The Satanic Bible Commentary

The Title

The Satanic Bible - The derivative, Christian character of this scripture's title is plain. No other religious scripture has "Bible" in its title other than the Christian text, though some use euphemistic references such as "The Hebrew Bible" (for the Tanakh, which was appropriated by Christians at least in part), "The Muhammadan Bible" to refer to the Muslim Qur'an, or even published works taking up the word for promotions (including myriad titles of books promoting their counter-current religious interests along the same lines since this Satanic scripture was published, such as "Luciferian Bible," "The Abysal Bible," "A Wicca Bible," "The Wiccan Bible," "The Solitary Wiccan's Bible," "The Beginner's Wicca Bible," "Wiccan Witchcraft Bible for Beginners," "A Witches' Bible", "The Pagan Bible," "The Hoodoo Bible," "The Fortune-Teller's Bible," "The Astrology Bible," "The Tarot Reading Bible," "The Palmistry Bible," "The Feng Shui Bible," "The Dream Bible," "The Crystal Bible," "The Crystal Healing Bible," "The Angel Bible," "The Meditation Bible," "The New Holistic Wellness Bible," "The Prosperity Bible," etc., etc.).

We can forgive the knock-off nature of the title due to the benighted state of the Christian culture surrounding them in San Francisco at the time of the origination of religious Satanism (late 1960s). They mimicked Christian language in order to be recognized by them as a start-up religion on the platform of the subversion ideologies they'd been promoting for centuries.

This derivative quality may also be seen in the selection of the names for the first religious body assembled: The First Satanic Church and The Church of Satan. They created a church to go with their bible and their black pope so as both to fit into the condemnatory rhetoric and also to be taken seriously by Christians. They could have looked to other parts of the world where brahmins sport Vedas, bikkhus tote Dhammapadas, or shih carry their Taoist Canons, and who might be acknowledged as religious peers .

Despite the fact that it adopted the name of its adversary's text for its own scripture, it is not characterized as a testament (Old, or New), does not purport to be an amendment or addition to the Christian Bibles, nor does it make reference to Christian Bibles as comparable documents or even itself, consistently, as a religion. Instead, "The Satanic Bible" might contain, by an interpretation of its name alone, Satanic versions of Christian books, re-interpreted from Satan's perspective. However, this is not the character of its content.

The Table of Contents

The contents of the book itself are sparse and reactionary. They are set into an Elementary and Monstrous framework (Satan:Fire, Lucifer:Air, Bael:Earth, and Leviathan:Water). The rationale for this isn't entirely plain, since the first two are Jewish and Christian references, respectively, to the different beings conflated by Christians, the third is a separate but competing deity or set of deities from a similar region of the world which is included in Christian Bibles (Baal, Bael, et al). The fourth is a sea monster purported to have existed or used in fiction within Christian Bibles.

Sections within these partitions roughly correspond to:
• Sociopolitics and Morality;
• Ethics, Personal Survival or Promotion;
• Holidays;
• Rituals;
• Magical Practices and Spells;
• Invocations and Conjurations;
and finally
• Enochian Keys

The Text

Skipping the introductions variously pre-pended to the body of the work, which is full of hyperbole, biographies of uncertain quality, and anecdotal references of promotional content, we may proceed to the Preface, the Prologue, and thence to what are called "The Nine Satanic Statements".

The Preface implies that this is a book on magic, rather than a strictly religious treatise, and on Satanic magic at that, along with Satanic philosophy. We will find that its treatment of magic is slanted and bloated with hubris, ignorant of many aspects of its practice, and biased toward certain types of rites or spells.

The Prologue makes its polytheistic premise clear. From a narrative born of the Norse twilight of the gods, swapping in Lucifer for Balder, the author mentions "man's salvation" and a "preparation for any and all eternal delights," while emphasizing "justice" and "the flesh." His epicurean and indulgent interests are plain, with the repudiation that such a salvation is earned through self-denial, lapsing into spiritual pipedreams, somehow pursuing physical delights in "eternal" dimensions.

The Nine Satanic Statements

The beginning of The Satanic Bible is an alchemical symbol for sulphur, or as Christians refer to it, brimstone. It effectively symbolizes the text to come as a 'shot over the bow' in relation to what should be contrasted with the Jewish "10 Statements" or "10 Commands" adopted by Christians as 'commandments.'

