Why Satanism?
I get asked this question to the point of ad nauseam. Let me try and answer it as best I can, keeping in mind that I'm tackling a large, broad subject.
The false historical argument
Most people who fall into this sort of predicament use easily accessible non-scholarly sources. Let me give you an example. In Webster's Dictionary, (I'm unsure of whether or not it's abridged/unabridged, or what edition), it writes this:
Numbers 1, 2, 3, 4 (four is just confusing, Satan has never been associated with an old white-bearded man), 5, 6, 9, and 10 are all irrelevant. Number seven is patently inaccurate, neither Hitler nor Mussolini were "Satanists", Hitler considered himself a proud descendant of the Catholic Church, (wrote all about it in "Mein Kamph", Christians like to say that Hitler was writing that for 'public appreciation', but if you know anything about the book, he wrote *nothing* in it to please the public), and Mussolini was brought up to be a Priest. (Mussolini failed miserably in that endeavour, and seemingly might have developed a neurotic fixation upon religion for it in his later life.) The second part of it derives from a myth, and one which Satanism isn't alone in battling, unfortunately the FreeMasons have been having problems with this festering lie as well, started by a book by Leo Taxil, who admitted that the book was a fraud. http://www.masonicinfo.com/taxil.htm For a firm refutation of those points, view this, this, and this.
Number eight is also an interesting one, it actually calls Zoroastrianism a form of Satanism. What it probably means is that certain Gnostic beliefs were carried over from interaction with Zoroastrianism, which was then considered to be "Satanic", by Church Fathers. Of course, they routinely said that about each other.
Going back to number seven, the mention of Walter Moberly (1881-1974) in context to Satanism is a bit strange. I'm unsure of what they mean by his "preoccupation" with "evil", his works primarily consisted of ideas about the punishment of criminals. Alongside others such as William Temple, Neville Talbot, and John Bailliee, he was a "Social Gospel" minister, i.e. he was a Christian. In Moberly's theory he asks:
"Should a criminal be regarded by society chiefly as a nuisance to be abated, an enemy to be crushed, a debtor to be made to pay, a patient to be treated, or a refractory child to be disciplined? Or should he be regarded as none of these things, but simply as an example through which it can be demonstrated to other men that anti-social conduct does not pay?"
Following that, his theory is one which combines retributive and reformative aspects of punishment. The punishment should be a ritual or mirror of what the criminal has done, in a manner so that the criminal can see the moral deterioration that is within themselves. He described this as an "inverse sacrament". Further, Moberly tells us that the criminal has inflicted a punishment upon society which is like a festering infection. Some form of counter-activity must take place to combat the infection. However, not just any punishment will do. It must be one where the punishments symbolizes, and is felt to symbolize, the crime. Now, while I can state that his idea is intriguing, I find nothing particularly Satanic about it. (His theory goes a lot deeper than that, including discussions on people he considers too 'amoral' for such things to work, but that is beyond the scope of this discussion.)
Regardless, you can write with satisfaction to the academics who publish Webster's Dictionary that they have been firmly refuted. Thus, there is no naturalistic appeal to Satanism as deriving from a 'historical' source, other than what we choose to qualify it with, and that will be looked at in more detail here.
Answering the Question, why call it Satanism?
Before we can discuss this any further, a marvelous post by Robert the Merciless on alt.satanism, September of '99, defines Satanism better than anything else. He writes that:
'Communists do not believe in a deity called Commun but they do revere and hold up communes as an ideal.
Taoists do not worship the god Tao but, instead honor the philosophy and symbolism of the Tao.
Atheists do not worship the god Athe. Instead, they seek to live a lifestyle that is a-theist, i.e. "without god(s)."
Ventriloquists do not bow down and beg before the demon Ventriloqu. They study and practice the art of ventriloquism.
In the same way, many who use the term "Satanist" to describe themselves follow a cogent philosophy of life modeled upon the mythical literary character known as Satan, honoring his qualities, his rebellion and applying his name to the natural forces which so many white light religions oppose.
The narrow use of the term "Satanism" to mean only the worship of a devil deity misses the more robust and complex nuanced development of the word over the past 33 years or so. Perhaps considering it through the above contexts will help to understand the broader definition. Or perhaps the stupid and narrow-minded will continue to fail to grasp the concept.'
I have two comments to make. First, "Satanism" was developed by people like Michelet, well over 33 years ago, and as such, this concept shouldn't be overlooked. Second, it also applies to "Buddhism". Most Buddhists don't worship "Buddha", but instead, they see Buddha as a manifestation of a higher quality which they strive to be like, to literally "become the Buddha." However, before the Buddha, there were several others, and some people do worship these Buddha's as God, and I've heard there is even one sect which does worship the Buddha, (Gautama), as God. As such, further discussion will have to deal with how people perceive Satanism and Satan.
Satanism as the Eclectic Philosophical Movement:
Satanic concepts have been embodied in a variety of works by famous authors, including Milton, Mencken, Maugham, Twain, Bentham, Hobbes, Nietzsche, Crowley, Rand, P.T. Barnum, Anatole France, Michelet, and Hearst, along with others. These Satanists tend to be a fairly small variety, and although many Satanists agree with the concept of this, there's a distinction. Eclectic Philosophical Satanists tend to not have any unifying thread, or that is to say that no Church of the Eclectic Philosophical Satanists exists. Most shun becoming affiliated with any one particular org or group.
