Is the Satanic Bible still relevant?

[iandiabhal]

"Is the Satanic Bible still relevant to the Satanist - Now?"
I wanted to open a discussion on the Satanic Bible at Venger's invitation.
I would politely request that this does not turn into a "LaVey bashing thread".
Why? Well the man is dead. I apply the following dictum -
"Lakota wisdom strongly advocates dismounting a dead horse".
However, his writing has survived him, and still is selling well.
I would posit it will still be selling - 100 years from now.
I would like to keep the discussion firmly on the book - and off ad-hominems about its author, unless it is to illustrate or demonstrate some valid point about the book itself.

As a starting point - If you think the Satanic Bible is still relevant to the modern Satanist, then explain why you think it is.
If you believe it has lost its relevancy, then explain why you believe so clearly, intelligibly and concisely.
Please, no trite or sarcastic "one-liners". Satirical or comedic one liners - aren't a replacement for a well-reasoned explication of thought.
Attack it if that is your desire or wish, but be clear in your meaning.

Now I have been a Satanist for over 37 years, and as such, I still think the Satanic Bible is relevant in my own considered opinion.
One obvious thing I believe many, most especially those lately come to Left Hand path thinking and reasoning misunderstand, with my own decades of experience as a practicing Satanist is in the very title of the book itself.
It is not meant to be, and was not written in the sense of the Christian Bible, nor was it meant to be used in the sense of the Christian Bible.
It is not a Book of Commandments chipped in stone and "thou-shall-nots".
It is also not a "How-To-Be-A-Satanist In 10 Easy Lessons" cookbook either.
It was also not meant as a "end-all, be, all" document.
Anton was very clear to explain in many of his writings that Satanism was about learning - not worship.
This has definite "gnostic" overtones, that some might choose to critique.
LaVey, explained his use and choice of the word "bible" within the context of the book and in other writings.
It is relevant, for among other reasons, although it may be a bit dated in some paragraphs and notions historically - for its sheer, non-esoteric, pragmatic simplicity. No guru or "learned expert" is needed to help explain it to you or walk you through it.
You either get it - or some parts of it - or not.

Thanks, and Hail Satan!

Attachments:

[iandiabhal]

On a related note, I have the entire text version, of the Satanic Bible, and the Satanic Rituals right at my fingertips, if you need a text cite, or need reference and don't wish to type the paragraph out. To start us off, critique wise I quite dislike the "new" Satanic Bible introduction "rewritten" by HP Peter Gilmore.

Perhaps he had the legal right to do so, but I found the addition foul, distasteful and disrespectful. I firmly believe the Satanic Bible should have stayed the way it was written - in its original entirety - without any additional commentary, and certainly not the pompous pedantic drivel that forms the introduction now.
Burton H. Wolfe's original well-written introduction, was classic and should have been left completely intact.

I have a few Satanic Bibles. One is my oldest one acquired in 1970 that I treasure. Not exactly a first-edition but close.
This one stays pretty much tucked safely away.
I have another that I read regularly, I bought years ago.
Another copy I own is a special custom-leather bound, and Sigil of Baphomet embossed copy from "Satanic Bibles" bookbindery, which is unfortunately now out of business. This special custom copy of the book, is primarily used during Satanic ritual operations.
If the moment came that I had to purchase another copy of the Satanic Bible, the first thing I would be doing would be taking the old #11 X-Acto blade, and would completely and carefully slice out and excise every bit of the bullshit drivel written by Peter Gilmore in the Satanic Bible immediately, given that what he "added" was complete and utter crap and shite, and I am not the only one of that opinion.
I believe Boyd Rice shares the same opinion.

[Timotheus Prophet of Darkness]

Mar 12, 2011 10:58:06 GMT -6 iandiabhal said:

On a related note, I have the entire text version, of the Satanic Bible, and the Satanic Rituals right at my fingertips, if you need a text cite, or need reference and don't wish to type the paragraph out. To start us off, critique wise I quite dislike the "new" Satanic Bible introduction "rewritten" by HP Peter Gilmore.

Perhaps he had the legal right to do so, but I found the addition foul, distasteful and disrespectful. I firmly believe the Satanic Bible should have stayed the way it was written - in its original entirety - without any additional commentary, and certainly not the pompous pedantic drivel that forms the introduction now.
Burton H. Wolfe's original well-written introduction, was classic and should have been left completely intact.

I have a few Satanic Bibles. One is my oldest one acquired in 1970 that I treasure. Not exactly a first-edition but close.
This one stays pretty much tucked safely away.
I have another that I read regularly, I bought years ago.
Another copy I own is a special custom-leather bound, and Sigil of Baphomet embossed copy from "Satanic Bibles" bookbindery, which is unfortunately now out of business. This special custom copy of the book, is primarily used during Satanic ritual operations.
If the moment came that I had to purchase another copy of the Satanic Bible, the first thing I would be doing would be taking the old #11 X-Acto blade, and would completely and carefully slice out and excise every bit of the bullshit drivel written by Peter Gilmore in the Satanic Bible immediately, given that what he "added" was complete and utter crap and shite, and I am not the only one of that opinion.
I believe Boyd Rice shares the same opinion.

Did he just write a new introduction for the satanic Bible or did he basically rewrite the Sb's main texts or add stuff in to the main texts like hsi explinations for what it means etc etc)?

Well I for one see the Sb as being valid for the Satanist,but we are at a point where the emphaisis on the carnal Indulgence factor is becoming passe (somewhat) and we need to move on to newer horizons while keeping the carnal Indulgence factor as a vital part of the teachings found with in teh Sb but not to the point that our primal urges control us and I think alot of Satanists that follow the SB are stuck in a carnal Indulgence factor infinity loop and can not see past that.

