THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
	a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.

To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.satanism,alt.thelema,alt.pagan.magick,talk.religion.misc
From: 333 
Subject: Re: Thelemic Satanism?
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 03:00:08 GMT

50031222 vii om Hail Satan!

E6

unanswered questions from 333 to Jan/Jane/Janette/Jani/et al: 
#> what kind of practice does this include? is 'non-dualistic'
#> somehow separable from the rest of Satanism? does it have
#> some identification within the Satanist Herd?
# ... 
#> what kinds of things does Thelema practice include?

sri catyandanda :
# As to the question of an inherent "clash" between Satanism
# and Thelema -- frankly, as an outside observer (neither a
# Satanist nor a Thelemite), i see more Thelemic self-will
# being demonstrated and promulgated in the
# materialist/nihilist wings of Satanism, particularly among
# the solitary (non COS, etc.) Satanists, than i see in
# the follow-the-leader centrist portion of the (c)OTO /
# Gnostic Church worshipping so-called Thelemites. 

this is really the meaty issue when it comes to demonstrations
of volitional power or sovereignty: does conformity to some
counter-cultural or offensive standard provide such evidence,
or does standing for some resolute individual platform do so?

in the case of CoSatanism, at some points in its history one
might join the LaVeyan Herd and eek some portion of a grotto
out of its participation, promoting thereafter one's wing of
the CoS, and joining as part of the body. this may still be
possible, but it is less obvious that such things are indeed
happening: the major movers in CoS are either remaining fairly
constant in the wake of its High Priest's death or yielding
no shining stars to its membership after the celebrity
circuit milked what it could out of media attention derived
from supposed participation (this being in particular the 
involvement of people like the musical and semi-political 
Marilyn Manson -- interestingly interviewed and well-spoken 
in "Bowling For Columbine"! a must-see for anyone who 
opposes cultural domination by the corporate missile-builders).

in the case of the (c)OTO and its EGC leadership, in-depth
participation within it has become something of a bureau-
cratic conformance in terms of its volitionary display. this
is not necessarily a contra-indicator of Thelemic fortitude,
but no longer does adherence to the standards of said order
constitute a reversal of extant societal currents that serving 
this stratified and *persistently-hierarchical* order can ipso 
facto be seen as evidence of freedom and True Will-concord.
this is as much a measure of its success as of its problems.

that said, the order itself makes allowances for its role
with respect to Thelema as a Standard-bearer during the
typically presumed march-into-the-new-aeon (whenever this
is deemed to take effect, often on the back of Mr. Crowley).

# If the Law of Thelema is "Do What Thou Wilt" 

arguably, by the Beast's reception, "Do what thou wilt" 
*"shall be the whole of the Law"* with no particular date-
point agreed as to when this ought take effect. ;> thus 
it may be understood as some kind of aim or utopian 
objective, if not taken right into the heart of the adept.

# and if "Love is the Law, Love under Will," 

usually (but not always!): "Love is the law, love under will."

# then in my opinion, Satanists are sometimes long on Will 
# and short on Love, 

this is my observation as to many religious, especially those
who are carried to the extreme Protestant ends of the spectrum
or who are negationists by virtue of philosophy (some Buddhists
take this tack, for example, and focus on wisdom to the
detriment of ignorance, sadly omitting a focus on compassion
in their selection of the aconceptual -- the best counter this
with dedicated charitable service).

# but the (c)OTO has just put a Parliamentarian on the payroll 

I wonder what the pay is for that.

# -- and i hardly think that speaks well for the group's 
# ostensible advocation of Will under Love ... it gives 
# supremacy to Rules of Order over both Love and Will. 

or at least makes them more plain. the issue is in part what
such a Standard-bearing order ought achieve as its overarching
set of objectives. there is some room to argue, for example,
that it is *inter-aeonic*, and therefore should be using the
edifices well-known in the Old Aeon to achieve standards, as
a global entity, that are promoted for the benefit of those 
who will come to dwell in the shadow of its overall influence.

'Love', within such a paradigm, is 'true love', and it is
quite probably *identified* by these Thelemites by virtue
of the classic Crowleyan Greek gematria which enshrined the
number '93' as so passionately important to the cultists in
his wake (because 'Thelema' and 'Agape' are presumed equal
in some essential way by virtue of their numerolinguistic
summation and equation).

rules and laws, just because of their being, are not 
contra-Love or contra-Will. those who operate within them agree 
to do so because they have desired effects upon the system in 
which they obtain. this is as true when playing games as it 
is in the participation within governments.  

conformity with rules and laws may or may not be someone's
true will. the fact of each's existence doesn't determine it.
instead, one's role in the universe (by the logic of many
Thelemic theosophers) and one's discoverable "orbit" (some
pathway discernable by those sufficiently adept) are the real
and true indicators of one's proper position with respect to 
any organization, as well as any rules it may set into place.

it is this which makes it possible to avoid easily-selected
standards of conflict (because one's true will may include a
revision of societal aims, as in Crowley's example of the
true will of Napoleon Bonaparte in "Book Four:Liber ABA".

E666
9333