it again and again?
Post by nagasiva# Eros of Rapture - their version is INDULGE INDULGE
# INDULGE, only to have to later write articles in the
# 90s about how they don't mean over indulge and they
# don't mean.....etc.
that's not to what I was referring, but to the rapture of
'St. Teresa of Avila' as portrayed within classic art and
as espoused within Via Negativa theologians and mystics.
we're not talking about sensualism here, but asceticism.
For some poor folks, asceticism IS sensualism. I know nothing of St.
Teresa - and ain't interested in her.
Post by nagasiva<snip much contention the CoS about which I primarily agree>
# ...might is right..... RIGHT? ....
how does this different even slightly from what you asserted
in another post: that the ends justify the means?
It doesn't. The POINT is that might is not necessarily right - RIGHT is
right. But in a capitalist society, one either does what is done or
ey --- uh - end up homeless? dead? Is it wrong to outcompete people I even
like at a job and they end up literallly homeless and/or thrown out of
apartment? It is on that job where competition rules and you either make
the bucks or you do not. IMO, it's ultimately WRONG, there has to be a
better way. That's not gonna mean that I won't actully DO that on that kind
of job. Hey, I DID. It's the past. I realized how fucking predatory I
could be when put into that kind of a situation and I also felt that it
SUCKED. Nothing has to be THAT stressful in a modern civilized country -
but right now IT IS. I don't deny reality for some ideology, babe. I never
did or would. Result: I made bucks. Others did not.
Post by nagasiva# ...You are so pie in the sky, rose colored glasses that it's
# too late to wipe the mildew from your eyes....
a projection on your part. I wasn't talking about the CoS, but
about the post-CoS revisions that hit on former CoSatanist themes,
I'll show you POST that org - just go look at that org right now, LMAO. If
you want to see the actual org - go see Karla. I'd say that ALL of the ASL
type orgs out there are revisions that still keep strict to the actual words
of ASL. I believe the article on GoD site is very succinct about all of
that - and damned accurate. We now also have POST TOSetian orgs - like the
Storm and maybe a few others. Once upon a time there was the Catholics.
Then there was the Prote...ooops - wrong - then there was the GREEK orthodox
and all those orthodoxes - and then the protestants and then America with
its own brand of many types of religion all based on the same original
bible. So what. That is the way of the VOID in action via Will of someone,
baby - behold it - CHAOS. A CHAOS of orgs. All insist they are right (so
human of them). ALL use the same text. ASL orgs are all too human and all
are the same way - they all use the original text - but they all disagree
and all insist that they KNOW what ASL intended. LMAO. Some say TOS does
that too. Well, SR DOES NOT. I should remove "bad stuff" off site just to
get it OFF our site. Problem: I have no clue how to do html involving
Brendan's template and he says it's TO MUCH WORK to get it right. That
means, perhaps Jerome can find a way - he's good with that, but has no time.
He can tell me. and I can DO it. Maybe. someday. If I remember.
Post by nagasivaeffectively returning to less hostile ideology and theology that
resonates with experience moreso than strikes out against culture
(e.g. 'dark matter', 'dark flame', even 'Luciferian' ideologies,
and those which grapple with contenteous sociopolitical platforms).
# There is very much you should learn about biology, then, Bobo,
# if you like wild nature so much.
considered below.
# ...Fuck mysticism. Not interested.
the terminology you associated with your Sat-Tanism is mystical.
True - but what we are talking about is NOT mystical. Hey, if I want to
call my cup of coffee the Brew of Tipereth, I can call it that. It doesn't
mean coffee is mystical. You are fooled by terminology. People in the org
are not fooled by that at all. They can see what the THING ACTUALLY IS - or
FEEL it. Nothing mystical about it.
Post by nagasivamy observation of its valences in contrast with CoSatanism are
relevant, and the comparison with 'via negativa mysticism' are
probably what allow Roman Catholics to gravitate your direction.
Jesus fucking christ. ONE PERSON feels the same thing a hard core cos
atheist felt, knows serious pitfalls in his own doctrines and agrees with
what we say - and you see the fucking Catholic church flocking to join the
SR? From ONE PERSON?
Post by nagasivaI'm explaining how your expression may produce certain results,
results which you yourself are below confirming for me.
# ...SHE ALSO read the same thing that RCPriest friend read -
# and FELT the same damned thing HE felt....
again, in conformance with my previous contentions about the
via negativa contemplatives and their transrational referents.
Uh, via negativa would not apply to a hard core LaVeyan atheist, Bobo.
Lucinda IS that. There is nothing negativa OR affirmativa (LMAO) about it -
ASL also claimed he personally FELT that - but he felt it ONCE and didn't
know quite what it was.
Post by nagasiva# ...For the RCPpriest to experience the SAME EXACT THING -
# for HIM this was a direct FEELING of "presense of real god
# - and it was DARK." ...
of course. the morphological or adjectival support is usually
merely contextually significant. its 'dark' quality is, at
times, predicated on certain technical factors within the
mystical culture allowing and promoting it. "darkness" is a
relevant and valuable thing within Christian contemplative
tradition, as it is within a number of other mystical
cultures to which you have sometimes made reference.
Sure, but it's not "darkness" like night time, or no lights.
Post by nagasiva# ...Now the priest calls this a mystical experience....
bingo! that's why I suggested that you ask him about Thomas
Merton. you might also ask him about 'St. John of the Cross'
or 'St. Teresa of Avila' or perhaps 'The Blessed John
Rouysbroeck. some of their expression is *comparable
to your own*.
OK, just called. Did ask. Hmm, my joke was on the mark. Fancy that!
I read what you wrote here in this post. DICTATION, he said: "Where does
he get that? He's either off his rocker or he's not read what I've written
for the website I requested. I notice there are many more articles on
there, aside from the ones I wrote."
"Via negativa is the opposite of via affirmativa. Via Afrirmativa is where
you see God's attributes, like good, creator of all things, loving, etc. all
goodness, but aside from the concept of infinite goodness, this is not
adequate to define God. You can also invert that and see God as the
ultimate destroyer (of worlds, of cities eg in the O.T., of galaxies), an
extremely punishing God who is ultimately the lord of both heaven and
hell - and also the creator and lord of the entire universe. You can take
that concept to infinity also. That is also via affirmativa because you are
giving god inversed but still definable attributes. You define the
attributes you think you know about God, but not God's entire nature.
