You have heard it said, love your enemies. But I say to you, no purer love is there than this: to hate your enemies with your whole heart.
“SERMON OF THE NIGHT QUEEN” THE BOOK OF INFERNAL PRAYER
When I was 6 years old, we had a giant pile of rocks and leftover construction materials out in the front yard of our newly built home. My little sister and I would climb that hill of debris, pretending it was a mountain strewn with artifacts and hidden treasures—broken bricks, steel pipes, bits of quartz. We had just moved into the neighborhood and had yet to have much contact with the other local kids. So, I was glad to see my baby sister standing by the pile one afternoon, talking to two boys. I was outraged and panic stricken, however, when those two boys began tossing stones at my sister, causing her to shriek and scream. Without giving it much thought, I ran for the pile, snatched up a length of pipe sticking out of the ground, and cracked one of the boys across the knee with it. While he rolled screaming on the ground, I grabbed my sister’s hand and ran with her back to the house.
Wrath is righteous anger, and it was precisely that emotion which swelled up propelled me to my sister’s aid. Some readers might get squeamish with the use of the word “righteous.” Jehovah is the deity most obsessed with righteousness. But to behave righteously simply means to do what is right in a given circumstance. It could be compared to the Buddhist 8-Fold Path, which prescribes Right Action, Right Speech, and so on as a means of liberation. Of course, Buddhists, Christians, and Diabolists may disagree about what is right in particular situations, but that need not trip us up here. The important point is that the Devil Worshipper, like every human on the planet, recognizes that there is an appropriate time and a place for certain behaviors.
Anger fuels our action in the world in ways few other emotions can. Whereas sadness and despair often weigh us down and rob us of the capacity to act, anger can be a goad, pushing us to correct wrongs we perceive in our world. This could be addressing a political injustice, a social ill, or a personal slight. Most of us know this already even if we don’t consciously think about it. Apathy is rarely an engine for change, but wrath can move mountains as well as masses.
The potency of wrath, while making it so useful, also makes it exceptionally dangerous. The risk of fury going overboard is famous in literary terms—the entire plot of The Iliad is based on the tragic result when wrath mixes with an over-inflated sense of pride. And certainly, all of us can think of a time we said or did something we later wish we could take back.
Beyond setting us upon a course from which it is impossible to turn back, the volatile nature of wrath also makes it highly susceptible to manipulation by external forces. The entire basis of most political movements is the harnessing, if not outright conjuring, of outrage and indignation. This is all well and good as far as it goes—real world action has to be powered by something—but when a media or political figure seeks to elicit our wrath in connection to a particular issue, the Diabolist would be well served not to take anything that is thus said at face value. While people often act like spin is something new, the truth is that there have always been hidden agendas and mixed motives in politics and journalism. Resist the urge to immediately trust and react to any given source. Ask yourself, why do they want me to act in a particular way? What narrative frame are they pushing or assuming? Who benefits and who loses if I join this cause? Skepticism has its limits, of course, but a healthy dose is more likely to help than harm.
Perhaps most perversely with regard to wrath is our ability to manipulate ourselves. We can be so desperate for a sense of purpose, and the hot rush of moral outrage can be so addictive, that individuals will see injustice when no actual injustice is to be found. This danger is particularly present in cultures where freedom fighters and activists of the past lauded as examples to emulate. If your personal heroes were warriors for justice, and you desperately want to be like them, there is a real risk you might invent enemies if no real struggle is readily at hand.
Wrath should always be tempered with rationality, self-awareness, and a willingness to change your mind when reality turns out to be other than what you first thought. Cultivate the ability to think before acting, and actively seek out opposing viewpoints. Echo chambers are the death of free thought.
Step lightly in your certainty. Sit boldly in your doubt. In the palace of tension, I am found.
“ANNUNCIATION” THE BOOK OF INFERNAL PRAYER
So much for the benefits and dangers of wrath; what shall we say of its exercise? Some evolutionary psychologists believe that revenge served the social function of teaching people which behaviors not to commit. A line is crossed, a punishment is meted out, and the guilty party (hopefully) learns to change their behavior in the future. The line between revenge and justice is blurry indeed.
