Mind Parasites
My final charge to the Temple of Set as High Priest of Set is therefore simply to never forget
this Gift of Set as the central force underlying our many specialized arts, sciences, investigations,
applications, experiments, and pleasures.
The Italian automobile constructor Enzo Ferrari was world-renowned for the sensuous, feral
machines he created, as well as for the melodramatic controversies that constantly swirled around
his explosive personality. Some revered him as a saint; others hated his guts; most felt both
emotions simultaneously without any apology for inconsistency. As with Asimov, Hoffer, Russell,
and Nietzsche, the magnetism and the immortality of the Ferrari phenomenon lay in something
much more subtle and powerful than mere skill at building exotic cars. In Enzo’s spiritual
testament he finally revealed his secret:
... ho dedicato la mia vita all’automobile: una conquista di libertà per l’uomo ... [I
have devoted my life to the automobile, which has won the human race its freedom.]
And there you have it again. He sought to capture in machinery what a Blake did in art, a
Vaughan Williams in music, a Milton in prose, a Clark Ashton Smith in poetry: the ecstasy of
surpassing one’s presumed limitations of self, of shattering the spear of the universe that is with a
self-created sword of the universe yet to Come Into Being. The Children of Set must never aspire
to less.
I appreciate beyond expression all the encouragement, support, affection, and loyalty you have
so graciously extended to me as High Priest of Set these many years. And I look forward to
enjoying with you many more mysteries of the Great Black Magic as it continues to illuminate for
us horizons beyond our darkest dreams.
At the Set-XVII International Conclave in San Francisco that November, Set, speaking
through his Council of Nine, entrusted his High Priesthood to Magus Don Webb, who for the
subsequent 1-1/2 decades far exceeded my own contributions and competence in that office.
When it was formally transferred, he presented me with an engraved black-marbled plaque on
behalf of the Temple. Beneath a mirror-engraved Pentagram of Set is inscribed:
- 140 -
For Michael A. Aquino
A STELA
Composed on the First Day of the Egyptian New
Year as a Magical Link of the eternal Respect, Love
and Blessings that flow to him from the Dwellers
in the Æon of Set now and forever. 8/1/XXXI
I played my flute in the desert night,
and a special few heard the silvery call.
It was as subtle as the gem-hues of the Dark Light,
but it made for the Mind an everlasting Hall.
I gave what I had, which was the Way to the stars,
I gave it with tears and blood and sweat,
I gave it with Love, for with Love it had been made mine.
And they saw my magic treasure, saw it Dark and Fine,
and heard it in their words, and drank it when they met,
and they grew wise on this earth, and shone among the stars.
I will not be remembered by all,
I didn’t disturb the sands of time with Might,
but I will always be Remembered by those who Heard the Call,
when I played my flute in the desert night.
- 141 -
Part II: Concepts
- 142 -
- 143 -
16: The Black Magical Theory of the Universe
The true nature of what is spiritual and what is merely nonsense is hard to agree upon. A
precise line cannot be drawn between faith, superstition, and science. All we can say without
argument is that there is a larger reality which is beyond our comprehension. We don’t have a
name for it, but we know it exists. In practice we find ourselves breaking through, at times, to an
expanded reality in which we are able to perceive a whole new set of mysteries which were
formerly invisible to us. Then we discover the limitations of this new awareness and must break
through yet again. This process is, as far as I have been able to discern, endless.
Ultimately no amount of study will lead us to the whole truth. Even if we work continually for
a lifetime, we will never come to the end of our explorations about truth. This is where faith comes
in. We accept the truth of theories we cannot prove, and in that way perceive the whole picture,
though its complete structure is beyond our understanding.
- David Carradine, The Spirit of Shaolin, 1991
A. Theory
Before advancing the theory identified by the title of this chapter, it may be useful to review
just what any “theory” is - and what it is not.
Definition: A theory is an organized set of ideas about reality.
Why is theory useful? (1) It enables data to be ordered. (2) It requires that the criteria of
selection of problems for analysis be made explicit. (3) It is an instrument for understanding
similarities and differences.
Theories can be descriptive (classifying a phenomenon or placing it within a conceptual
framework) or prescriptive (advancing a set of norms or values).
One must assess a theory either as (1) a passionate statement or (2) an honest attempt to
state truth.
A theory should be critiqued on the plane of its logic and internal consistency, not on the
basis of its popular acceptance and influence [this echoes Plato’s condemnation of what he
derisively called the “democratization of truth”].
The only absolutely general standard of rational criticism is that a theory mustn’t contain
mutually-contradictory propositions.
