From thelema93-l-owner@bitsy.hollyfeld.org Fri Aug 2 10:20:20 1996 Received: from nova.unix.portal.com (nova.unix.portal.com [156.151.1.101]) by jobe.shell.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA21534 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 10:20:20 -0700 Received: from bitsy.hollyfeld.org (bitsy.hollyfeld.org [38.240.235.1]) by nova.unix.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA04541 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 10:19:51 -0700 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by bitsy.hollyfeld.org (8.6.12/8.6.9) id NAA18580 for thelema93-l-outgoing; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 13:15:29 -0400 Received: from nova.unix.portal.com (nova.unix.portal.com [156.151.1.101]) by bitsy.hollyfeld.org (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id NAA18576 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 13:15:23 -0400 Received: from jobe.shell.portal.com (jobe.shell.portal.com [156.151.3.4]) by nova.unix.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA03365 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 10:09:24 -0700 Received: (tyagi@localhost) by jobe.shell.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) id KAA20988 for thelema93-l@hollyfeld.org; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 10:09:18 -0700 Message-Id: <199608021709.KAA20988@jobe.shell.portal.com> Subject: Crowley's Satanism To: thelema93-l@HOLLYFELD.ORG (Thelema93-Listserv) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 10:09:17 -0700 (PDT) From: tyagi@HOUSEOFKAOS.ABYSS.COM (xiwangmu) Orientation: House of Kaos, St. Joseph, Kali Fornika, US -- Kali Yuga X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 3225 Sender: owner-thelema93-l@HOLLYFELD.ORG Precedence: bulk reply-to: thelema93-l@bitsy.hollyfeld.org Status: RO kaliyuga 49960802 Aeon of the Adversary (year 1) do what you please, for that is my Law. Hail Satan! #From: Walter Cassidy #...Crowley himself states im magick p277. [reformatted] # "The Devil does not exist. It is a false name # invented by the Black Brothers to imply a Unity # in their ignorant muddle of dispersions. A # devil who had unity would be a God." others have (usually haughtily and with some degree of ignorance) pointed to this very same text previously within this and other forums, apparently thinking that this 'proves' that Crowley was not a Satanist. what they appear not to understand is that many if not most Satanists not only reject the idea of a Christian Satan but even go so far as to *entirely* reject the very notion of gods and Satan as 'real entities'. some 'Thelemites' have asserted (without citation which I have seen) that Crowley made this same claim, apparently thinking that this *excluded him from Satanism*! that is, to many modern Satanists the concept of 'worship' is quite repugnant, and the criteria which is (futilely) argued against by quotations like the above only displays an abject ignorance of modern Satanism and what it includes. #...is Thelema a religion.? Did Crowley truly look at Thelema as a religion #or a [philosophy]? he seemed to treat it like both. # Is Thelema Satanistic or New Eaon Christianity? it is thoroughly Satanic by modern terms, having been a core inspiration (in a Nietzschean and individualistic sense). as it comes across via Crowley it does appear to retain a great variety of what Satanists would identify as 'Christian' remnants. of course most modern Satanists are attempting to go further than are Thelemic orgs in separating themselves from what the former might call 'the Christian taint'. :> some associate this with a greater degree of 'Thelemicness'. some (such as myself) might it consider this reactionary. while I agree that the New Aeon may well include vestiges of the structure and emblem of the old, I also agree with most these modern Satanists who think it laughable that Thelemites resort to the same old (Christian) arguments when attempting to refute statements about Crowley's Satanism (such as that 'Satanism means Devil-worship' and Crowley didn't do that -- most modern Satanists don't either!). I would point you to a previous post on the subject (in the archives), in which I carefully asserted the various texts in which Crowley associated himself quite directly with Satan, albeit (as most Satanists do) with a refinement as regards the character of Satan Hirself. the article from which I drew was an archived post by Tim Maroney, whose work I greatly appreciate (and who is apparently somewhat controversial within the OTO, fancy that): ftp://ftp.hollyfeld.org/pub/Esoteric/Usenet/Thelema/9601.acsatan.tm I would be most pleased to see a thorough review of this file and its contents. to date all I have seen in response is a grumpy withdrawal without content, which I could only interpret as the original writer having been in the wrong (presuming facile claims) and discovering this. love is the law, free love right now! mu