our presently unexposed self.
In the realm of magic such an examination must be done. To leave such hidden dimensions alone would be to
invite terrible retribution in the later workings. With the magical Aspect so strong, there is no limit to the energy
that can be conjured up. When the demons that lurk in the unconscious also receive the benefits of this evolutionary
energy, all Hell can break loose. [Cf. L.D. Seago IV°, “Psychic Hazards and Proper Use of Ritual Magic”, Scroll #I-3,
11/X.]
Ultimately the Magical Entity helps in the integration of the Setian. The goal of the Setian is to evolve, and one
of the first steps in any sort of evolution is learning about the self. Then the various elements should be nudged in
the same direction.
Imagine a herd of cattle, with a cowboy riding herd on them as they all wander down to the railhead. Some trot
off, others plod along, and the leader barrels ahead of the herd. This cowboy is our will, which emanates from the
Core Self, and the different Aspects are all the cattle that have been pushed, plodding, in the same direction. The
Magical Entity is the leader with its conception of the ultimate “goal”, and the function personality is the maverick
who wants to do its own thing, as it has done for these too many years.
The fusion ultimately of all of these Aspects together under the guidance of the Magical Entity is in a sense an
enhancement of the Core Self’s will and the evolution of a new self which will incorporate all the Aspects in itself.
The Magical Entity is the channel of this new self, and the function personality, though still existing, has been
relegated to a primarily minor position, performing its mundane functions without tyranny.
- 293 -
In Freudian terms this may be considered the triumph of the “ego”. In magical terms we have the integrated
self, which is evolving and metamorphizing, always changing and yet progressing. This integrated self carries with it
all the power that has been frittered away by the divergent Aspects, now combined in one and all directed at the
same goal. To bend one’s will and know that one’s whole being is directed behind one’s will is an achievement of this
integration.
- 294 -
A36: Implications of Elitism
- by L. Dale Seago IV°
Scroll of Set #III-6, February 1978
At a recent meeting of the Sekhmet Pylon, a member took exception to my “fanaticism” and my apparent
attitude that the Temple of Set embodies “the only true religion”. It seems to me that this should be clarified. If this
organization is in fact the Temple of Set, then ours is the true religion. If it is not the Temple of Set, which the
Prince of Darkness has himself ordained, then it is merely another magical order ... and there was no point in the
resignations of its founders from what they saw had become merely the Church of Anton LaVey. If the concepts and
principles set forth in the Book of Coming Forth by Night do not issue from Set, then ours is a false religion itself.
The Temple has been founded upon the ability of its Initiates to perceive certain Forms (in the Platonic sense)
and principles, patterns, and relationships which are not apparent to ordinary humans; and upon their ability to
apply their perceptions and understanding of these things to their lives [i.e. “magic”]. It is this perceptive faculty,
together with its application, which distinguishes the Elect from the human and places the former upon a superior
level. It is also the reason why our initiatory system of advancement is a process of recognition as opposed to
administrative/ organizational “elevation”.
“Elitism” has become a dirty word in our egalitarian-oriented society. It is considered “not nice”, impolite, to be
better than the masses. But if the Temple of Set is authentic, then its members are elite. And the logical
consequence of their elitism must be considered: Millions of humans are impoverished and starving. Do you have a
“duty to humanity” to aid them? Will you give of your own substance and reduce yourself to their level in the hope of
bringing them partway up to yours? Will you expend your time, your energies, your intellectual qualities, on the
masses - or on your own kind from whom you can expect a reciprocal commitment? Do the non-Elect deserve as
much consideration from you as the Elect? If you are truly Elect, and better than they are, do the non-Elect deserve
any consideration from you at all?
I seek my Elect and none other ... and I think not of those who think not of me.
This does not mean a Setian may not have non-Elect friends and associates. There is generally some kind of
reciprocal benefit in such relationships, or they would not be entered into; the non-Setian may be entertaining and
amusing, possess some skill which you can either learn or persuade him to employ on your behalf, etc.
From an Elect standpoint, however, there are three kinds of people: the Elect, the potentially Elect, and the non-
Elect. On first meeting people, it may not be immediately apparent to which category they belong. My own policy in
any case where doubt exists is to treat them as potentially Elect until they prove themselves otherwise. If they show
themselves to be non-Elect, the following options are open:
1. Cooperate with them as long as paths and goals are congruent.
2. Ignore them if they are neither a help nor a hindrance to your own plans.
3. If you have nothing they need/want but they have something you need, use them. Find some way to get
it at their expense rather than your own. [Advertising agencies do it all the time by creating an artificial
need in a person in order to obtain the money they want from him.]
