O9A Insight Role
O9A Insight Role

A recent essay {1} – the second of a three part series, much of which series is devoted to the Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A) – is a rather strange and somewhat contradictory work for at least three reasons.

First, the exposition of the philosophy Heidegger, which is informative, balanced, reasonably detailed and reasonably accurate. Second, because the author makes some valid points about ONA philosophy and praxis and about its influence, albeit that such (mostly covert) influence is seldom appreciate by self-described, Levey-inspired, ‘satanists’. Third, because the author, when discussing the ONA, apparently cannot resist from making pejorative comments about Myatt – “pompous pseudo-intellectual crap,” “mental-o-path” – and includes a link to some internet article about by some anonymous person which makes malicious accusations about Myatt based on no factual evidence whatsoever. {2}

In addition, the author – in common with many other authors who via the internet write about the ONA – makes the presumption that David Myatt = Anton Long even though no actual evidence from primary sources is provided (or referenced) regarding such a claim, and not attempt made to explain (a) that Myatt has always denied being Anton Long, and (b) that, to date, no one has provided any factual evidence from primary sources to substantiate such a claim.

It is thus difficult to ascertain just who the intended audience of these articles are, and what the intent the author has. For the tone varies from fairly detached, when for instance discussing Heidegger, to almost propagandistic when discussing Myatt and when asserting that Myatt=Long and when providing a web-link to malicious allegations without providing (as in the custom with unbiased internet essays) a web-link to where such allegations are debunked or countered {2}.

Nevertheless, despite there reservations, the article – and the previous one – are worthwhile reads providing as they do some informative insights regarding how the ONA relates to contemporary esotericism and how, in the author’s opinion, it relates to modern philosophy.

In our view, the author rather overstates the relation of the ONA to modern philosophy and especially to Heidegger. For two reasons. Firstly, that Anton Long – whomsoever he was – developed and refined ONA esoteric philosophy as he himself ventured along the Seven Fold Way and acquired more insight. Thus the older, 1970s-1990s, texts (such as the Symbols and Being MS in the 1980s Naos) should be read in the context of what Anton Long wrote from around the year 2000 until his retirement in 2011.

Second, even though the raison d’etre of ONA praxis is the same now as it always was it has been more eloquently and probably more accurately expressed by Anton Long in his later writings, as the following quotes illustrate.

1. {quote} Our real work, both as individuals and as an Order – our Magnum Opus – is genuinely esoteric and Occult, and thus concerned with lapis philosophicus and not with some purely causal self-indulgence, or some ephemeral outer change in some causal form or forms, or with using such forms to try and effect some external change. {3} {/quote}

2. {quote} There is only lapis philosophicus and its individual discovery. There are only those, on their own individual journeyings, journeying in their own way in their own species of Time, and who may or may not arrive at their planned destination. For we are life, the Cosmos; we are Time beyond its perceived illusive dichotomy and are and have been and will be Being, presenced and unpresenced, particular and general, past-present-future, and beyond the illusion, the deception, of ‘a being’ and of ‘beings’. {4} {/quote}

2. {quote} The story ends with an anticipated discovery: that the penultimate stage (however named: Magus, GrandMaster, GrandLadyMaster) of that life-long genuine Occult journey which begins with initiation (of whatever kind:
hermetic, ceremonial, self) is the same whether one began on, and thence followed, what has been described as ‘The Left Hand Path’, or whether one began on, and thence followed, what has been described as ‘The Right Hand Path’. For in the context of beyond The Abyss, such designations based on such a dichotomy become, and are, irrelevant because without sense and meaning. That is, the ‘outer secret’ of the inner, the real, the living, alchemy is that the end and the result of both our apparently separate journeys is the same; the same place, the same understanding, the same knowledge. For wisdom is undivided, the same for all of us, whatever we believed or assumed when we began. {5} {/quote}

2017 ev

{1} https://en.kalitribune.com/prolegomena-to-any-future-satanism-order-of-the-nine-angles-and-supremacy-of-the-fringe-pt-2/
{2} The de-bunking of that malicious allegation is included on p.7 of the following old (2010) file: https://wyrdsister.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/lies-of-a-moac1.pdf
The debunking post was taken from a now deceased internet forum where that particular Myatt stalker used to regularly ply their allegations. Consequent to such allegations, someone O9A (in her role as a journalist) contacted the relevant Police authority who confirmed that in respect of that particular incident no complaint about Myatt had been received from anyone, anonymous or otherwise, and nor was Myatt the subject of any investigation. Subsequent research by the journalist revealed that any incident involving or complaint to the Police or investigation by any Police force regarding Myatt was always referred to Special Branch and thence to MI5, given that he was – between the 1990s and until around 2011 – a “significant person of interest” given his violent neo-nazi past, his arrest in 1998 for incitement to murder, and his subsequent support of bin Laden and al-Qaida.
See also http://defendingthetruth.com/crime-punishment/11898-disability-now-hate-crime-survey-3.html
{3} O9A Adversarial Action – Success or Failure? 122yfayen
{4} The Enigmatic Truth. 2011
{5} Lapis Philosophicus. 2/2/123 yfayen