Basically, with via negativa, there are no words or descriptions or complex
concepts you can really apply to God, the whole of God. The two approaches,
affirmativa and negativa, involve views of God via iconography, feelings,
etc. - but it doesn't get to the hidden aspects of God, things hidden beyond
any means of sensing them, knowing them, etc., the great unknown attributes
of God, which would be much, much more than any things we could possibly
know about God They would be things not even within the ability of human
beings to conceive of. But this has nothing to do with ascetism. It has
nothing to do with the behaviors the Church call sins or anything like that.
You are speaking to this person about me, I assume, and he's getting an
entirely wrong idea."
(QUESTION RE MY ARTICLE) This has nothing to do with what I experienced when
reading your article. I have always believed that there was a presence of
the divine hand in everything alive, everything that exists. I was looking
in the wrong place for affirmation of that, though I can't say that I spent
my time looking for it as a monk might do at all. I simply mean that on
occasion, I wondered about some kind of sense of it or sight of it, the
divine. I had no preconceptions of what that might look like at all.
Nonetheless, I persevered on faith alone. When I read your article it
literally felt like something hit me, a physical sensation literally through
my physical body so strong it almost knocked me down. There was a visual
sense of a blinding light in my body, which physically almost knocked me
down. I know what it feels like to be hit, as I've boxed occasionally. It
felt as if something hit me, physically; though it didn't hurt like an
actual punch would hurt. The force of it was the same. I may as well have
been struck by real lightening. Then a rush of images came into my head
almost in an instant, as if something, capitalize the s, was showing this to
me, like a vision. I saw the similarities of all life, the connectedness of
all of it, and saw the near infinite variations of it all, the uniqueness of
every single thing that exists. Then I saw, literally saw that underlying
all of it, and also surrounding that lightening bolt that hit me, was what I
can only define as a darkness so dark that it would be better described as
the absolute absence of light - at which point I could not distinguish which
was light and which was dark - as if they were confused, or the light was
dark, but the light was light. That is what I experienced, in what I think
was a few seconds. It must have been longer than that, since your article
can't be read in a few seconds. What I experienced, and think due to that,
would not correctly be classified as via negativa because I am now defining
God as that Darkness, a darkness in which there is a tiny spark of light, as
your article states. I believe this because it is what I literally saw and
literally felt. That is via affirmativa. Needless to say, (laughing) I was
able to go back and reread articles where you spoke of a "black flame" and I
certainly knew why you called it that after this happened to me. Prior to
that, I had some silly image of a literal flame on a candle that somehow
burned black. Do you ever imagine that most people reading your articles
are going to have a silly image like that, unless they have actually
experienced this? (still laughing) I don't even try to ponder the
attributes of God that are unknowable. I feel assured that most of the
attributes of God are beyond the human mind to conceive of. Why would I try
to contemplate something I'm incapable of grasping? I wouldn't do that on a
mundane level, why would I try to do that on any other level? I was unable
to do that math problem you sent as a joke. I simply gave up since I didn't
even know how to start to go about solving it. It was beyond my abilities
in math. I accept that my intelligence is limited. Would your friend
(BOBO) think that math is mystical or religious or call my inability to
solve a math problem, via negativa because there is so much more math out
there that I don't know?"
(QUESTION, RE JESUS) "What I had to say about the personality of Jesus is
something I've said for years and has nothing to do with your article or
anything you've written. People getting romantic ideas about Jesus or how
handsome he is, as they would about a movie star, is straying far from the
message. As you did mention, this is something people in America tend to
do." ("instead of listening to the song, they focus on the LIFE of Elvis" -
TJ note). (dictation) "Yes, like that." When you speak of the other aspects
of the darkness, or 'what else is in there,' or 'still part of that darkness
but not here,' giving it Greek names, this is what the Church has focused on
in the past as 'the darkness that should be avoided.' Demons and the like
that obscess and then possess man. The Church had the outlook that such
things beset mankind from outside. Your outlook is that they are beset in
the person by the person himself and what you write about it is much more
like modern psychology. Today, the Church does take that modern approach.
Many Priests have degrees in psychology. However, no one can deny that such
self inflicted injuries often can be cured by cathartic methods, which is
what an exorcism actually is, as we view this today. We know that humor,
laughter, watching comedies on television, can put cancer in remission. The
reason may once have been thought to be magical or spiritual, but today it
is known to be chemical."
(QUESTION MYSTICISM) "I can honestly say that I have never in my life had a
mystical experience or tried to have one. I became a Priest in all sincerety
because I felt a calling, a desire to help people. But I never had a
mystical experience until I read your article. I don't feel adequate enough
to explain the difference between the 'good" darkness which contains the
spark of light, and the 'bad' aspects of that same darkness. You do that
quite well yourslf. The only way I can relate to what you are saying about
the 'five' is that they are similar to my concept of Seraphim. Seraphim are
not the chubby, childish images you see in drawings. They are terrifyingly
punishing angels that go out by the will of God and defend the Light. It
also occurred to me that you know these things in the same way that I have
come to know that darkness and spark of light within it. I don't think I'd
want to know about that aspect of God in that way. I prefer to not know
that. It would be too terrible."
(More questions on people) DICTATION "If your friend (BOBO) is referring to
St. John's writings about the soul emptying itself to be filled with God, or
his dark night, this has absolutely nothing to do with anything I
experienced. St. John had what anyone would call a miserable life. I have
not. I have had much joy in my life and much joy at being a Priest and
helping others successfully. St. John contemplated many things during
terrible times and I believe he desired to contemplate such things. I never
did anything like that. I experienced something when least expecting to
experience anything, in a few seconds of time. I didn't go looking for
anything in particular when I found your website. I noticed the name
'Satanic Reds' and wondered what it could be. I didn't even know that the
site was serious. It seemed humorous. The roaming eyes following my mouse
(laughing). I soon saw it was very serious and also very differnt from what
I'd expect to find. I read 'Are you a Satanic Red' and couldn't for the
life of me understand what those politics, good ideas, had to do with the
devil. I skipped a few things, and saw "Dark Tradition" and went there. The
first thing I noticed was the lack of a pentacle on the page. I still don't
know what to make of that symbol you use. I read the first article on that
page. That was it. Capitalize the word it."