By rendering them as '9 statements,' however, we are in no way called to interpret or rationally analyze these for content. They are, for all intents and purposes, emblems, sounds, and flashes of signification which need have no obligatory loyalty or belief.

In what follows, i will first respond from the standpoint of rational analysis by a reflective Demonic Satanist, and then attempt to interpret the motivation for having issued the statement by Satanists to an overarching Christian culture.

All but the last of these begin with "Satan represents," making it clear that, for Satanists like LaVey, Satan is symbolic, connotes principles or a philosophy he will help to disclose.

1. The focus on indulgence continues, though no mention of discipline or rationality with regard to it is ever mentioned. This all seems to be a strident reaction to enforced abstinence.

The sharpest and most vociferous proclamation from early Satanists is against inhibiting natural, mature interests by rational consenting adults. The outcry takes the form of supporting strident hedonism, indulgence, and, in the characterization by former Christians, "commitment of sin." We can see similar advocation even amongst some Christian Gnostics.

2. Another emphasis on this animal life, this time not paying any lip service to "possible eternalities'.

Early Satanists sought to drive a supported wedge of doubt into the cosmological suppositions about souls, experiential post-mortem survival, and the potential rewards or punishments promised by 'fire and brimstone preachers' in Christianity.

3. Hypocrisy and exposing it is something many Christians focus upon, as does LaVey here and elsewhere. Intrusive and critical moral upbraiding offered by conservative adherents to those outside of their cult challenges others to uncover their failure to conform to their own standards, and this inspires anger and condemnation in turn.

As it turns out deceit, lying, either to oneself or to others, is a very important thing to identify by all factions in the Christian-vs-Satanism struggle. Asserting that the deceit endorsed by those associated with Satan is self-originating, this undermines the campaign of calumny promoted by Christians and Muslims that Satan is at root of it all. Combining this with an assertion of hypocrisy is a double-hit accusation against Christians.

4. Another persistent theme from LaVey and his church is the conditional or transactional relationship amongst those who are part of their tribe or church. In response to Christian advocation for unconditional love, kindness to all including one's enemies, and charity, these Satanists talk about earning respect, treating others as they treat you, and having vengeance upon their foes.

In combination with text from such sources as Redbeard, Nietzsche, and misinterpretations of Darwin, Satanists try give the impression that they cannot be expected to treat tedious, abrasive, or parasitic Christians with anything resembling cooperation or cordiality.

The Christian contention that it is advisable and within their intention to offer love up to their enemies (despite their obvious failures in this department) makes it doubly challenging to them when their avowed enemies inform them that they will not be doing likewise, and in fact wasting no time with them. A harsh, cold combative hand is held up to a fraudulent face.

5. The primary indicator of a Biblical reaction, since the dogma from Christians focusses on convincing others to sit still and take abuse while they dish it out (by quoting their scripture that their God teaches that you should, if slapped, offer yourself up for more abusive slaps on your cheeks rather than to retailiate).

The ramp-up of a blatant. vengeful opposition to their sabotage, lies, and propaganda makes it plain that an accounting with the real (e.g. secular authorities) will be taking place and a furious battle against Christians in response may be expected from those whose experienece is not riddled with delusion.

This focus on vengeance is precisely what was not sought by Jews or Pagans during the struggles and origins at the hands of a much larger Christian context. Jews have been pogrommed and genocided, Pagans have just begun to call for an end to Christian tyranny with armoured fists (in primarily Scandanavian sects).

6. The notion of psychic vampires was promoted by the Church of Satan in the aftermath of its invention previously (as by Webber in fiction) or previous mention by Dion Fortune (as psychic parasitism). In combination with the elemental and ceremonial magic standards to be found in this book, it fits a particular pattern and derivation.

By siding with "the responsible" and demanding power commensurate with ability, Satanists indicate their frustration and termination to negotiation with those they deem to be parasitic and devoid of merit. Issuing proclamations of might and implications of harsh treatment or retaliation, Satanists promise a future full of battle and resistance to distracting rhetoric and campaigns of misinformation.

7. There is a common interest amongst Satanists to oppose the artificial elevation of humans above other animals, whether on account of fictional Creationism doctrines or as part of a pseudo-Darwinian 'survival of the fittest' mentality that points to opposable thumbs and particular brain developments.

