FAQs 1-2 Video Transcription
The Video for this Transcription is here:
Mufti's Corner FAQs on Satanism Episode 01
https://youtu.be/_nX6W6eE3Cw
Contents
FAQ 1
{"Daisy, Daisy, give me your answer do...."}
-- Troll Towelhead, Grand Mufti of Satanism --
Hey there!
I'm taking some time out while proofreading spellbooks and playing virtual poker {PokerVR and PokerStarsVR} to do a video recording for FAQs {Frequently Asked Questions} for Satanism. I've recorded a series of questions {audio} and i'll simply respond to them.
SATANISM FAQS >> 1 << DOES SATAN EXIST?
The first one is about Satan: "Does Satan {Really} Exist?"
That is a question which relates to a category of philosophy: What exists? and What does not (exist)? What falls into the categories of existing things or not, and how you decide what they are?
Concrete items such as chairs, tables, VR equipment, glasses, have a physical existence which {strictly} experiential things do not. That they endure, are more stable in their physicality gives the impression of reality to them, even though they are changing; they decompose, break apart into their elements after having been constructed.
Personalities and entities, intelligences, have a less than physical existence. It is speculated without much support that spirits, and even persons, exist at a remove, that they have a greater reality {such as in the fourth dimension or as spirits or Forms} than what we experience as physical beings. From what i can tell, this is not accurate.
My examination of consciousness leads me to conclude that the things the that are most concrete and real to me are those which have physical effects, and at a greater remove from my person, being, my organism, have less reality to me. This doesn't make them unreal, but it does make them less real, especially to me.
Therefore, spirits, or notions of archetypes, or other things that are not physical, are speculative. Even aspects of my own person are speculative. How reliable are they? Not so {reliable}. When we talk about intelligences which are at a remove that i encounter in the realm of consciousness, then i must test them to determine their relation to my mind. I see whether or not they have an integrity, an endurance, because they could simply be {products of} imagination at a short term. If they have those and can answer questions in a manner that discloses information i did not consciously have, then i afford them reality, and regard.
Satan is one of these entities with whom i have had interaction. Therefore i have concluded that Satan does exist at some level. I urge those who are curious about such things to proceed, with similar interest and caution, to explore non-physical intelligences as i have, because i found them valuable to engage. You might also.
What Satan is, who Satan is, is a different question than if Satan exists.
FAQ 2
SATANISM FAQS >> 2A << HOW DO YOU SEE SATAN?
{The first segment of this 3-part response}
I'm taking some time out to record the next FAQ question while feeding
the chickens.
"How Do You See Satan?" is the question.
Well i don't see Satan unless i understand it metaphorically. If you ask me how i see Satan, the first way i understood Satan was as wild nature. *Wild* nature. The way that i first understood Satan {was} when studying Satanology and Demonology. It's another good point {to be considered} why it might be valuable for Satanists to study that. That is, why it might be valuable for a Demonic Satanist to study Satanology or Demonology is because it gives you a sense of grounding for how people might understand Satan in history or otherwise in your vicinity.
When i first did that i had a revelation. That revelation was about what Satan was. That revelation was that Satan was wild nature. Now what wild nature is is interesting to me. It's things that are natural that don't get constructed by human beings and that aren't controlled. Things that are not in zoos, they're not captive like chickens here. They're not in gardens. They may have different relationships with us as beings, both benefic and antagonistic; internal and external; things that are at odds with what we want, and things that really coordinate with what we want very strongly.
So that's the first way that i understood Satan after having studied it from writings and in history and as part of religious and spiritual interests.
'How do i see Satan?' therefore becomes a rather subjective and personal question from that perspective. After all, if i understand Satan to be wild nature, then how i see wild nature changes through my life. Initially it had to do with rather alien and quite distant things, or beings, or organisms. Wild nature, initially in my life, was dangerous, unknown, and part of the outside more often than it was the inside. Although i began to understand that many things inside of me were definitely uncontrolled. That is, they were at odds with parents and society who wanted me to behave or to act in a way that was friendly to them.
So the way that i found wild nature changed through the course of time and as i grew older i began to be more friendly and more compassionate toward wild nature. Initially it seemed threatening or dangerous or unknown. And then later it became more of interest. So for me it was more of an adult thing. That is, Satan was, and Satanism, from this perspective, isn't for children, because it's too hazardous for them. Satan is more of a mature engagement. Satanism is more of an mature engagement also.
There are Satanists for whom the practice or involvement with Satanism is only an adult thing. That is, they don't initiate children, religion is not for children. They have a restriction on their overt inculcation and their own insulation against the world, against having children involved. In their own families, they may well involve them because they think of it as supportive and as emboldening and strengthening to their children.
