Path: shell.portal.com!shell.portal.com!not-for-mail From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nocTifer) Newsgroups: alt.pagan,alt.satanism,alt.religion.all-worlds,alt.religion.wicca,talk.religion.misc Subject: Satanic Reverence for Nature (was Re: Satanist/NeoPagan War) Date: 3 Jul 1996 15:50:25 -0700 Organization: Portal Communications (shell) Lines: 283 Sender: tyagi@shell.portal.com Message-ID: <4retfh$qj9@jobe.shell.portal.com> References: <4pkpee$dqu@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> <4qo02r$nft@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com> <4qosfv$55n@news.internetmci.com> <4qpgn3$49j@amber.ora.com> <4qv58v$2s6@matrix.eden.com> <4r1el0$1cn@amber.ora.com> Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nocTifer) NNTP-Posting-Host: jobe.shell.portal.com Xref: shell.portal.com alt.pagan:165067 alt.satanism:46436 alt.religion.all-worlds:8243 alt.religion.wicca:32918 talk.religion.misc:227700 kaliyuga 49960703 AA1 Thomas Hrouda : |...the definition of Reverance. The question is do Satanists show |reverance for earth and nature? it would all depend on what you take as signs of this reverence. some Satanists certainly do according to my own standards, at least in their texts as they relate their feelings about the biosphere and how this relates to Satan and their religious focus. some of the classical Satanic literature with which I am familiar (having only just begun a thorough review of these) appear to lament or bemoan the impact which the (often Christian) establishment has upon not only the natural world but also the gods who personify this world to them. here's a sampling from my recent readings: [caution: some of this first selection appears to be sarcasm] The old universal god of Nature is no more. Great the jubilation; it was fancied that, Nature being defunct, Temptation was dead too.... The early Christians, as a whole and individually, in the past and in the future, hold Nature herself accursed. They condemn her as a whole and every part, going so far as to see Evil incarnate, the Demon himself, in a flower.... Nor is it human beings only who are demoniac. Alas! all Nature is tained with the horror. If the devil is in a flower, how much more in the gloomy forest! _Satanism and Witchcraft_, by Jules Michelet, Allinson transl. _______________________________________________________________ I think this is one of the more cogent criticisms not only of the typical Christian but also of the Satanist, and I do not find within Satanic literature (the words themselves) the kind of pervasive TEXTUAL value of nature as a whole or 'earth' as an organism. however, as the above makes clear, and as I excerpt a variety of snippets from the popular texts I've yet reviewed, I hope to show that at least certain *aspects* of nature are in fact revered by popular Satanists. certainly William Blake is considered a 'natural mystic' and must not be dismissed when considered for his Satanic bent (I have yet to read his classic, _The Marriage of Heaven and Hell_). others more modern and popular of character, such as Anton LaVey, while occasionally mentioning the natural, do so as their needs dictate or within predatorial or animal contexts, perhaps to drive home a point, or to support individual human liberty: It has become necessary for a NEW religion, based on man's natural instincts, to come forth. THEY [that is, Christians] have named it. It is called Satanism. It is that power condemned that has caused the religious controversy over birth-control measures -- a disgruntled admission that sexual activity, for fun, is here to stay. _The Satanic Bible_(SB), p. 48 The semantic meaning of Satan is the "adversary" or "opposition" or the "accuser". The very word "devil" comes from the Indian word *devi* which means "god". Satan represents opposition to all religions which serve to frustrate and condemn man for his natural instincts. He has been given an evil role simply because he represents the carnal, earthly, and mundane aspects of life. Satan, the chief devil of the Western World, was originally an angel whose duty it was to report human delinquincies to God. It was not until the Fourteenth Century that he began to be depicted as an evil deity who was part man and part animal, with goat-like horns and hooves. Before Christianity gave him the names of Satan, Lucifer, etc., the carnal side of man's nature was governed by the god which was then called Dionysus, or Pan, depicted as a satyr or faun, by the Greeks. Pan was originally the "good guy," and symbolized fertility and fecundity.... Many pleasures revered before the advent of Christianity were condemned by the new religion. It required little change-over to transform the horns and cloven hooves of Pan into a most convincing devil! SB, 55-6. Most Satanists do not accept Satan as an anthropomorphic being with cloven hooves, a barbed tail, and horns. He merely represents a force of nature -- the powers of darkness which have been named just that because no religion has taken these forces *out* of the darkness.... Satan, as a god, demi-god, personal saviour, or whatever you wish to call him, was invented by the formulators of every religion on the face of the earth for only one purpose -- to preside over man's so-called wicked activities and situations here on earth. Consequently, anything resulting in physical or mental gratification was defined as "evil" -- thus assuring a lifetime of unwarranted guilt for everyone! SB, 62-3. Satanism *does* advocate sexual freedom, but only in the true sense of the word. Free love, in the Satanic concept means *exactly* that -- freedom, to either be faithful to one person or to indulge your sexual desires with as many others as you feel is necessary to satisfy your particular needs. Satanism does *not* encourage orgiastic activity or extra-marital affairs for those to whom they do not come naturally. SB, 66. _________________________________________________________ LaVey and other Satanists often focus very strongly on the liberation of natural human instincts from the repressive moralism of religious culture. often Satanists go further than many other modern religious in frankness, supporting masturbation and imaginative/experimental sexual and lifestyle practices such as are also accepted by certain elements of Neopagan communities ('Leather Faeries', for e.g., and those ideals expressed in Heinlein's _Stranger in a Strange Land_ as regards liberated sexuality and relationships, which inspire the Church of All Worlds). the criticism against the Satanist becomes most acute as we search for some regard for Nature, for what Neopagans often refer to as 'Gaia' or as 'Mother Earth' as a living composite organism, quite beyond yet inclusive of *human* nature. whereas I am certain