Hermeticism, Learning, Wisdom, And The O9A

Order Of Nine Angles
Order Of Nine Angles
°°°°°

 

A person using their real identity recently wrote, via the internet, regarding a certain Mr Myatt – and regarding the recent publication of Myatt’s translations of and commentaries on texts from the Corpus Hermeticum {1} – that:

               [he] played a key role in my own personal moving on from the nonsense of ONA egoism, to labor over something truly important, and eternal…the time, dedication, and insight, poured into this production is life changing… [An] example which modern youths ought to be pursuing, rather than vampires, naked women, torture worship, and all manner of childish and vulgar nonsense, going, and having gone, nowhere.

Which is exactly how we view the matter, but not only in respect of modern satanists in general (including some who profess to be O9A) but also in respect of devotees of a Western Left Hand Path.

For there is Mr Myatt – out there, in the real world – doing real stuff (translations, commentaries) that makes a real difference vis-a-vis understanding Occult, esoteric, theory and praxis, ancient and modern, by explaining the hermeticism that underlies all modern Occultism including the so-called ‘occultism’ that derives from the medieval Magian distortion.

Meanwhile, most self-described modern ‘satanists’ continue to egoistically preen themselves, wallowing as they do in the symbols, symbolism and accoutrements of death and decay; infected as they are with the “satanism as symbol of the carnal selfish self” plebeian abstraction spread by Levey the Yahoudi.

As a certain Anton Long wrote over a decade ago,

               the true Dark Arts are concerned with style; with understated elegance; with natural charisma; with personal charm; and with manners. That is, with a certain personal character and a certain ethos. The character is that of the natural gentleman, of the natural noble lady; the ethos is that of good taste, of refinement, of a civilized attitude. {2}

The Order of Nine Angles has always championed

               culture, manners, learning… [Championing] a certain noble, civilized, aristocratic, attitude where there is a disdain for uncultured, ill-mannered, vulgar plebs and their antics {3}

According to the O9A,

               Knowledge is divided into causal and acausal knowing, which compliment each other, with both regarded as necessary to attain wisdom.

Causal knowing is regarded as attainable through reason, scholarly learning, rational observation (experimental science), self-insight, exeatic living, and learning from practical experience (pathei-mathos).

Acausal knowing is regarded as attainable through dark/sinister empathy, Insight Roles, Grade Rituals, Dark Arts, and sorcery. Dark Arts include Esoteric Chant and The Star Game. The Seven Fold Way is considered a practical means of acquiring acausal knowing. {4}

Thus, those who have actually studied the O9A in detail understand that,

               One of the main reasons for the existence of esoteric groups such as the Order of Nine Angles is to be a living hereditary repository of a certain type of knowledge – kunnleik – and to personally, directly, encourage some individuals to acquire the culture, the habit, of learning – practical, scholarly, esoteric – and thus enable them to move in the traditional esoteric manner toward the goal of discovering and thence acquiring wisdom; and which wisdom is a balanced personal judgement and a particular knowledge of a pagan, Occult, kind to do with livings beings, human nature, Nature and “the heavens”. {5}

It should be no surprise, then, that this “particular knowledge of a pagan, Occult, kind to do with livings beings, human nature, Nature and the heavens” is what the eight Greek texts of the Corpus Hermeticum that Myatt has translated, and commented upon, are all about.

As a certain English poet wrote in 1873 CE, “the separation between the Greeks and us is due principally to the Hebraistic culture we receive in childhood.” All those tall stories of Jewish folk from the Bible…

T.W.S.
2017 ev

{1} David Myatt. Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates. 2017. ISBN-13: 978-1976452369
{2} The Gentleman’s – and Noble Ladies – Brief Guide to The Dark Arts. 119 yfayen.
{3} Presencing Azoth. Documents of the Inner O9A. 122 yfayen.
{4} The Radical Occult Philosophy of Anton Long. 2015.
{5} https://wyrdsister.wordpress.com/2017/09/17/knowledge-the-internet-and-the-o9a/


Advertisements

Flavius Josephus: Pseudo-Historian

Order Of Nine Angles
Order Of Nine Angles

In a July 2017 article {1} David Myatt quotes from one Flavius Josephus, the much vaunted Jewish ‘historian’ who lived during the time of Vespasian, the Roman general whose son destroyed the Jewish temple in Jerusalem.