Satanism as a rejection of Herd Mentality and Social Movements:
"My brand of Satanism is the ultimate conscious alternative to herd mentality and institutionalized thought. It is a studied and contrived set of principles and exercises designed to liberate individuals from a contagion of mindlessness that destroys innovation. I have termed my thought "Satanism" because it is most stimulating under that name. Self-discipline and motivation are effected more easily under stimulating conditions. Satanism means "the opposition" and epitomizes all symbols of nonconformity. Satanism calls forth the strong ability to turn a liability into an advantage, to turn alienation into exclusivity. In other words, the reason it's called Satanism is because it's fun, it's accurate, and it's productive"
Anton LaVey, introduction to "The Devil's Notebook"
Satanism as a Promethean concept:
"Contemporary Satanism is basically a foundation pool of ideas and a point of action launch for sentient humans who find progressive vanguardist heretical ideas, ones that are struggling for expression across all fields of spiritual, social, scientific and economic endeavor, to be worth fighting for. The Luciferian or Promethean Satanist is basically the archetype rebel who recognizes the power of invention as being the "fire of the gods" and works to place the liberating tools of cognition that lead to progressive change into the waiting hands of the exploited proletariat."
Walter Alter, Proletariat of the Satanic Reds
Satanism as Promethean Liberator:
"In the Western sense, Satanism, with the emphasis on Lucifer, is really like liberation movements, revolutions, fighting for rights against an oppressive Christian (or Moslem) regime. The analogy is simple: the regime is "God's heaven" and the revolutionaries are Lucifer's rebels! This is also exactly what Michelet wrote about in his book "Satanism and Witchcraft." So in the West Satanism would also include Witches and Warlocks, folk traditions and other things that are outside of the mainstream system that would condemn these things when they are harmless. In the Eastern sense, it would be the tradition of Boundless Darkness we write about on our website. The Sat and Tan."
Tani Jantsang, Commisar of the Satanic Reds
Satanism as Individualistic Philosophy of Existential Freedom:
"Satanism is more accurately identified as a disposition than as a religion, as it is actively concerned with all the facets of human existence, not with only the so-called spiritual aspects. Yet those who proclaim it to be a danger to justice and cooperative order have missed the point entirely. Satanism advocates unrestricted freedom, but only to the extent that one's preferences do not impinge upon another's. It should also be noted that Satanism is a philosophy of the individual, not of the mass."
Dr. Michael A. Aquino, introduction to the first edition of the "Satanic Bible".
Satan as both archetype and personification:
"Satan is a symbol of the self, then, as it should be within the Satanist. But this symbolism is only part of the truth, because man's ability to think and act in disregard of the balancing factor of the Universe necessitates a source for that ability. It is the intelligence of what mankind has personified as the Prince of Darkness himself -- no symbol or allegory, but a sentient being."
Dr. Michael A. Aquino, "The Church of Satan", (note that Aquino hadn't contacted Set yet in the first quote, and was only delivering his opinion of Anton Lavey's idea of Satan.)
Satan as the Dark Force of Nature:
Satan is seen by some as a Dark Force of nature which permeates everything. In this sense, Satan is more akin to the forces of nature, or as some intransigent force which usually cannot be tapped into. (Some believe this and claim otherwise). Satan is seen as the things of nature we hate, (i.e. for those who are overweight, stepping onto the scale can cause them to curse gravity), and they see Satan as a force which cannot either be hated or loved, and requires instead, understandment. The Universe doesn't care about you, you care about it, and by learning to manipulate it, you make yourself the master of it.
"The Devil has the most extensive perspectives for God; on that account he keeps so far away from him: - the Devil in effect, as the oldest friend of knowledge."
Nietzsche, "Beyond Good and Evil", p. 94
"To some extent indifferent in itself [the astral light], it lends itself to good as to evil; it transmutes light and propagates darkness; it may be called equally Lucifer and Lucifuge; it is a serpent but it is also an aureole...." (p. 75) Transcendental Magic by Eliphas Levi.
"The Key of the Mysteries" by Eliphas Levi, p. 28:
"The angel of liberty was born before the dawn of the first day, before even the awakening of intelligence, and God called him the morning star.
O Lucifer! Voluntarily and disdainfully thou didst detach thyself from the heaven where the sun drowned thee in his splendour, to plow with thine own rays the unworked fields of night!
Thou shinest when the sun sets, and thy sparkling gaze precedes the daybreak!
Thou fallest to rise again; thou tastest of death to understand life better!
For the ancient glories of the world, thou art the evening star; for truth renascent, the lovely star of dawn.
Liberty is not licence, for licence is tyranny.
Liberty is the guardian of duty, because it reclaims right.
Lucifer, for whom the dark ages have made the genius of evil, will be truly the angel of light when, having conquered liberty, at the price of infamy, he will make use of it to submit himself to eternal order, inaugurating thus the glories of voluntary obedience."