- 144 -
B. Types of Theories
Ethical theories express some degree of preference or distaste about reality in accordance
with certain a priori standards of evaluation. Some ethical theories state ideal goals towards
which reality ought to be changed. [Chapter #19 contains ethical theories.]
Metaphysical theories are attempts to discover the ultimate nature of reality transcending
the observable. [This chapter contains metaphysical theories.]
Empirical theories are generalizations about observable realities. [This chapter contains
empirical theories preliminary to and supportive of the metaphysical theories presented.]
A political theory is a disinterested search for knowledge of political and social reality. It is
a set of empirically-validated, logically-ordered, and functionally-related propositions about the
actual political behavior of individuals and societies. It contains (1) factual statements about the
existing posture of affairs, (2) causal statements about probabilities, and (3) value statements.
[Chapter #19 contains political theories as an illustration and application of the ethical theories
treated.]
C. The Multiverse
Before one can venture an intelligent decision concerning what to do with one’s existence,
one must know what that existence is and in what environment it is situated. Many of history’s
major religions and philosophies came into being in order to address this problem. While some
of their proposed explanations are æsthetically and/or emotionally attractive and have gained
many devotees, this in itself does not make any one of them true - merely popular.
The Temple of Set proposes its solution after having considered and dismissed the
alternatives as untrue in whole or in par
t. We consider our position to be the only correct one -
not because we are intolerant of competition or comparison, but rather because we do not accept
the notion of coexisting but incompatible “truths”. If there is an evident fallacy or unknown
factor in the truth as we understand it, then we must address and if possible correct it - or at
least identify the fallacy or factor and qualify the stated truth accordingly. But to say “ours is just
one approach, and many others are just as good” is an evasion of responsibility and would
reduce the concept of “truth” to merely a matter of whim [or popularity].
Most humans assume “the Universe” to be the totality of existence, by which they mean the
physical assemblage of matter and energy along with whatever presence humanity has within it.
This necessarily reduces that human presence to a mere aspect or reflection of that physicality.
Setian philosophy rejects such crude oversimplification as both factually inaccurate and
intellectually lazy. Since “uni-” implies a whole, we begin by replacing “the Universe” with
“Multiverse”: an infinite multiplicity of -verses. This Multiverse is divided into a single
assemblage of matter/energy [balanced cosmically by an equivalence of antimatter and
antienergy] which we shall call the Objective Universe (OU), and individual perceived and/or
created -verses generated by each self-aware conscious entity: Subjective Universes (SU).
D. The Objective Universe
1. Origin
The issue of the origin of the OU is crucial to conventional religions and most philosophies.
There are two alternatives:
- 145 -
• Something created it at a point in time, or
• It has always existed, and therefore no creating agent was/is necessary.
Since infinites of anything can only be theoretically conceptualized, and then with great
difficulty, most humans find the “created” option easier to assume. If this option is true,
however, it necessitates the existence of a creative, originating agency prior and superior to the
OU: conventionally called “gods”/“God”. This in turn necessitates an origin and source for said
g/God(s), which then requires an even higher/prior source, ad infinitum. Conventional human
religions generally limit the conversation to just the first g/G, considering that difficult enough
with which to grapple. [This of course does not make the annoying “higher/prior” question go
away.]
Similarly swept under the rug is the reason for the OU’s creation and composition.
Conventional religions simply presume that g/G did it on whim, which is as good an answer as
any. Nevertheless in the latter part of the 20th Century CE this consideration annoyed an upstart
field of philosophy called “Existentialism”, which, in the vernacular of one of its laureates Jean-
Paul Sartre, regarded the phenomenon of physical existence to be intrusive, jarring, and obscene
to the point of causing “nausea” in the human apprehender. The implicit premise is that a
totality of nonexistence, an “absentiverse”, would be more serene. While abstractly that is hard
to dispute, it also begs the question: The OU is very obviously here; and, nauseated or not,
humans must deal with it. [Existentialists tend to shun a reasoned solution in favor of
unmotivated instinct.]
Additionally with the “creation” option there is the question of “the artist’s canvas”. The OU
consists of a presumably finite amount of extant phenomena: the aforementioned matter/
antimatter/energy. Beyond this composition lies ... what? A theoretically infinite expanse of
nothingness? Does such an “unpainted canvas” also necessitate its original establishment? Or, as
Existentialism postulates, is it a state of inherent purity requiring absolutely nothing external to
its nonself?
As if these causality consequences aren’t annoying enough in themselves, they also imply a
unidirectional timeline from creation to omnipresence or entropic exhaustion. This in turn
implies a purpose to the process, and for intelligent beings a mission for them. It is just such a
mission that conventional religions profess to recognize and advocate.