Myatt’s article reminded me of how unreliable Josephus is as an historical source, as a ‘witness to history’; how boastful he was about himself, and how his writings (such as The Antiquities of the Jews, and The Jewish War) are still used as a reliable source by authors who have failed to ascertain the historical facts.

Among the uncorroborated boasts of Josephus was his claim to be of “royal blood” and that he was so knowledgable at 14 years of age that High Priests and other influential people came to him for advice (The Life of Flavius Josephus, 1) . Other uncorroborated boasts are that during the Judean rebellion against Rome he was high-ranking military officer who was responsible for raising and training a large army and for fortifying cities, and that when the people of Jerusalem believed false rumors of his death they were all in morning for a month.

When what he writes can be checked with other historical accounts his errors are obvious. To present just four from dozens of examples. (1) Comparing the account of Josephus regarding the camp of Mithridates by the Nile (Antiquities, 14. 128-136) with the accounts of Cassius Dio (42.41ff), and of Alus Hirtius in De Bello Alexandrino (26ff) shows that Josephus got his facts wrong. (2) Comparing the account of Josephus regarding the expulsion of Hebrews (Antiquities, 12.414ff) with sources such as For Flaccus (28) by Cicero contradicts Josephus. (3) Josephus confuses the Persian Kings Darius the Second and Darius the Third. (4) Josephus (Antiquities, 168) claimed that Nehemiah travelled to Jerusalem in the 25th year of the reign of Xerxes despite the fact that the reign of Xerxes only lasted for 20 years.

In summary, because of his proven unreliability and his boasting Josephus comes across as someone repeating uncorroborated hearsay; as biased, and as self-serving. Someone, that is, who in this day and age would not – or who should not – be considered a reliable witness.

K.S.
2017

{1} https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2017/07/05/a-note-on-the-term-jews-in-the-gospel-of-john/


The Avenging Alastoras

Order Of Nine Angles
°°°°°
The Avenging Alastoras

 

We read an awful lot, these days, in books, articles, and via the internet, about ‘sorcery’ and invokations, almost all of which books and articles describe or rely on the Magian influenced goetic ‘tradition’ as exemplified by the misnamed Hermetic Order Of The Golden Dawn.

Thus it is refreshing to once again revisit actual Western pagan sources {1} dating from centuries before The Magian Distortion; that is, before the ‘grimoire’ tradition with its summoning forth of Hebrew, and Hebrewesque, ‘demons’ and entities, as beloved by the likes of Creepless Crowley and Howard – the Yahoudi – Levey.

This visit of ours is to Tractate 13 – an evocative name by itself – of the ancient, Greco-Roman, Corpus Hermeticum, as brought to life by the recent translation of Mr David Myatt {2}. The tractate itself deals with palingenesis and Greco-Roman (Western) mysticism – a Western mysticism perhaps relevant to the ‘sinisterly-numinous’ way of the Order of Nine Angles – and our extract below deals with both palingenesis and those avenging deities, the Alastoras, mentioned by Klytemnestra after she, in revenge, had honourably killed her husband and his mistress Cassandra and, covered in blood, stands over the body of her husband:

     Do not add to those words that it was me who was the mistress of Agamemnon
Since the wife of this corpse presents herself here
As that most ancient fierce Avenger.
It is Atreus, he is of that cruel feast,
Who, in payment for that, has added to his young victims
This adult one. {3}

It is probably just coincidence that one of the Alastoras is named by Myatt as Vengerisse, given that in his Mythos Of Vindex he named the female Vindex as Vengerisse.

Alastoras and The Vengeress

An extract from sections 7-11 of tractate 13.

{begin quote}
     Go within: and an arriving. Intend: and an engendering. Let physical perceptibility rest, and divinity will be brought-into-being. Refine yourself, away from the brutish Alastoras of Materies.

Alastoras are within me, then, father?

Not just a few, my son, but many and terrifying.

I do not apprehend them, father.

My son, one Vengeress is Unknowing; the second, Grief. The third, Unrestraint; the fourth, Lascivity. The fifth, Unfairness; the sixth, Coveter. The seventh, Deceit; the eighth, Envy. The ninth, Treachery; the tenth, Wroth. The eleventh, Temerity; the twelfth, Putridity.