Generally they don't think of Satan as wild nature, however. Generally they don't think of themselves as exposing them to uncontrolled dangerous activities or beings, so that's not really applicable to that extent. They don't coincide with that view of how i've seen Satan and how i understand Satan.
In a continued consideration of how i view Satan besides wild nature, which i have come to feel is more important to engage on a mediated basis and begin to support, especially for complex organisms in an ecological sense; life-orientation and the way that we, what Christians call, 'steward' the environment, because they perceive that it is the property of their cult and their god. It is valuable to manage and caretake and support this. Insofar as it doesn't simply become a zoo and a garden, my perspective is that we are dependent upon that and benefit from promoting and supporting ecology. This was my initial encounter and revelation with respect to Satan, is that we are valuably engaged in ecological defense of the planet in connection with mammals and our species and the wider life that we live with because it is to our interest to do that.
And because out of compassion (which is the reason why i became a Satanist), out of compassion we can help other entities, other beings, who need it. They need our help to withstand not only the forces of the cosmos that are totally averse to them: entropy, and a variety of different competing life and non-life processes, but also, because those who have a vested interest in compassion, and what i think of as love and wisdom, bring this to other beings, and we see this as a helpful, holistic enterprise.
So that's the first part of how i see Satan, as wild nature, and why it is that i have initially converted to Satanism, out of compassion, and how it is that this relates to other things, including demonology, and including the wider world and our role in it.
INTERLUDE
For the second part of the question about 'How do you see Satan?', it requires an adjustment. You have to understand not only that there's a differential of knowledge with respect to seeing Satan, and who that is, and what it is that it includes, but also that i have a number of different views of Satan, and those have developed through time, and they haven't stopped.
SATANISM FAQS >>2B<< HOW DO YOU SEE SATAN?
{The second segment of this 3-part response}
That is, they've continued, and so that's just the first of the views that i developed because of reading. It was an abstraction, really; an abstract concept of Satan as wild nature; an inference. Like i said, it was the revelation after a number of hours of considering what it is that people were accusing, demonizing, castigating. I conceived that it was: wilderness, and enemies, the jungle, diseases, {and} storms. I sought to form an alliance with that so as to better understand and support what i understood to be valuable in that regard, and dangerous, though worthwhile, ecologically.
After that, how i saw Satan changed when i created my own scripture. I did that because of reading, and comparing and contrasting what i understood to be Christian scripture and literature, but originally derived from Judaism. It was the parts that featured the Devil, especially, and what they *really* included. This was by people who knew their Bibles or their Tanakhs or whatever they were looking at. These were people who were analytic in a way that ordinary religious people aren't. I began to understand that the way that religion proliferates genericizes, paves over, simplifies, and commodifies the content, such that i understood a travesty had been done to the scripture itself.
Its modality of delivery was emblemized by the writings of the poet Milton in "Paradise Lost." This was subsequent to this revelation about wild nature. It had elements of the contents of scripture but it was simplified in a massive way, such that it could become a tool for religions of all kinds, not just Christian. It seemed to me that the travesty was bad enough that it deserved its own inversion. I was emotional about that at the time, probably because i was so ignorant and saw the vista of propaganda as it was, or partially at least. So i conceived of writing an inversion (which i favour; i like inversions) of Milton's "Paradise Lost," because it was so popularized as THE VERSION of how the 'historical narrative of theology took place.'
It's important to understand that THAT'S NONSENSICAL. Theology isn't history. The fact that otherwise intelligent people were treating it as such, were passing it on to the masses as such, gave me incentive to counter-promote something i found valuable. I conceived of the inversion of "Paradise Lost" because i found it so offensive, and i called it "Lost in Paradise: A Milton-Hatred." At the time i was very angry about that. In the course of perhaps a day or two i wrote something that i thought was reflective of some of the character, composition, {and} structure of "Paradise Lost," but with the intention of having it be Satan as the central figure, and in fact having Satan reside in the center of our planet so as to 'ecologize' that story.
I didn't have to decide whether or not all of reality emanated from the center of our planet (which i thought was amusing), but i did decide that Satan was to be the one who was first there, and that the Underworld was 'the place toward which we died.' It's valuable to understand that neither do i think we have souls (or that we are souls), nor do i think that we survive experientially beyond death. It was a *story*, the idea is that it was a story, fiction, with maybe some implication, indication of reality. Satan, in the story, controls or controlled the Gate of Death. That is, it fit pretty nicely to have Satan as the centerpoint controller of such a mechanism, possibly in common with Hades or some other Asian officiant, official, who monitored and mediated death for living beings. As part of that, because it was an inversion of Milton, it had the introduction or invasion of Christian entities which i characterized as 'invading star gods.'