(QUESTION about other people) Dictation: "Blessed John Ruysbroeck (he
spelled it), the Divine Doctor? The metaphysics of mysticism. God to man,
man to God. Some say he was an ignorant illiterate. The Church disagrees.
He was a poet. I don't see the connection. Thomas Merton? There has been
a bit about this fellow since he may be removed from catechism. He was a
Trappist monk. He tended to be liberal, focused on independent experiences.
Such people interpret the monastic ideal usiong psyshology, anthropology
and even existentialist philosophy. But once they have interpreted, they
often go about defining what they think are God's attributes and their
followers tend to do the same. This would still be via affirmativa. I
think he died in a car accident when he went to visit the Dalai Lama
overseas. He was a monk that spoke of God's silent presence in empty
churches where even people ignorant of the religion and practice would be
able to feel the presence of God, in a church, an empty church. This is
contrary to the words of Christ, however. God is not to be found in a
building. People have the wrong idea about Catholic Churches. These are
not exclusive places where God is; they are houses of worship and community
for people who know they can worship anywhere else if they wish to. Even in
the poorest places, people want to see something beautiful and most Catholic
Churches are beautiful. They are places that people can come into, all
people. House of worship doesn't mean that 'God is in there and nowhere
else.' Christ disagrees with that idea. There is a quietude to be felt in
there. I don't know much else about him or the issue regarding his removal.
Does your friend think that all we do is sit around and read things?
(QUESTION RE Augustine). "My article on Augustine is nothing new to
clergy. I just went a little further in what I had to say. It's not
something I didn't think long ago. I'm glad you liked it."
(QUESTION other orgs article): "I simply wrote that to clarify the
differences in an objective manner, not negative, though I see you have
added web addresses. Those weren't available at the time I wrote that. I
don't see why your friend regards your organization as post Church of Satan
when the core doctrines of your group pre existed the Church of Satan. Even
if you simply trace it back to the Lovecraft influenced dark doctrines, it
pre exists that other organization. There are quite a few groups out there
that use what they call the Lovecraftian current and they all pre exist the
Church of Satan. If anything, the Church of Satan would more correctly be
seen as the post-new age and witchcraft movement since it is an organization
that exists in reaction not only to particular forms of Christianity, but
also in reaction to the witchcraft and new age or new paganism of the 1960s
in America. I doubt that I'm reading their early material wrongly, but it
seems that they are or were also reacting to and against the liberal
attitude of the 1960s, which is, as I see it, a strange thing for them to
have done."
(HE MAKES THE SUBJECT, I told him I'd type this too since it's about
something I put on HIS website) "I'm still mulling over Bogdan and Shulam
and I've shown that to others here. What would I do? What would you do?
What would Christ do? That came up after reading it. Is there an answer, a
correct answer? I've passed that around to quite a few people since I read
it. Every solution poses a problem. Christ would forgive Shulam, but
Shulam would continue to do harm. God might send angels to kill Shulam but
that's not an answer to the question, if I were Bogdan, what would I do. I
see you won't tell me the answer (laughter). Father James here figured out
your math problem. He's the type to stick to something and not put it down.
It took him two days (laughter)."
Well - there ya go, Bobo. I asked him - I took dictation (I type FAST so
idgaf the typos or bloopers in there). That was the answer. Short, about 10
minutes, maybe less, blunt, nothing much else. I was busy, he was busy.
LMAO, I called today on a SUNDAY, the day after Christmas, LMAO.
And it would seem you are once more in ANOTHER FUCKING UNIVERSE trying to
compare the taste of oranges to the fucking quasar star out in space
somewhere. Now I wonder if you even know the meanings of the words you use
when you get all guffaw hyper cerebral about some NEW thing. He just
defined it REALLY clearly, Bobo - and it ain't quite the same as the
yammering you are doing - nor can I even put into pieces what you are SAYING
to me - about that OTHER org, instead of asking two MEMBERS OF IT that are
on here right now. If you read what he said carefully and then go and
whatever with those people YOU mentioned - well then - comparing oranges and
stars ain't a good idea when you can't EAT stars. The funny thing is, my
JOKE about it was more on the money than what I can see of what you said.
He said it SUPER clear - so clear that a baby could understand it. But you?
OH, just a spectator, hey? Never kicked the ball or ran the bases,
hey? You don't know how to "know" something on the mark.
Post by nagasiva# ...atheists don't have [mystical experiences]....
false. check out what are sometimes called 'natural mystics'
or those who have no interest in any deity but do have some
kind of simplified relation to the natural world and their
place in it. some of these are Americans. some are Jewish,
or other effectively materially-based ecstatics, some are
absolute anarchists.
This PARTICULAR atheist has no mystical experiences. Better? But I'm
speaking for a person that posts here. ASK HER yourself. I might be
getting it wrong, just like I got "what Phil's religion is" WRONG. When I
asked PHIL - he said QUOTE "I don't think about religion. I don't have a
relgion." Are you an atheist? "NO, atheism is a religion, too." "What,
kundalini yoga? That not a religion, it's something I can do." There you
have it, NIX what I said, KEEP what PHIL said about PHIL's religion. You
know, find, delete, find replace?
Post by nagasiva# ...I don't think ANY of that is mystical, Bobo. That's
# what you aren't quite grasping here.
I grasp that, but my interests aren't just your or my peculiar
terminology. I'm also reflecting something to you about your
overall presentation of your Sat-Tanism and explaining what kind
of overlap it may have in its content with the expressions of
others, maintained experiences by mystics, etc.
Don't care about that. The info is up there for ANYONE to read. They don't
have to join anything and we say that up front.
Post by nagasiva# I think the fucking INTERNET is more mystical than ANYTHING
# in the DDocs.
http://www.luckymojo.com/avidyana/gnostik/libermud.tn
which has similar thoughts and values in mind, Neoplatonic.
# ...you don't know what habitat tracking is
I have enough interest to follow out your assertion and note
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/eldredge.html
search down to the phrase "habitat tracking" and a gist is
therein presented. I'm not avoiding your text, merely trying
to supplement it where you don't seem to understand its
overall resonance. this isn't 'battling knowledge' to me,
and so I'm content attempting to grasp some of what you are
bringing forth that might be helpful to my understanding
of wild nature (something I can't exactly locate without
the identification of control-mechanisms).