The alternative to this creation presumption and all of its baggage is almost blissful in its
simplicity: It is that there was no point or purpose of creation, no ultimate end, and of course no
pathway or mission between them. Rather the OU has always existed as it is, and always will
continue to. No “creative concept” or agency is thus needed. The concept of “time” refers to the
measurement of changing objects/energies and the relationships between them, but is
meaningless in terms of some overall forced-march. In time-theory a directed OU is
characterized by “linear time”, and its destination called “eschatology”. The conventional religion
of Judaism and its Christian and Islamic variations are eschatological, which accounts for their
climate of dogmatic belief and obedience.
By contrast, ancient metaphysical schools such as that of Egypt perceived time as “cyclical”
or “circular”. Virtue and healthy living were sought in harmony with the constant cycles and
permanences of nature, for which there was no element of urgency. In the millennia of recorded
Egyptian history, there was no essential difference between the first and the last dynasties save
in their incarnated personalities. “Progress” would have been thought an odd notion indeed.
Cosmologically the Temple of Set inclines to the timelessness of the second existential
option. The neteru - the universal Principles espoused by Ayesha, the Forms of Pythagoras and
Plato - were, are, and will be eternal in the precise sense of that term. Worship of them is to be
found in harmony, not slavery.
- 146 -
2. Enforcement: Proof of the Neteru
While there is no necessity to establish creation of the OU per se, its stability and
perpetuation is another matter entirely. Everywhere and at every moment it is characterized by
consistency in its behavior: what philosophers generally refer to as “natural law”. This
consistency exists, the OU is not a random, kaleidoscopic chaos, because a force greater than it,
beyond it, insists upon its structure and order: the neteru.
The collective natural law of the neteru is perceived, identified, and interrelated by human
beings for the simple reason that their consciousness is apart from it and can thus apprehend it.
It is this “ability of perspective” which is a characteristic of the “neter not of the neteru”: Set.
It is this same Setian perspective, this “otherness”, which enables beings with the Gift of Set
to imagine and create in disregard of natural law, or more accurately in various
“rearrangements”, as in reshaping the wood of a tree into a table or creating fantastic works of
art, music, architecture, and literature.
In judicious sensitivity and æsthetics such straying from natural law is both harmless and
stimulating. However when humankind seeks to disrupt or destroy the harmony of the neteru at
its most essential and sublime, the consequences can be truly blasphemous, as in the haphazard
destabilization of atomic order to produce fission and fusion bombs of dreadful destructiveness.
In the conceit of “mastering nature”, rash scientists may well find that it is easier to open
forbidden doors than to safely close them.
3. Contentment in Plato’s Cave
In his Republic Plato allegorizes a darkened cave in which the ignorant are chained so that
they cannot see the daylight outside. It is the calling of the true philosopher, admonishes Plato,
to unchain these prisoners and enable them to find their way to the light.
Where the ordering and enforcement of nature - the super-nature, the neteru - are
concerned, there are two classes of cave-dwellers who don’t see them: atheists and agnostics.
While Setians are under no obligation to unchain them, a few clarifications are in order
concerning them. By way of mitigation it may be acknowledged that their attitudes are generally
in rejection of the emotionally vulgar and sadistic God of Judaism/Christianity/Islam, not the
more subtle and sublime neteru of the Egyptians.
Atheists maintain that no conscious or intelligent entity exists either “as” nature or, even
more nonsensibly, “above” it. The OU is a nonconscious, automatic machine, nothing more. How
it came to exist, and why it behaves as it does, are therefore “unanswerable questions”, to which
it is pointless to expend any time or attention. In support of their intransigence atheists point to
the complete absence of any actual supernatural discretionary behavior apart from mythology.
Agnostics consider themselves more reasonable by merely asserting a lack of evidence one
way or the other: God cannot be proved or disproved, so the only sensible course is to table the
question, presumably indefinitely.
The omnipresence and enforcement of natural law do in fact establish “supernature”, but at
a level of abstraction beyond the capabilities or comprehension of these contented cave-dwellers.
They may be left to bask undisturbed in their shadow-existence.
Ironically conventional religion-adherents do not counter the aversion of atheists and
agnostics by the straightforward proof of the OU order/enforcement phenomenon discussed
above. It is as though its very obviousness and simplicity blind them to it, like fish unaware of
water because it is “everywhere”. Instead over the centuries they have advanced clumsy,
torturous “proofs”, such as the assumed need for a creator and slavemaster God as imagined in
The Temple of Set I Page 26