4. If they are hostile, or a potential or actual threat:
(a) Avoid them;
(b) Educate or mislead them so they no longer threaten you;
(c) Control them;
(d) Destroy them.
Who has the moral right to decide whether someone should be made a tool of, or even destroyed? If the Elect
are the Elect, then they have that right. The Setian must take upon himself the responsibility of tracing the
consequences of his convictions to their logical conclusions. If he finds he cannot stomach those conclusions, he
should reexamine the foundations of his convictions. To be a successful Setian requires the unceasing and
discriminating use of one’s mind, and a most precise and delicate sense of intellectual balance. In dealings with
those outside the Temple, it may also at times require the will to be coldly and utterly ruthless.
Are you Elect or not? If you are, then, in the words of Set spoken at the First Conclave, “Ye are alien to
mankind.”
* * * * *
- 295 -
Reply
- by Richard D. Murad II°
Scroll of Set #III-8, April 1978
I am writing in reference to the article in the February Scroll, “The Implications of Elitism” by Magister Seago. I
do not agree with everything he said, and what follows are the reasons why.
The first matter concerns the statement that “the Temple of Set embodies the only true religion”. I believe with
all my heart and mind that the Temple as it now exists is the most advanced magical and philosophical order in the
world. As far as I have seen, there is nothing which can compare with the it. I am very proud to be an Adept within
it. I cannot, however, take it to the point of saying that the Temple embodies “the only true religion”, th
us
embodying the absolute and ultimate answers to the many philosophical questions we all have.
To say that means that the Temple cannot change any of its current ideas, because if it contains all the truths
now, any deviation would produce falsehoods. Change is what Xeper is all about. If the religion [I personally prefer
to employ the word “philosophy”] in the Temple is the ultimate truth, then the section in the new reading
list “Toward the Unknown Region” means nothing - because if the statement is true, everything must be known.
The philosophy in the Temple today is the most satisfactory for me, because for me it answers questions which
before were unanswerable. All my questions can’t be answered, because the Temple, even though the most
advanced in the world, is not - and by the very nature of the word of the Æon cannot be - a finished product. The
statement by Magister Seago implies that the philosophy of the current Temple is a finished product. Of course this
first matter could be a misinterpretation of Magister Seago’s choice of words on my part.
The second matter concerns Magister Seago’s opinions on dealing with individuals in the mundane world. I do
not disagree with him, but I cannot agree without a couple of modifications.
I firmly believe that Setians are quite alien to mankind. I also believe that a Setian has the absolute right to use
and/or destroy anyone who is capable of being used or destroyed, if it is the Setian’s will to do so. In this sense I
fully agree with him and his four options. However just as it is the right of a Setian to use individuals and if so
desired destroy them, it is also the Setian’s right not to. His article completely overlooks any true friendship or love
relationship which could exist between a Setian and a non-Setian. His article allows for no possibility of such a
relationship.
There are those who I would destroy in a minute [and I’m trying]. There are also those for whom I would risk
my life. It is my right to act in either manner if I so choose. Of course this second matter could be just another
misinterpretation of Magister Seago’s article.
* * * * *
Reply to Reply (1)
- by L. Dale Seago IV°
Scroll of Set #III-9, May 1978
It was gratifying to see the concern you expressed in the April XIII Scroll about my “Implications of Elitism”
essay. As it happens your comments are in fact the results of misinterpretation. However if one person has doubts or
misgivings about the essay and has expressed them, the chances are that others have some which are not being
expressed. By sending a copy of this letter to the Editor of the Scroll, I may allay their apprehensions as well as your
own.As I see it, the only thing which can logically be directly inferred from the statement that the Temple of Set
embodies the only true religion is that the others (conventional religions) are false, which is not the same as saying
that the Temple of Set has all the answers ... or if it is, the connection escapes me. If I were to extend the syllogism
implicit in your letter a little further, it might look like this:
1. The Temple of Set is the only true religion.
2. Therefore the philosophy of the current Temple is a complete, finished product which requires no
further change, modification, or evolution.
3. Therefore Xeper, the guiding principle of the Temple (evolutionary change), is false or is impossible
to execute.
4. Therefore if the Temple is the true religion, it is necessarily false.
I think you can see that the breakdown in logic occurs in the relationship between #1 and #4.