Read the Niles Eldredge book. A BOOK, not the internet. Get the WHOLE
picture. Not pieces of it like that old spectator.
Post by nagasiva#> least the phrase online "via negativa" -- it's a hottie
#> in the Christian contemplative community....
like this.
# ...I don't know ANYONE in the "Christian community."
apparently you're coming to know some Roman Catholics as a
result of your expression. I'm attempting to explain WHY.
ONE Roman Catholic - or er, EX RC? Damn, forgot to ask. Let's talk about
the many more Thelemites in the Sr org that wrote GOOD articles that are ON
the SR site - not OFF site. Oh, right, you didn't notice them. On second
thought, let's NOT talk about them. You just go READ what they wrote on our
site. Do that.
Post by nagasiva# ...it's about HUMAN NATURE....
# http://www.geocities.com/go_darkness/god-humans-tod.html
excellent. I'm not looking at your web pages right now. I've done
much of that and don't see much returned attention on your part,
You want my attention? Gee, that sucks. The url article has NOTHING
mystical in it at all. You think when I use foreign words (for lack of
English ones) that it's mystical. FINE. Leave it at that. I need a cup of
Tipereth Brew right now. Hey, I'm gonna sing three tones at you and whisper
something in your ear. Now three different tones. Whisper something else
in your ear. GOT IT? NO? Ooops, tone deaf. Too bad.
Post by nagasiva# ...My own immediate family, being Derbet (as Cat noted) are
# probably the most irritatingly CHAOTIC people you'd ever
# want to meet. Self included. The only thing I make sure
# to do - that none of them do - is show up on time (not a
# week later).
LOL -- I know the type.
# ...As Michael Moore's film came out, it turned out that my claims
# were BULL'S EYES....
"Bowling For Columbine" sort of laid the groundwork and was indeed
excellent. his later "Farenheit 911", about which you may be speaking
here, was less hard-hitting, overall, but generally very good. his
*previous* films were also excellent, more focussed on corporations
and the individual work harmed by big-corp decision-making (as in
"Roger and Me").
I'm talking about hard facts exposed in Farenheit 911. Bull's Eye. I dont
appreciate being FLAMED all over this newsgroup by a GANG of "free thinkers"
that refuse to even THINK - who of course say NOTHING when Moore proves what
I said to the letter. If not for the law, I'd exterminate those people for
souring my good day. And yes, the day after 911, I personally had a good
day. I found Moore to be a tad DISHONEST about a few facts in "Bowling for
Columbine" movie - especially the shit he pulled with Charleton Heston. I
will not get into it except to say - HAIL THE NRA.
More was PRETENTIOUSLY naive about a few American facts of life - and CRIME.
LIke, maybe he should check the FBI stats on that.
Post by nagasiva#>#># and for them ethics and integrity are much less important
#>#> right thing for the wrong reasons? ends justify the means?
#>#> as long as the moral is followed, to hell with maturation?
#># Uh, the ends DO justify the means, imo, in real life.
#> thus your willingness to lie to obtain what you desire.
#> as I've said, you do seem consistent in some ways.
# ...BOTH [of two contradicting expressions about] ideas
# are felt and hence true. It's not a matter of yes or no.
# It's a matter of yes AND no....
I can understand the repudiation of Aristlean categories of
either/or. but we weren't talking about that so much as about
the ends and the means. these are different philosophic issues.
I'm not talking philosophy. I'm talking real life. There is nothing
philosophical about getting money in order to pay for things required for
LIFE in the USA. Nothing philosophical about it at all.
Post by nagasivathe latter has far-reaching implications that the former never
really touches. ends/means may be resonantly compared with the
maxim "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions."
That's usually said of the Big L do-gooders. I don't pave any road save my
own road. There are no intentions involved in that way - only DEEDS.
Post by nagasiva# ...Everyone LIES to OBTAIN what they desire....
an interesting sociological assertion. your inclusive
significance for 'lie' allows this, I presume..
It's a fact proven by many many hard core studies.
Post by nagasiva#>#># compared to the moral systems they set up based on the
#>#># "laws" of their imaginary gods.
#>#>
#>#> the Left Hand Path must have enough integrity to steer leftward.
#>#> I guess some interpret this to mean against systemization,
#>#> structure, or design....
#>#
#># The LHP need not steer anyway except the way the individual
#># deems fit to travel
#>
#> then it isn't "left" with respect to anything at all. maybe
#> it is individualistic, or egocentric, as I also mentioned.
<personal address re the topic omitted>
# ...You are either ON the LHP, even without knowing it -
# or you are NOT.
like 'the bus' some like to speak about in various metaphors.
THIS time you affirm a dualism while above it is disputed.
No, you misunderstood (AGAIN?) The personal address explained it. Analogy,
since you don't like anecdotes - you are either musical with good ears - OR
YOU ARE NOT. NO amount of practice or prayer is gonna change that.
Post by nagasiva# Ego, in our viewpoint, is a little head-liar, a "false I,"
# that gets in the way of the whole Self - which includes the
# INSTINCTS as the foundation of being and the somatic markers
# as second to that foundation. The thoughts and ideas are
# LAST in that procession.
excellent. I tend to enjoy this perspective also. it is in
some degree transrational as it removes reason as the arbiter
of morality and knowledge at base.
Actually, it is not "transrational." It is PROVEN by hard neurological
data. I.e., it's the truth. instinct first, next somatic markers, lastly
reason. Without the foundation and the senses - there is NO logic or reason
at all. Proven. Science - I gotta love it when it catches up.
Post by nagasiva# LHP is nomadic, it is highly changeable, and it is like the
# void - ALL THINGS are permitted. If not, if they were not
# permitted, then you'd not be able to do them at all....
self-driven, egotistic, narcisistic, within the parameters
into which we are born.
We have vastly different definitions of the words egotistic and narcisistic.
Not necessarily SELF driven either - it is both self driven AND driven by
the environment the Self exists in. (I mean environment in the BIG sense,
to include metabolism, etc.) I use the word ego ONLY in the eastern sense.