[Deleted]

Mar 12, 2011 9:40:27 GMT -6 iandiabhal said:

"Is the Satanic Bible still relevant to the Satanist - Now?"
I wanted to open a discussion on the Satanic Bible at Venger's invitation.
I would politely request that this does not turn into a "LaVey bashing thread".
Why? Well the man is dead. I apply the following dictum -
"Lakota wisdom strongly advocates dismounting a dead horse".
However, his writing has survived him, and still is selling well.
I would posit it will still be selling - 100 years from now.
I would like to keep the discussion firmly on the book - and off ad-hominems about its author, unless it is to illustrate or demonstrate some valid point about the book itself.

As a starting point - If you think the Satanic Bible is still relevant to the modern Satanist, then explain why you think it is.
If you believe it has lost its relevancy, then explain why you believe so clearly, intelligibly and concisely.
Please, no trite or sarcastic "one-liners". Satirical or comedic one liners - aren't a replacement for a well-reasoned explication of thought.
Attack it if that is your desire or wish, but be clear in your meaning.

Now I have been a Satanist for over 37 years, and as such, I still think the Satanic Bible is relevant in my own considered opinion.
One obvious thing I believe many, most especially those lately come to Left Hand path thinking and reasoning misunderstand, with my own decades of experience as a practicing Satanist is in the very title of the book itself.
It is not meant to be, and was not written in the sense of the Christian Bible, nor was it meant to be used in the sense of the Christian Bible.
It is not a Book of Commandments chipped in stone and "thou-shall-nots".
It is also not a "How-To-Be-A-Satanist In 10 Easy Lessons" cookbook either.
It was also not meant as a "end-all, be, all" document.
Anton was very clear to explain in many of his writings that Satanism was about learning - not worship.
This has definite "gnostic" overtones, that some might choose to critique.
LaVey, explained his use and choice of the word "bible" within the context of the book and in other writings.
It is relevant, for among other reasons, although it may be a bit dated in some paragraphs and notions historically - for its sheer, non-esoteric, pragmatic simplicity. No guru or "learned expert" is needed to help explain it to you or walk you through it.
You either get it - or some parts of it - or not.

Thanks, and Hail Satan!

I agree with you on everything.

Stay Awake, for the emerald kingdom is at hand !

[iandiabhal]

Did he just write a new introduction for the satanic Bible or did he basically rewrite the Sb's main texts or add stuff in to the main texts like hsi explinations for what it means etc etc)?

Ian> No Gilmore just replaced the introduction by Burton H. Wolfe. Gilmore did write a book called the Satanic Scriptures which was mostly a rehash and rewording of a lot of LaVey's writings.

Well I for one see the Sb as being valid for the Satanist,but we are at a point where the emphaisis on the carnal Indulgence factor is becoming passe (somewhat) and we need to move on to newer horizons while keeping the carnal Indulgence factor as a vital part of the teachings found with in teh Sb but not to the point that our primal urges control us and I think alot of Satanists that follow the SB are stuck in a carnal Indulgence factor infinity loop and can not see past that.

Ian> I think the Satanic Bible is more than just simply about Carnal Indulgence.
I think the Church of Satan's issue, has been to simply over-emphasize the topic, while removing the esotericism, and magic from Satanism
See, one thing you said there is a common misconception about the Satanic Bible - it is not an idea of "following" it in a dogmatic sense - but more an idea of recognition. Quite honestly for me, the Satanic Bible was a synopsis and definition for the way in which I already thought - it just helped me to coalesce that belief, or way of thinking, it was not some "strange" doctrine.
Many Satanist, and many within the Church of Satan will relate the same idea about the Satanic Bible.
There are many points that are still quite valid today, and still are issues for the modern Satanist 40 years on. I think many people fool or delude themselves still on the idea of "carnal indulgence". Some may disagree but it isn't just a matter of "do whatever the hell you want". I believe indulgence must be balanced by intelligence, and the idea of rational self-interest in mind.
Sure it is fun to drink, but it sucks to become a diseased alcoholic.
Heroin might make you feel great, but it turns most into addicts and slaves to their addiction, which is antithesis to the whole idea of Satanism - in my opinion.
Many, many Satanists or would-be Satanists have gotten this wrong - and its easy to spot which ones have.
I like Anton's original idea of Satanism being about "free thought" to your point about not becoming mired in mental loops or static pragmatisms.
Again, Satanism is about learning - not worship - the Satanist should naturally read many ideas and doctrines, in the dictum of "questioning everything". You can't seriously question something that you have not seriously examined or aquainted yourself with at least on the surface.
Indulgence, good conversation, reading, ritualizing, meditations, exchange of ideas, epicureanism - not setting like a slug on the couch blandly watching the latest "popular" crap on the television like watching moving video wallpaper.
Here is why I think the idea of carnal indulgence is still quite valid - people still don't grasp what the entirety of the notion is.
Nothing wrong with watching that show, browsing the internet or an online game - if you enjoy it, but don't let it become a substitute for having a life or learning, or for neglecting your family, job and health. That is just plain stupidity.
Many let games and the internet rule their lives - and just like heroin, once you are a slave to something - that is no longer indulgence, but obsession, compulsion and addiction - which are weaknesses of mind and character.

Great comments.

[Cain Da'arnesh]

Good point! Perhaps I should drink that forty tonight after all... I could use a good break! But first, I need to meditate!

There! Actions will always speak louder than words...