In number, these are twelve but below them are numerous others who, my son, compel the inner mortal – bodily incarcerated – to suffer because of perceptibility. But they absent themselves – although not all at once – from those to whom theos is generous, which is what the Way and Logos of Palingenesis consists of […]

To us: arrivance of Knowledge of Theos. On arrival: Unknowing is banished. My son, to us: arrivance of Knowledge of Delightfulness: on arriving, Grief runs away to those who have the room.

The influence invoked following Delightfulness is Self-Restraint: a most pleasant influence. Let us, my son, readily welcome her: arriving, she immediately pushes Unrestraint aside.

The fourth invoked is Perseverance who is influxious against Lascivity. Which Grade, my son, is the foundation of Ancestral Custom: observe how without any deliberation Unfairness was cast out. My son, we are vindicated since Unfairness has departed.

The sixth influence invoked for us – against Coveter – is community. With that departed, the next invokation: Actualis, and thus – with Actualis presenced – does Deceit run away. Observe, my son, how with Actualis presenced and Envy absent, the noble has been returned. For, following Actualis, there is the noble, together with Life and Phaos.

No more does the retribution of Skotos supervene, for, vanquished, they [all] whirlingly rush away […]

With a quietude, father, engendered by theos, the seeing is not of the sight from the eyes but that through the noetic actuosity of the capabilities. I am in the Heavens; on Earth; in Water; in Air. I am in living beings, in plants; in the womb, before the womb, after the womb. Everywhere.
{end quote}

As a certain English poet wrote in 1873 CE, “the separation between the Greeks and us is due principally to the Hebraistic culture we receive in childhood.” To wit, those tall stories about Hebrew folk from the Bible that the children of the West have for centuries been indoctrinated with.

T.W.S., 2017

°°°°°

{1} Our first visit is described here: https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2017/06/30/western-pagan-curses/

{2} Myatt’s translation of tractate XIII is available, together with his comprehensive scholarly commentary, here: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/tractate-xiii/

{3} Aeschylus, Agamemnon, as translated by DW Myatt.


Toward Understanding The Acausal

Order Of Nine Angles
Order Of Nine Angles

Editorial Note: We reproduce here Myatt’s seminal essay Understanding The Acausal which explains, in philosophical detail, his concept of the acausal. Which concept of the acausal the Order of Nine Angles has – with acknowledgment to Myatt – made one of the foundations of its Occult weltanschauung.

 

Understanding The Acausal

 

In essence, what I have termed the acausal is not a generalization – a concept – deriving from a collocation of assumed, ideated, or observed Phainómenon, but instead is just a useful term used to distinguish a particular perceiveration from other perceiverations. This particular perceiveration is the wordless knowing which empathy can reveal and which a personal πάθει μάθος often inclines us toward: a revealing of the φύσις (physis) of some beings, of the non-causal connexions which exist between living beings, and of how we humans – as beings possessed of consciousness – are not only an affective connexion to other living beings but also can consciously decide to cease to harm other living beings.

For convenience, this revealing has been termed acausal-knowing to distinguish it from the causal-knowing that results from observing Phainómenon.

Hitherto, the φύσις of beings and Being has most usually been apprehended, and understood, in one of three ways or by varied combinations of those three ways. The first such perceiveration is that deriving from our known physical senses – by Phainómenon – and by what has been posited on the basis of Phainómenon, which has often meant the manufacture, by we human beings, of categories and abstract forms which beings (including living beings) are assigned to on the basis of some feature that has been outwardly observed or which has been assumed to be possessed by some beings or collocation of beings.

The second such perceiveration derives from positing a ‘primal cause’ – often denoted by God, or a god or the gods, but sometimes denoted by some mechanism, or some apparently inscrutable means, such as ‘karma’ or ‘fate’ – and then understanding beings (especially living beings) in terms of that cause: for example as subject to, and/or as determined or influenced by or dependant on, that primal cause.

The third such perceiveration derives from positing a human faculty of reason and certain rules of reasoning whereby it is possible to dispassionately examine collocations of words and symbols which relate, or which are said to relate, to what is correct (valid, true) or incorrect (invalid, false) and which collocations are considered to be – or which are regarded by their proponents as representative of – either knowledge or as a type of, a guide to, knowing.