This negative reinforcement tends to work best in small, localized groups. Punishment need not always be physical, and even in the cases where it is often the accompanying shame of being punished in front of one’s peers is as or more useful in constraining future behavior. Though our populations have perhaps grown too large for this type of conditioning to work on a macro level, this method of behavior modification still works in social groups of a restricted size. I.e., classrooms, workplaces, and family homes. Anyone who has cared for small children knows that giving vent to one’s wrath is not only necessary from time to time, but need not entail anything brutal or vicious. A stern word or the temporary removal of a prized possession can often be enough. Likewise, the Diabolist should determine the appropriate shape their revenge should take, rather than blasting their anger forth indiscriminately.
There is nothing particularly satanic in all of this. Ahh, but what of destroying one’s enemies, particularly through the use of magic? Curses and maledictions are supposed to be the historical witch’s bread and butter, after all.
I will skip the how of casting curses, pointing readers instead to LaVey’s Satanic Bible for instruction to that end. Rather, I will conclude by considering when it is appropriate to destroy one’s enemies.
In 1941 Aleister Crowley wrote a small tract known as Liber Oz. It is short enough that I will reproduce it in its entirety.
“The law of the strong: this is our law and the joy of the world.” AL. II. 2
“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.” –AL. I. 40
“Thou hast no right but to do thy will. Do that, and no other shall say nay.” –AL. I. 42-3
“Every man and every woman is a star.” –AL. I. 3
There is no God but man.
1. Man has the right to live by his own law—to live in the way that he wills to do: to work as he will: to play as he will: to rest as he will: to die when and how he will.
2. Man has the right to eat what he will: to drink what he will: to dwell where he will: to move as he will on the face of the earth.
3. Man has the right to think what he will: to speak what he will: to write what he will: to draw, paint, carve, etch, mould, build as he will: to dress as he will.
4. Man has the right to love as he will:— “take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where, and with whom ye will.” —AL. I. 51
5. Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights.
“the slaves shall serve.” –AL. II. 58
“Love is the law, love under will.” –AL. I. 57
What we see in this is that each of us has a right to live our life as lead by the dictates of our nature, and that anyone who attempts to deny us that right forfeits their own to live. Granted, just because we are technically justified in a particular action doesn’t mean we ought to take it. LaVey’s warning to never cast a curse upon someone we don’t intend to destroy is essential to remember, and Anton would surely agree that discerning when and when not to act on one’s impulses is a satanic necessity. Nor should it be thought that offensive magic can be used without some personal cost. The sad truth is destroying others, whether by means mystical or mundane, often requires us to destroy in some way ourselves. Let the reader beware, lest they make the mistake of thinking that because they seek to harm someone from afar a curse is somehow less serious or dangerous than a physical attack. I have suffered physically for my own flippantly cast curses in the past. Spare yourself similar anguish by making sure in your own heart a curse is warranted before casting it.
The question arises, “Who, then, would be considered a fit and proper human sacrifice, and how is one qualified to pass judgment on such a person?” The answer is brutally simple. Anyone who has unjustly wronged you – one who has “gone out of his way” to hurt you – to deliberately cause trouble and hardship for you or those dear to you. In short, a person asking to be cursed by their very actions. When a person, by his reprehensible behavior, practically cries out to be destroyed, it is truly your moral obligation to indulge them their wish.
“ON THE CHOICE OF HUMAN SACRIFICE” THE SATANIC BIBLE
To obey their Law is the highest moral obligation for the Diabolist, and thus the removal of impediments to living that Law is perhaps the only justification for all out violence. This, as Crowley puts it, is the “law of the strong,” which is to say those bold enough to lay claim to their freedom and protect it jealously. “The slaves,” after all, “shall serve.” Though that may seem straightforward enough, the moral calculus for resorting to violence is nevertheless often riddled with ambiguity. Two people who are following their respective Law may still come into conflict with one another. In fact, their Law may demand it of each of them.
In such a case, when you are certain you are being true to yourself, and there is no other clear-cut way to decide who is in the right, then you can only do as Uncle Al says. As brothers, fight. Success shall be your proof.
Leave a Reply