Satan as the Questioning-Self and Archetype:
A real-life personification of Satan can be seen in two people primarily, one being Nietzsche, the other being Socrates. Socrates always questioned all things, and in doing so, he annoyed people, and earning him his death. He was never content with what the authorities "knew", he believed that other answers were at least as plausible, though he never seemed to expect to find them. Nietzsche took a similar conclusion, only his was that they couldn't be found because they didn't exist.
Satan, as derived from Hebrew etymology, means "Adversary", or someone which is against something else. The primary thing which is "against" society, and people in general, is the questioning of all things. No one likes being questioned, as it undermines their self-image and ego. By questioning, we arrive closer to the axis of truth, but truth can be a painful thing. Satan, in reality, represents just one thing. The questioning self.
In our technocratic society, we tend to forget that real knowledge doesn't come from universities, it doesn't come from teachers, it doesn't come from professors, doctorates, or orators. It comes instead, from one source. The questioning self. The college, the high school, the book, they are all just vehicles used by the questioning self to find out answers, and Satan is the questioning self. Satan represents a dynamic self-determination to achieve and be more, and to question society, the self, and things at large in order to cause change in the environment. Satan represents a thinker and a doer, someone who is motivated to act and not to be complacent within social boundaries.
The problem within someone who is intensely curious is that they can become so wrapped up in the exterior world of pursuit they neglect interior speculation, no introspective time can cause them to not reach their full potential and goals. Querat, (La Curiosite'), 1920, informs us, (indirectly), that there's a reason Satan was feared. In the realm of ancient societies, questioning was reserved only for the Gods and it was considered above the realm of man. Satan finds that no knowledge is left to "the realm of Gods", all knowledge can be assimilated if only one puts forth the effort to eat from the sacred tree.
Why use the name "Satan", something associated negatively with active rejection? It was Otto Rank who first observed that the primary assertion of "will" on the part of a child is always in the form of a negation, a saying "no" to the breast. According to Rank, it is only through a nurturance of this "negative will" that the child's positive volition can arise. In the spiritual sense, a neophyte is just a child who has yet found his spiritual way, and as such, he needs an active negative will to forcefully develop his own will.
In this sense, Satan represents the motif of the journey, and 'the myth of the eternal return'. This is the journey out to the 'other' in order to return to constitute 'self', and this movement is a movement of desire. The desire is for wholeness, for self-presence, and for a unified self. It is a desire for origins. Ultimately, the quest to know self is to desire to know the world, the whole spectrum which that encompasses. In the movement towards a conscious self, the self attempts to negate the sensuous world in order to return from this world to self, in order to know: 'that is not I'.
However, the realisation of self-consciousness in contrast to other beings of nature is only the first step. To become self-conscious, we must not only realize ourselves in contrast to nature, but also to other selves which are similar to ourselves. The way to one-self, to self-consciousness, can only be through a relation to another self-consciousness. It identifies itself first with the mother, then it negates it, then with the father, then it negates it, then with the "male mother" or "female father", in Greek mythology the "mentor" who shows the person his true quest. This relationship too is negated, self-consciousness does not exist with crutches. Finally, they realize their wild, sensual side, and now free from the constrictions of the father, mother, and mentor, (which can be society at large sometimes), they find their own way in the World."
Satan is just one archetype which leads into the others, Satan is the questioning self and active rejection, Dionysus is the passion of life and temporality, Apollo the intellectual and cultural, Ma the motherly and compassionate, Isis the inner desires and accomplishments. I don't believe in Isis, Apollo, Ma, Dionysus, or Satan as anything more than archetypes, but an archetype is a powerful thing.
Magister RyanS
From the Collected Works of Carl Jung:
"If the name Lucifer were not prejudicial, it would be a suitable one for this archetype [the Self]."
(vol. 9 i p. 567)"It is also worth noting that Lucifer, the Morning Star, means Christ as well as the devil."
(vol. 9 ii p. 192)"Therefore Lucifer was perhaps the one who best understood the divine will struggling to create a world and who carried out that will most faithfully. For, by rebelling against God, he became the active principle of a creation which opposed to God a counter-will of its own."
(vol. 11 p. 290)"The growing darkness reaches its greatest intensity on the day of Venus (Friday) and changes into Lucifer on Saturday."
(vol. 13 p. 301)"...the inner voice is a "Lucifer" in the strictest sense of the word, and it faces people with ultimate moral decisions without which they can never achieve full consciousness and become personalities."
(vol. 17 p. 319)"With him God does not only contain love, but, on the other side and in the same measure, the fire of wrath, in which Lucifer himself dwells."
(vol. 18 p. 1654)
If you still don't get it, Satanists are not bound by conventional means, methods, or social prejudices. There are no sacred cows which we are afraid to tip over. Discounting a precious archetype like Lucifer/Satan, merely because social bigotry won't allow for it, only further roots the archetype as one of prevalence, one which needs to come to the surface. In doing this, we service a great favor, for Jung warned us that not understanding our myths had disasterous consequences.
"Lucifer is the Star of the Morning and not only the fallen Great Angel Lucifer, but also the brother of Christ "
Gregor A. Gregorius