A person with a whole self has NO ego - they are in an egoless state - OUR
terms. Narcissism is self love. How can you "love yourself" when you ARE
yourself? That doesn't tend to COMPUTE with me or my kind at all. As a
whole self, you can love things or people. But you ARE yourself. It's the
ONLY self you got.
Post by nagasiva# ...The RHP paths (there are more than one) are "straight
# and very narrow" while the LHP paths they wind around,
# they are changeable and very very wide and open
agreed. their orienting factor is not external.
RIGHT - it's 100% INTERNAL.
Post by nagasiva# - like the VOID.
part of that metaphorical terminology which I said to you
previously is akin to the via negativa. still sounds it,
albeit expressed from within a single-person perspective.
Look, English language sucks. There is no other word that gets translated
to. The THATNESS - is that better? I don't mean anything metaphysical by
the term "the void."
Post by nagasiva# Uh, like your little wild nature? You HATE HUMANS who
# embody wild nature - that's apparent to me.
how can such a thing be apparent to you? strange projection
on your part, from what I can tell, and not founded on
anything I can discern about my expression. the category
of "humans who embody wild nature" is disputed here.
By your reaction to ME when I heh - when I talk to you as a wild animal
able to talk. A beast with brains. You misunderstand me at every turn, you
accuse me, you make false assersions and you give my enemies on here
ammunition that they hurl against me in a FLURRY of drone posts. Do you
understand that NONE of the other founders of the SR org are willing to say
a word to you about the SR org? Their take is that it's up there for ALL to
read.
There is a COS member on here, I actually see TWO of them, and they aren't
answering your questions about their org. Stop asking ME about their org.
I can't fathom why you'd ask ME when Ben Schultz and Shiva are right here to
be asked, Bobo. MAKE SENSE. I made that fucking sig file for that - to
save me TIME so I DO NOT have to answer anything ELSE about it. I view that
asking as provocation in the extreme because I see what it's RESULTING in.
And STOP accusing me of making anon posts. I never post anon. I don't have
to. Stop accusing anyone that agrees with me of being a mindless boob, too.
Does Joe Shmo agree with me, or I agree with him - or do we BOTH agree on
certain tings? MANY people watch Star Trek. We ALL agree that we LIKE the
series. It never once occurred to you that IF an anon poster is really
agreeing with me, and NOT trying to set me up, maybe they have a really good
reason to go anon lest they get "chastised" or "reprimanded" by the org they
are in? One of them used to chat in PM friendly with me, real friendly -
and she outright said they'd reprimand her if they knew she was friendly.
When I asked, "They would do that?" She said "Come on, Tani, you used to be
a Mag in it and you know damned well they'd do that." So much for that.
She even got emails inferring that she joined the SR because she wasn't out
there flaming me. I got the logs of this, Bobo. So - maybe anon posters
SINCERELY agreeing with me are posting anon for a very very VERY good
reason - at least it's a logical theory. You never once thought of that.
From what I can see, there is NOTHING in what they are saying that would
require an anon post. they aren't flaming me or anyone else. I have no
problem saying what I want to say under my own nick. So KNOCK IT OFF.
You were, I am told, very quick to adopt the "flying monkeys" label against
people arguing with the TOS once - and brand them MY monkeys when I wasn't
even online. They didn't even rep my own god damned views, eg, about HUMANS.
But you are TOO SLOW to see the flying monkeys attacking ME on here - or
even realize that you go and chat with them about me - when these idiots
don't even know me or a thing about our org.
How about you take that to a real life situation. If you hung out with my
mortal enemies and chatted about me, do you think I'd give you the freaking
time of day or hang out with you? Get real, man.
Post by nagasiva# True, the only reason I do not just go and murder people
# I have come to loathe (as pests!) even tho this IS permitted
# - is due to the THREAT OF THE LAW. That is the ONLY reason.
# There is no difference between offing a human and offing
# fire ants - except that offing fire ants is not against
# the law. Very simple.
I would not identify the inclination or the ability to kill
as supreme in its association with deconditioning.
What the fuck are you yabbering about there? I'm a TURK - bottom line - got
any idea what we are famous for when you piss us off bad enough? It's got
nothing to do with deconditioning. YOU better develop the ability to kill
in case they reinstate the damned DRAFT. If you can't, you will BE killed.
Those people's norms are to cut your head off slowly when you are screaming
in pain. US TOO, Bobo. Famous for it.
that you
Post by nagasivawould like to do so is sufficient for me to oppose your
overt sociopolitical expression,
Get off that high horse and get down to EARTH here. It is not a
sociopolitical expression for fuck's sakes. It's a very simple case of - if
you bother me enough, I'll fucking bash your face in and stomp you into
oblivion. It's not strange to me that in person, NO ONE ever bothers me,
Bobo. People ARE intuitive. I've never even been mugged or hasseled at all
in the worst neighborhoods late at night.
but your identification
Post by nagasivaof wild nature with rapacious human behaviour is unsound
OH no it's not. What the fuck do you think any animal would do if you
HOUNDED it that way, eh? Even a PET dog would turn on it's master and rip
his god damned throat out. I'm just being brutally honest here about this
shit. Got a problem with that? Apparently you DO - you switch to this
overly cerebral yabbering so far from the "GET REAL" that it's a joke.
What do YOU think some guy in the hood would do to you if you upped in his
face and called him a nigger? EH? He'd KILL you. And yes, it's HUMAN
NATURE. The only thing holding the katharsis back is the damned law. That
is only ONE aspect of wild human nature. In reality, WILD humans wouldn't
tend to be the fucking assholes I've run into (NEVER in person). WILD
humans wouldn't start shit with other humans - for very logical reasons -
unless they had to in order to TAKE something they needed from them - like
living space - for that they'd band together and call it WAR. That is ALL
part of wild nature, Bobo.
Post by nagasivaand may extend to the anti-natural (where Taoist and
more nature-based religiomysticism tends to affirm
the 'goodness' of human beings in contrast).
Bwhaha, Taoist - part of what grandaddy was - they invented Kung Fu, you
ninny. LETHAL shit. The Taoist Toba Turks were warriors, Bobo. How do you
think they got to RULE such a big area? By asking nicely? The point is,
the ability to rip an enemy to pieces is as common to WILD HUMANS as is the
ability to be 90% of the time playful and fun loving. There is NO
contradiction there at all. It's real life - real people. Especially, wild
humans are very kind and friendly to their OWN KIND, but not so much to
OTHERS that are notably different.