this kind of text can be found in *some* Satanist literature, I am often hard-pressed to locate it excepting certain key authors. as LaVey is open to hand and represents an important faction of Satanism, I begin an examination for you by quoting him as best I'm able: Man, the animal, is the godhead to the Satanist. The purest form of carnal existence reposes in the bodies of animals and human children who have not grown old enough to deny themselves their natural desires. They can perceive things that the average adult human can never hope to. Therefore, the Satanist holds these beings in a sacred regard, knowing he can learn much from these natural magicians of the world. ...The Satanist does *not* hate himself, nor the gods he might choose, an has no desire to destroy himself or anything for which he stands! It is for this reason that he could never willfully harm an animal or child. SB, 89. _______________________________________________________ this is often as close as any modern, popular Satanist gets to a sincere reverence toward Gaia: a protection for human children and other animals. it does not take into account a holistic regard for ecology or environmental issues except through related commentary regarding 'seeing the whole picture', etc., which need not be connected to the protection of 'the weak' beyond these foci. and yet there is room for the development of this value within Satanic philosophy as espoused. in Barton's _Church of Satan_, for example, in a review of her High Priest's ideology and practice, the author writes: LaVey maintains that his philosophy is life-loving, not life-denying. By accepting and encouraging man's animal nature, Satanists feel that they are returning to a purer state, a truer justice. The same kind of "state of Grace" has been advocated at different times throughout history; by the English Romantic poets for example, who felt redemption (if there was any to be had) could not be found in "civilization" (i.e. the Church) but in the animal spirit of Nature and the old gods. _Church of Satan_(CS), p. 98. __________________________________________________ if we were to look to these English Romantic poets, perhaps we would find the same kind of reverence for Nature beyond the merely animal about which you ask, I'm as yet unsure, since, speaking from my insufficient education I'm not sure who qualifies. and yet this is just in WRITINGS. if you were to ask about, say, *ritual* practices, I notice there is some degree of overlap as regards the ancient festivals and gods. HOWEVER, as likely with the *original pre-Christian Europeans*, these may not have often been related to an endearing ecological concern for the planet or the biosphere as a whole. in terms of modern Satanists and Neopagans and their demonstrated reverence for the planetary life-system, I am not yet convinced that either Neopagans *or* Satanists actually live lifestyles fully compatible with these values, though I hear contradiction within at least the online community as to my assessments (there was some clamor recently about ecology activism and banner-waving, though little more was said to counter my intentionally extreme charge ;>). I wish to particularly note here that there *are* Satanists beyond these writers who do in fact demonstrate a serious and at times penetrating concern for the natural world and the impact which humans are having. Diane Vera (sometimes posts to online Satanic forums) and others (including myself, as I connect my Satanism to an adversarial religious body in the Church of Euthanasia, http://www.paranoia.com/coe/) have often spoken of our deep regard for ecology and the bisophere, though I am unsure how far this runs in any Satanist's lifestyle other than my own. I'll elaborate on this last should this be requested. how you would go about discovering for yourself what demonstrates a 'sincere reverence for nature' will of course determine where you will find it when looking. |...at least one group of satanists (COS) tend to "preach" that |nature is a brutal darwinian force. They rever this force. |They accept it as a purifier, a method of culling out the weak, |and culling out the weak is a major satanist ethic. To the extent that |earth is a platform for humanity and a stage for the forces of nature to |work, the satanists can be said to rever both nature and earth. I do appreciate the wolfish mentality brought to the fore by such rhetoric, yet I wonder whether this attitude is not only taken into the human realm but also, in the 'ego gratification focus' of modern Satanism, whether it may come at the expense of life-forms perceived as 'weak' in comparison with humans and other predators. |...Satanists (at least as far as others are concerned) seem more than |willing to strive to attune themselves to the darwinian principle in |nature. knowing a few biologists and having studied a slight bit of scientific theory in the field, I am not convinced that this usage of a 'darwinian principle of nature' is entirely accurately portrayed by Satanists except to further their own ends. I would welcome more learned posts quoting sources close to the field of biology to substantiate any so- called 'value of culling the weak', especially in an environment where humans over-reproduce beyond what may turn out to be the 'carrying capacity' of our species for the planet. |...the alt.satanism faq.... probably sought to integrate the various |factions of its "movement." that is correct, yes. I was one of the contributors to that FAQ, and have corresponded with its coordinator/editor, Lupo. it represents a relative consortium opinion, a cross-section strategy (last I saw it :>), and cannot possibly represent the ideas and preferences of all Satanists in any lasting way (nor, would I contend, should it be intended to). |I prefer going to the source but except for COS I don't know of any |group that really has a book on the open market. there are online documents describing many Satanic groups and their preferences regarding philosophy and practice. I suggest that due to the nature of the individualistic slant on Satanism, most of these groups are small, and represent only a certain style of Satanist to the public through at times intentionally antagonistic or controversial attitudes/politics. I've added a couple FTP links to the vamamarg page, which you may utilize, as a whole, to research Satanism further, if you like. I also provide the URL for the MaGI's Satanism section and would be very interested in hearing the results of any research on this topic you see fit to make public (I'll eventually do it myself in any case): http://www.hollyfeld.org/~tyagi/nagasiva.html http://www.hollyfeld.org/~tyagi/Magi/mysticism.html#Satanism tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com nocTifer