The matter of the Temple being “the true religion” [and don’t make the mistake of applying the conventional
meaning of “religion” to the Temple’s use of the term; it’s like referring to stage tricks as “magic”] rests upon the
answer to an antecedent question: Is Set a conscious, intelligent, objective entity? If you will go back and reread our
introductory pamphlet, the follow-up document, The Book of Coming Forth by Night and its Analysis and
- 296 -
Commentary - especially “GeneSet” - you will find that the Priesthood does indeed believe that Set is an actual
being. “All other gods of all other rimes and nations have been created by men.”
We are not trying to delude anyone into thinking that we are merely humanists or existentialists dressed in
fancy robes who are. developing a philosophy along certain lines because we think it is “cute”. The Temple of Set is
exactly what its name says it is, which should surprise only those who are accustomed to assuming that everyone is a
hypocrite.
Back in “the old days” of the Church of Satan, the distinguishing characteristic of the Priesthood was that its
members had been “singled out” and “led” through experiences which showed them unequivocally that there was in
fact a Prince of Darkness. The Priesthood of Set of the year Xlll is a far more subtle and complex thing than that of
the year X, but this remains one of its identifying features. Without this “sense of Set”, as Magister Barrett calls it,
our Priests would merely be senior magicians and administrators - not Priests. And I will go on record here and now
as stating that if I ever find that an individual holding the III° does not believe Set exists, I will (a) counsel that
be construed as punitive: the individual concerned might be a wonderful person and a proficient magician. But not a
Priest or Priestess of Set.
Things are not so stringent, of course, for the lay membership, and I don’t think the Temple of Set is “dogmatic”
in the usual, repressive sense of the word or that its philosophy is restrictive. No lay member is required to believe in
the literal existence of Set. Our philosophy is pretty consistent internally, but if that is “restrictive”, then one might
as well condemn a chemist for finding that the results of his experiments tend to support each other.
The Word of the Æon is Xeper, but no one is saying that it is necessary to “Say three Hail Sets and a Diabolus
Noster and genuflect” in order to do it; each individual can go about it in his own way. And while I see tremendous
respect and outright love expressed toward Set within the Temple, I have not noticed any “bending of knees or
dropping of eyes” as occurs in the conventional concept of “worship”.
Speaking of respect and love, you stated that my essay “... completely overlooks any true friendship or love
relationship which could exist between a Setian and a non-Setian ... allows for no possibility of such a relationship”.
If memory serves me, what I said was: “This does not mean a Setian may not have non-Elect friends and associates.
There is generally some kind of reciprocal benefit in such relationships or they would not be entered into ...”
One such reciprocal benefit, of course, might be affection. That is one of the reasons I have a cat, although I do
not think of her as a Setian. I’ve also had a couple of pet humans (female), which worked fine until I began treating
them as Setians - at which point they became insufferable! Seriously, though, I know a number of non-Setians
whose personalities and/or intellectual abilities in various areas draw sincere affection, admiration, and respect
from me, and whom I would go pretty far out of my way to help. But as far as priorities are concerned, Setians hav
e
first claim on my aid and my friendship.
You also pointed out that the Setian has the right not to destroy someone, and I agree wholeheartedly with that.
This recognition is one of the essential differences between the outlook of the Age of Satan and that of the Æon of
Set. The Seventh Satanic Statement proclaims that man is simply a beast who, due to his mental development, has
become more vicious than all the rest. There is a lot to be said for that statement. But by virtue of that same
intellectual development - the Gift of Set - man is now able to become something other than a beast. He can choose
not to be vicious. Most Setians would probably prefer to follow the “path of least resistance” and live as
harmoniously with non-Setians as possible. This is why cooperation was the first of the four options I suggested for
dealing with them. The “vicious” options are a last resort.
I hope these comments have cleared up your apprehensions about my essay. If not, you are welcome to write to
me for further discussion.
* * * * *
Reply to Reply (2)
- by James Lewis III°
Scroll of Set #III-9, May 1978
After reading Adept Murad’s letter regarding “The Implications of Elitism”, I wish to toss in two cents’ worth of
my own view of Magister Seago’s article and Adept Murad’s letter.
Agreed, the Temple of Set is the most advanced magical and philosophical order in the world; no one will argue
this point. But it’s also “the only true religion”. I base this statement on a passage from the Book of Coming Forth by
Night: “I am the Ageless Intelligence of this Universe ... All other gods of all other times and nations have been
created by men.”
“All other gods” certainly had greater or lesser followings, but being “created by men” made them shams, some
impressive and grand, but shams with internal and external control by men. If anyone feels this to be the case with
the Temple of Set, I invite a closer inspection. If our By-Laws are not sufficient to stop an individual intent on
manipulating the Temple to his own ends, then Set himself is more than willing and capable to rectify matters.