Post by nagasiva# ...NO, your kids are not IN my life. NO, I will not go
# somewhere to meet them because they miss me. I go where
# I go - I do not go there. I do not want to meet your kids.
# NO, I do not go to the beach when it's cold. NO, I do not
# personally use a swim noodle so I don't have it today - go
# out and BUY one for your kids if they want one. They cost
# 2 bucks. NO I do not go to the beach to meet people - I go
# for the sand, sun, etc etc - the whole beach thing. I don't
# care if NO ONE is there but me.
this reminds me greatly of the sovereign authority attributed
to the "will" or "True Will" or "Will" by Thelemites, with
which I've compared your similar expressions in the past
and to which I find myself also drawn in my life.
Well, the only difference is that you STOP, PAUSE and think about
categorizing this or that thing I said about what I DO. I do NOT think
about it at all, or pause, or categorize it. I related something very
recent that I could remember (1 month later, and I'd have forgotten it) - to
make a point to YOU, since YOU are asking me questions. But you do that, you
stop, pause, try hard to categorize and end up in another universe. This
time the anecdote WORKED. You got the idea RIGHT.
Post by nagasiva# People who call relativism "mamby pamby" are people who
# have straight jacketed themselves with DOGMA - and they
# resent (and probably fear) people who refuse to do that.
# We are NOT predictable - as they are.
the extension from this pertained to philosophic debate and
a tendency to hold a single position as accurate rather than
prefer to support both sides of such a debate to see how well
each hold up.
I support both sides when there is something about both sides that either 1.
I agree with (both) or 2. feel like having fun debating since the other side
is REALLY making me think in new ways.
my willingness to switch off and, in effect,
Post by nagasivasupport both sides of a dispute were derived from spectator
sports, something that I've eventually abandoned for pursuit
of interest in public discourse and greater meaning to me.
ooops, Ok, I never was into public spectator sports - however I used to
PLAY sports and had fun with it. I'm not so much into public discourse and
find NO meaning in it when I do it save - it can be fun. The last serious
public discourse (for real, no fun, no games) I was in was with the water
company down here. The one before that was at a school board meeting which,
my public utterances, caused a near riot. HAH! No fun or games there
either. It was serious. People took up arms it was so serious. They were
ready to shoot.
Post by nagasivait was this willingness to switch sides which was described
(and not for the first time) as 'relativism'. in contrast to
'absolutism' affirming a single conceptual position as true,
I thought at least this qualifier was accurate and relegated
'namby-pamby' to the bias of the absolutist speaker. my own
bias has been shown when I call the absolutist 'dogmatic'.
Ah ha. OK. Keep in mind that in the above mentioned real life serious
disputes, there was no room for both sides. One side prevailed. My side :)
It had nothing to do with philosophy or theory. DOING what needs to be DONE
at the moment is not about theory and philosophy. It's about INSTINCT and
DOing. There are two ways to do, as I see it, active doing and active
NONdoing. One is yang, the other is yin. Trust me, when I'm in a real
dispute I YANG. I become immovable and adamantine. I get my way.
All is fair in that kind of war. Anything goes. Ends JUSTIFY means!
Post by nagasiva# Relativism? EVERYTHING is relative....
LOL, completely agreed. however, the argument contrary to
this with some weight is that certain standards do make it
possible for many social interactions one may desire. if one
is *ignorant*, for example, of the ortho-language of their
immediate geopolitical region, then they will probably be
at a distinct disadvantage, which was the main issue.
# ...No one lives apart from the world around them, immediately
# around them....
this was in part what informed the suggestion regarding its
namby-pamby-ness: the real ontological relations one may be
demonstrated as having with one's local social structure are
not so easily waved aside when they begin to take the form
of language, or some sociocultural values (we covered this
between you and I recently when describing 'the Taliban').
# ...WHEN I am determined to make a version of a song my way,
# I do it. And that IS the most IMPORTANT thing for me at
# that moment - nothing else is important....
wonderfully-put, and precisely the spirit of my argument with
that same family-member: my enjoyment and experience are truly
assisted by the language which I have created. that you and I
have this similarity is interesting, and yet it also informs
some of the hurdles which we must face occasionally in our
mistaken inferences (as above where you were thinking that
I was talking about the CoS when in fact I was referring to
you and to your expression) -- i.e. creating our own language
has its benefits, but it also can lead to problems when we do
not adhere strictly to ortho-language standards and strict
logical character (something neither of us values absolutely).
Well, language is a problem when there is NO word in the language that
certain things translate to. BIG problem. I don't want to use scientific
words. I don't want to use words from my culture that no one can look up
anywhere at all. I don't want to keep mythos code words for everything - NO
ONE would understand it. What can I use? I'm writing TO satanists. Occult
words they'd be more familiar with - that works. I took "akathartic and
ophionic states" article and recently back translated it into pure
psychiatric terminology, standard stuff too, not some Reichian stuff which
is not so standard at all. OH, then the doctor on someone else's elist
understood it perfectly! He knew exactly what I was describing! But I
didn't write that for shrinks. I wrote it for people at least basically,
who are interested in things from the OCCULT side of things. If they wanted
to read a psychiatric text - they could go find one elsewhere. The problem
I had with Ole trying to "MAKE SCIENCE" out of the WHOLE of the dark
doctrines is that it's cerebral - in fact it's hyper cerebral - way too far
away from the GUT. Also, there isn't enough hard science out there to
explain it all. And too many of us reject soft science as legit. First of
all, all of this PREDATES science in the first place. The DDoc is supposed
to be orally transmitted, one on one, in the first place. HOW can this be
done in writing? Well, I managed to find a way! And I don't JUST use Sat
and Tan in the monographs. I use many terms for the things - it gets to it
from ALL angles, not just one angle.
Post by nagasiva# ...That you constantly and consistently MISrepresent me or
# what I've said, is noted by me as the DEEDS of a person
# with an unconscious feeling of ENEMY with me.... Either
# that, or one other possibility arises - you are the WRONG
# RACE OF ANIMAL and therefore incapable of understand what
# my kind of animal is....
all interesting metaphors, and pointing toward what I think
is *actually* operating with which I'm familiar that I have
struggled with before in communications: variation from and
subset-construction aside from ortho-language. I suspect
that both our egotistic interests in this, whatever our
actual backgrounds in genetics or culture, predispose us
to these types of occasional interactions in confusion.