Setting the stage for proper retaliation against vicious animals, the denial that divine imperatives or fraudulent superiority complexes will stay the struggle and combat promised to those who oppose them is an important element designed to alarm Christian apologists for delusional paradigms. Not only can one expect a vicious response as part of vengeance, but no respect for special qualities or adaptive skill will excuse them from any quarter.

8. Here the anti-Christian diatribe reaches a crescendo by re-interpreting the Christian "sins" as laudible and worthwhile for gratification purposes. Their characters will be differently interpreted through the course of this book in order to position early Satanism as an epicurean or hedonistic champion against a harsh and anti-mammalian cultic despotism.

Once the hoodwink of "eternal reward" is removed as a delusional promise without substance, then all that remains are moral constraints pertinent to natural processes, motives and values by most mammals like human beings. Setting Christian "sins" aside as religious biases intended to impede quite reasonable and ordinary animal interests indicates the truly massive differential (possibly inverted) between Christian and Satanist moral norms. This should be understood as a shocking wake-up call.

9. The author asserts the reality of the Devil and attributes the success of Christian religion to it. He is personalized in a way which contradicts strict atheism.

In combination with the next section ("The Infernal Diatribe") which personalizes the Devil and attributes to him "indigation," surely the assertion that Satan is "the church's" best friend inverts what might ordinarily be expected from Satanists. Given all the preceding "representations" that are at odds with Christian propaganda, it situates him as a goading bogey, a scare-tactic artifice sometimes so described by secular authorities. We might expect that this will cause confusion on the part of Christians and Muslims who read and comprehend its change of proclamation.

The Infernal Diatribe

Here, Satanists re-interpret the protocols of treatment of human beings to be worthy of application to the Devil, or at least play at doing so, whereas most of those religions using Satan as a bedrock element of their subversion ideologies have no interest in applying these principles to the being they identify as "the origin of evil."

Early Satanists lionized the "Law of the Jungle" as a legitimate operative standard for their sociopolitics in comparison to arbitrary codes and moral restraints issued by Christian councils. At its most defensible, this relates to a code of conduct emphasizing pack unity, survival, and cooperation. At its worst, it can easily be criticized for an abandonment of morality abjectly as 'might makes right' and 'kill or be killed.' LaVey even inserted a text originally by Ragnar Redbeard called "Might Makes Right" into the scripture during its publication.

By denying the viability and authenticity of moral standards fostered by Christians, this is likely to alarm them and cause them to recoil in fear; at least this is part of the motivation of mentioning "the Law of the Jungle" and following it up with mention of "tooth and claw." The intention seems to be to roar and make dangerous noises. It also insularizes and counters the metropolitan interest in universal benefaction (by argument because it is not natural and never authentic, hiding subterfuge).

The Book of Satan

I

Continuing with such text as "Death to the weakling, wealth to the strong!" and "he who saith 'thou shalt' to me is my mortal foe!", referring to the Christian God Jesus as "your impotent mad redeemer" and The TRUE prince of evil - the king of slaves" and to proclaim regarding the Jewish God which the Christians have assimilated: "I gaze into the glassy eye of your fearsome Jehovah, and pluck him by the beard; I uplift a broad-axe, and split open his worm-eaten skull!" is clearly antagonistic and anti-Christian in its wrath.

Many Satanists, as former Christians, might find such language emboldening and retributive, but we should note that PRECISELY what was complained about at the inception of this scripture (dealing harshly with the religious focus of one's ostensible adversary) is what is exemplified in this text.

It is one thing to hashly treat a dead-man-aggrandized-to-demi-god-status or a tribal deity in one's wrathful complaint and quite another to explain one's morality in dealing with other, actual, human beings. Whatever may be postured here, we shall see that Satanist morality is generally responsive and transactional. It is more akin to what Christianity sought to transcend ("eye for eye, tooth for tooth" of the tribal Jews) than it is to the horrors which are imagined for its propaganda purposes ("do evil, for that is what your Master Satan wants").

To offer up the challenge to the reason for supporting The Golden Rule and The Ten Commandments both exhibits the parameters of the struggle and successfully challenges the moral standards at their cultural foundations in substance and rationale.

II

text