I jotted it all down. It came out a blaze of fury, without a whole lot of forethought. I didn't plan it out. You might call it 'intuitive' if you like, and that became "Lost in Paradise: A Milton-Hatred." It was about the Jesus character, so it was a Christian story in many ways, but told from the perspective of Satan, and a battle between them as depicted by Milton, and using some of Milton's own text as spoken by Satan with the intention of taking a Romantic view in the sense of the Romantic poets who championed Milton's Lucifer in the aftermath of his writing, probably in a way that he never intended.
So from that perspective -- that's another view of Satan. That view of Satan is totally fictional. That is one that i have in mind because i wrote that scripture intending for it to be a Satanic scripture. In seeing that view of Satan, Satan is a terra-centric entity. There is coincidence between that fictional Satan and the wild nature that i described prior as part of my vision of ecology and our compassionate embrace of Stewardship. It is an authority in our cosmos. It extends beyond our lives and deaths. Although, like i said, i consider that to be fantasy.
That view of Satan has it as also, in engaging an overall content of that work, the Originator of Christianity, with the intention of pacifying its tribal and violent ways towards something that includes the death of gods and the understanding of the importance of our world, especially human-centered, mammal-centered, ecologically-centered life on this planet.
SATANISM FAQS >> 2C << HOW DO YOU SEE SATAN?
{The final segment of this 3-part response}
I've gone over viewing Satan as an emblem or a projected symbolism understood by me, having been studying Demonology and Satanology, and secondarily, having looked at scripture and being disappointed in the simplification of complex, longterm documents of religious import, set into some very rudimentary poem that people believe as a historical narrative in "Paradise Lost," writing a scripture of my own that has a Satan in it that champions individual thought, testing of spirits, {and} analytical thinking.
These are ways of seeing Satan; one of them being a view of the natural world, and one of them being a view of an imaginary world, a scriptural fiction set (as *i* indicated) in a fictional context about fictional things. Then, later, after having established a relationship of alliance, a compact, a blood-kinship with that emblem (not with the scriptural figure, because i don't believe in it), i had a dream in which Satan (as i understood it/him) appeared.
Now it should be said that before this time, initially, i conceived of Satan as non-personal insofar as Satan was an emblem of wild nature, or as a personification in fiction, in which i believe he is characterized as "he." In my pact with that emblem, i also characterized Satan as "he," associating him with some latinate father, as i recall {Satanas Paternas}.
In my dream, Satan had a particular manifestation as a woodcut devil; that is, a medieval woodcut that i'd seen before -- i'd seen many, many images of devils, demons the world over because i'd studied demonology {Bye, Skunk!} -- but this was, in my dream, a misty entity. That is, i couldn't actually literally see Satan except as a disturbing of mist, and the form was obvious, and the form was a bat-winged, tailed, reptilian entity straight out of some medieval woodcuts from witches' sabbats or something, and the witches kissing the devil's behind, and the like.
I had an encounter with that entity for more than two nights {in dreams}, successively, and understood that to be Satan, and understood that to be establishing -- because of my conversations with that entity from the first morning, subsequently -- my ability to have conversation with that entity, with Satan. He said i could call him 'Satanniel' -- interesting name, nothing i had ever heard before that i could recall. This was a new relationship, a new view of Satan that i then perpetuated. I understood that to be a personal manifestation of Satan to me, and ever since, that intelligence has been available to me on that internal plane of my consciousness.
It is not the first entity of that sort that i've had a relationship with. {I've had} a more profound relationship in fact with the Goddess to whom i dedicated my life. So this entity, this 'Satan' view, is of a supportive, creative intelligence who seems to care quite a bit about what i am doing in my pact, and in my devotion to my God, Kali, and in devotion to my guru, who is also my wife, and he is a fan of my wife's writings, my guru's writings, which i found amusing. In consultation i have sometimes got his perspective on things.
This Satan is definitely a demon or devil, {and} appears as such, not in the character portrayed by anti-demonists; many Christians, many Muslims, talk about that behaviour as poisonous, nefarious, antagonistic to me, in many ways, and inimicable to me, terrifying, etc., etc. None of those are applicable. It should be noted that i have tried to engage demons in rituals, things of that sort, and found them more often to be of a wild character. That is, simply not passive, or simply not dominated by the powers that be, etc. Not the way they were portrayed to me in demonologies, for example.
So that's a third way that i saw and have seen Satan, and have an ongoing -- not so much visual, it's an internal -- conversation of imagined sound, although i don't make Satan say things. i think things intended as i consider them to be prayer, but that's how i regard prayer: internal directed expression and then Satan responds. It's quite comparable to how Kali or some others have responded in mind. So that's a third way that i see Satan and rounds out that second question: How Do You See Satan?
Link to FAQs
Links to FAQs
How To Sell Your Soul To Satan
BONUS!