Translation: we don't speak the same lingo. I think it goes deeper.
Post by nagasiva# ...I never try to cross it. I never ask you what you
# are doing, what you believe, or anything of the sort;
# though you OFFER it when it was not asked about....
prerogative. I don't notice the same absolute difference
between us, but I hear your contentions about it. it is
probably true that I find human beings interesting enough
to ask about their reflections and log these for later
assimilated conclusions. that's not something a heck of
a lot of people I've met do either. so it goes. ;>
What I know about human beings is that you can never get to KNOW their
"soul" so to speak, by asking them questions, especially in writing where
there is no direct contact. It's not possible. The way to know a person is
to HANG OUT with a person. Hence, I can say absolutely that those beach pal
regs are LHP people. Absolutely. I don't have to ask them their religion or
philosophy and get an earfull of yabbering bullshit. I see what they DO -
and that is REAL, babe. I've seen them for almost 18 years, too.
Post by nagasiva# ...I don't hang out with people that blather about religion
# or ask me INTRUSIVE questions like that (it is illegal to
# ask that on a job, you know!)....
you do so in cyberspace (at least me; a kind of 'hanging out'
includes interaction with such people who exhibit this
behaviour),
Understand this - in cyberspace and ONLY in cyberspace - on the internet
here, I have some kind of "duty" - or then again, maybe I don't - to at
least rep the org. At least here I uh - tried to do that. I dont find
myself doing much of that lately - and the others say I'm wasting my time -
and I am believing them right now that I see what "here" is like.
Occasionally the "real Tani" shows up, even in the middle of a FLAME - and I
mention my brand new mower. I'm happy about my new mower, it's beutiful and
heh, it's BIG. That's me. I get TRASHED for it. There is nothing here for
me.
even if you dislike it in person. the forums of
Post by nagasivaour interaction tend to include it, and continued interest
in it as a whole, regardless of how many complaints about
it may be expressed to same.
I do not regard this as in person at all. Understand MY feelings then.
Stop being so solopcistic. And I mean no insult here. I'm talking to an
invisible "IT" behind a typed text here asking questions AT me. You are not
real. You are not even a person. I can't see you, feel you, or hear you.
This is NOT real life - and definitely NOT in person. I probably wouldn't
know you in person - you just ain't my style if USENET is any indication.
You'd TALK too much, noise noise noise, about a bunch of cerebral bullshit.
You have no innocence - you never take a THING at face value - you interpret
it, change it, distort it. I don't go near people with no innocence in
them - not ever. I have more luck explaining what I think and do to an
uneducated ghetto gang banger, if one of them asks me - literally. They are
GUT. PHYSICAL people. They deal in the REAL NOW - not some cerebral world
where DEEDS, or even DESIRE OF DEEDS are turned into sociopolitics or
philosophy. Unlike you, but very much like me, they ain't "spectators" in
sports. They DO sports. I'm using that as a METAPHOR for life.
Post by nagasivalocally I can't say there is much more forebearance of it
than online, but usually online there are designated areas
for discussion of same, so there is truly no justification
in griping about it when 'hanging out' in one of them.
Well, when I stopped hanging out in here, I had some shit SPILL into offline
from here and I'd have been forewarned had I been hanging out in here
watching for it. It's like having to watch my back. I'm gone yet maybe 5
days, and HEAPS of screaming posts are aimed at me, blaming me for what
someone else did and their friends and clones drones making threats against
our organization. Would I kill these people if there was no law? YOU BET I
would. It's a matter of NOT having to step in fire ant mounds again. It's
just like that. NO difference at all. You tell me then, erase all laws and
cops. WHAT is the difference between stomping out pest fire ants and
knocking off pest humans? What's the difference? I'm asking - because
aside from the laws against it, I DO NOT KNOW the difference.
OK, Take what Pan Pipes did to Gilmore then, since you bring it up all the
time in your glowering fauning over that pathetic guy. You do NOT call that
offline? That was seriously OFFLINE fucking around. It spilled into the
real world. Suppose HE wasn't paying attention? He'd have had BIG
CORPORATION going after tiny corporation sole. I saw both sides of that
dialogue with BIG corporation versus tiny org. Do you think that BIG
corporation cares if tiny groups of satanists boycott their product? heh,
NO.
Post by nagasiva# ...For me, NONE of what we write is mystical
I gathered, especially by your understanding of mysticism, yes.
Satanists tend to downplay mysticism even when engaging in it.
I never engage in mysticism, Bobo. Some of the SR org members ARE mystics,
admittedly so. Article on the "importance of ritual" by one of them. Go
read it.
Post by nagasiva# - even if for YOUR KIND this has to be something "spiritual."
dunno what my kind is, but it includes the recognition within
language of resonance in concept and terminology. that's all I
was commenting about in the above, and all that I've helpfully
reflected to you in part as explanation for the types of
religious who are being drawn in your direction as a result.
if I can't get that simple message across, then so be it. :>
You overblow someting tiny. We have WAY more Thelemites in the org, Wiccans
in the org (some of them, their husbands are Satanists, tho - they are Dark
Wiccans) - and so forth. ONE Catholic that well, is he EX Catholic or not?
I actually forget to ask him that when we talked. We don't talk a LOT -
it's LD. But I asked him YOUR stuff. He doesn't have a cell phone with
free minutes - nor do I. I HATE cell phones.
Post by nagasiva# ...Waves of whatever get beemed across the air and show up
# as pictures on a TV screen. Is that MAGIC? Is it mystical?
# It may as well be since most humans have no clue how to
# make it happen.
ACClarkean. the depth of our discussion about it is in part
hampered by your ignorance of the domain (not that I'm some
expert, but I have provided what I know in response). usual
Satanist materials don't include informed cogitation on the
subjects of magic or mysticism, with certain exceptions,
including that of Anton Szandor LaVey, whose text on
magic has at times proven to be very insightful.
Repeat, some SR members are mystics and ceremonial and all that. In fact,
one of them wrote an essay on the importance of ceremony or ritual (it
contradicts everything I personally believe!) It is on the SR page. For
me, what is ON the SR site is OF THE SR ORG. What is OFF the site, is NOT
SR. It might be linked, associated, but it's not the same org.
My laid-back view, observing all nature, is sociobiological. In fact, I had
that view before an entymologist invented the name for it "sociobiology."
LMAO. You need to remember, you are talking to ONE PERSON here, not the
whole org. If you talked to Vad, or Jerome, or Casey (especially her) you'd
get a VERY different perspective here. Some of the orgs connected to the SR
are bonafide purely mystical, I think. Others are not.
Also, one SRs that appears on here as pure hard core politics is one of the
BIGGEST mystics I've run into in years. He's also a member of the EOD
occult org - PURE mystics.
Post by nagasiva#># Your own overmuch concern for "wild nature" [Satan]... makes
#># YOU exceedingly RHP....
# ...What do I think of those "animal rights" yayhoos? I
# think they are yayhoos. Preying on them for vanity shit is,
# imo, a WASTE. Ya see, SMART dolphins do not get themselves
# caught up in tuna nets. 99% species went extinct in history.
# Is that something to FRET about? NO! NEW species came into
# being due to that, and they rose up and advanced themselves.
Darwinian species' survival observations don't support
the notion of "advance" except within the local bioregion.
When I say advance, I mean they amounted to something (humans sure did do
that). Man did definitely DO that. I'm a human, I don't have to run from
seriously predatory felines or canines (my ancesters did) - I do not have to
worry about those dinosaurs (my ancestors - more remote - did have to
worry). I hardly have to worry about even micro organisms due to how my
species has found ways to defeat them with medicine. Got it? Man advanced.
Bobo, man advanced not only by doing very animal-type things for thousands
of years - and banding together to do them using brute force of numbers -
but man has ALSO advanced, now advanced even more, using things that are
seriously NOT-animal at all. Making a shelter, a city with governing laws,
writing, reading, all that - still purely animal - we do it cause we CAN as
the kind of animals we are. But thinking up how to make fire hotter than
regular fire - melting a metal into a liquid (even thinking it CAN BE done
is odd) and then mixing metals in just the exact, precise, right proportion
to make an alloy is NOT ANIMAL. Neither is thinking that it can be done,
and then doing this: making plastic out of petroleum - all of that
technology. It's NOT animal-human. It's Something Else. It is OBIC in our
definition of that word - something part of the ASAT. An inspiration,
daimonic or genius or whatever, it ain't human-animal at all It is
beneficial? At first sure it is. How about in the long run, is it
beneficial? Maybe not. Man can do this. NO OTHER animal can, Bobo. NONE.
If there were any in remote history that could do it, I don't know about it.
There are oral legends about it, tho! Don't ask me about it, I won't tell
you.
Post by nagasiva# ...LHP are VOIDLIKE, like the void
# which causes CONSTANT change - and amidst that change, as
# one ancient Greek philosopher mentioned, there is what one
# might call Love and Strife - very value laden words that
# have different meanings today. Love ensnares and causes
# stasis. Strife breaks snares apart makes you get up and
# MOVE. More like chaos and order. LHP people have a knack
# for walking inbetween that. They just DO it - whether they
# self-define it as LHP or don't bother with ANY definition
# because definitions are mere words that they really don't
# need....
via negativa. live it, be it, do it. it's surely wonderful.
According to RCP, that is NOT the same as via negativa. I'm talking about
DOing, BEing, not contemplating life as some non-living spectator or
contemplating "all there is to life that I can not know." You do know that
PLAYING kickball is not the same as watching others play, right? You might
be a good watcher, but not able to kick a ball or run worth a shit. You are
what you DO. Not what you "think." Who needs philosophy or words to PLAY a
game of kickball, hey? NO ONE. You hear words at first, "the rules of the
game, HOW to play it." From then on, you DO. It's not philosophy. It's
PHYSICAL DEEDS. I pay an electric bill and I have certain ideas about the
electric company (affirmativa) but there is a great deal about that company
and everything it's connected to that I do not know (negativa). Who do you
think I think has the RIGHT definition of this? YOU, or RCP? I think RCP.
Point being, I don't contemplate the electric company. I DO the DEED of
paying the bill.
Post by nagasivarecognizing "the answers" to questions is indeed sometimes we
may have a difficult time doing. how you or others come to the
conclusion that some subset of possible answers necessarily
constitute The Answers is something I've enjoyed deconstructing.
Well then, deconstruct this via negativa. You have set ideas about what
Tani is into or interested in. They happen to be WRONG ideas, but they are
your affirmativas because you live on usenet and only see those attributes
(usenet shit). Contemplate the 99.99999% that you have no clue about, even
when I come right on here and TELL YOU up front. That would be via negativa
IF I didn't come here and TELL YOU. So then, why don't or why can't you
quite get it? You also have your little via affirmativa about your favorite
guy (aka preconceived ideas, Bobo) - but you don't ponder the via negativa
about the same guy - even when so many others with DIRECT dealings with the
guy tried to tell you and tell others of those OTHER attributes that you
clearly are biased against seeing. EG, why they'd FUCK with Satan Shop's
real world (not online) business to the point where they take and COPYRIGHT
(100 times stronger than a trademark) a sigil? You don't want to know that.
You don't want anything to crack a hole in your own via affirmative
spaghetti thin reality tunnel and show you THE WHOLE REST.
Post by nagasiva# so did some of the members - the heavies in the org that
# self-identify as SATANISTS.
thanks! I'll do what I can with it.
UH, it's a FAQ, Cat's format - same FAQ - just version 1.1. Erase the old
FAQ. Use the new FAQ. You are the one who collects these? It's on our site,
where it belongs. The small additions are in the first questions, I think
that's all there is. Better to just attach the whole .txt file of it and
email to you. Anything else is on our site. Imo, what you do irrelevant.
It's on our SITE - which IS relevant.
Post by nagasivaboboroshi at-sign satanservice.org: Satanic Outreach Director
Church of Euthanasia: http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/
TOKUS WEBLINKS: http://dmoz.org/Bookmarks/B/boboroshi/
Ninth Scholar's Library (Satanism Archive): http://www.satanservice.org/