All three of these perceiverations, in essence, involve denotatum, with our being, for example, understood in relation to some-thing we or others have posited and then named and, importantly, consider or believe applies or can apply (i) to those who, by virtue of the assumption of ipseity, are not-us, and (ii) beyond the finite, the living, personal moment of the perceiveration.

Thus, in the case of Phainómenon we have, in assessing and trying to understand our own φύσις as a human being, assumed ipseity – a separation from others – as well as having assigned ourselves (or been assigned by others) to some supra-personal category on the basis of such things as place of birth, skin colour, occupation (or lack of one), familial origin or status (or wealth or religion), some-thing termed ‘intelligence’, physical ability (or the lack thereof), our natural attraction to those of a different, or the same, gender; and so on.

In the case of a primal cause, we have again assumed ipseity because implicit in such a primal cause is a causal progression of individuals: from what-we-are (or are said to have been created for or born as) to what-we-can-be if we follow the correct way or praxis as described or revealed, for example, by a religious prophet, teacher, group or by some authority. Thus, in Buddhism there is the supra-personal Noble Eightfold Way which it is said can lead to the cessation of dukkha and thus to nibbana; while in Christianity there are the supra-personal teachings of Jesus of Nazareth as recorded in the gospels, a following of which it is said can lead the individual to eternal life in samayim/οὐρανός/caelum – the Kingdom of Heaven.

In the case of the perceiveration termed reason, there is again denotatum because of the assumptions – codified in certain supra-personal rules – whereby what is denoted by ‘true’ and what is denoted by ‘false’ may be ascertained and which ‘truth’ or falsity is also by that very denotatum supra-personal and ‘valid/invalid’ beyond the finite, the living, personal moment.

However, and in contrast to those three perceiverations, acausal-knowing is a direct and personal – an individual – revealing of beings and Being which does not depend on denoting or naming or causality or the assumption of a primal cause, and which knowing, being individual in φύσις and concerned with living beings, cannot be abstracted out from the living personal moment of the perceiveration. Thus, such a perceiveration – in respect of other human beings – does not and cannot involve and does not and cannot lead to any of the following: (i) any personal claim regarding possessing ‘the truth’ about some-thing; (ii) no ‘correct way or praxis’ or dogma or ideology which are assumed or believed to be applicable to anyone else; (iii) no understanding of or assumption of knowledge about others on the basis of assigning those others to some category or to some abstract form. Instead, there is only an intuition of the moment concerning one’s own φύσις and thus a wordless individual revealing of – a numinous knowing concerning – one’s own being and of one’s own relation to Being and to other living beings.

This particular revealing of beings and Being therefore means that our faculty of empathy – or more correctly, a developed faculty of human empathy – should perhaps be added to the four Aristotelian essentials [1], and which now five essentials can enable us to come to know both the reality external to ourselves and the reality of ourselves (our φύσις), as individuals. That is, it is the combination of causal-knowing and acausal-knowing that can incline us toward a knowing of Reality and thus which manifests thoughtful-reasoning, a reasoned or balanced judgement (σωφρονεῖν).

The nature of living-beings that empathy reveals is of Being coming-into-being through beings and manifest in the φύσις of those beings, and of the acausal connexions between all living-beings, sentient and otherwise, and this leads us to the understanding that our own self-identity, our separateness, and even our assumed uniqueness in causal Time and causal Space, are causal presumptions. That is, a product of Phainómenon, of only causal-knowing. Since such causal-knowing is incomplete, lacking as it does acausal-knowing, it would not seem to be a sound foundation to use in the matter of making ethical judgements, for such judgements should take into consideration what empathy reveals about Being and beings [2].

Acausal Postulations

It is possible, and certainly interesting although not necessary and possibly fallacious, to make some postulations regarding the nature of the acausal; that is, regarding the nature and extent and cause of the ‘acausal connexions’ between living beings that acausal-knowing reveals.

Such speculations are possibly fallacious because – while they may seem reasonable assumptions about the acausal – they (i) almost certainly impose assumed causal forms upon that-which, being acausal, might be and most probably is formless, and (ii) will of necessity involve denotatum and representation by some form of mathematics (either currently existing or yet to be developed).

Among the speculations that I have personally made in the past are the following. Of conceptualizing ‘the acausal’ as a continuum of acausal Space and acausal Time, in contrast to the causal geometrical Space and linear causal Time of the causal and four-dimensional continuum of Phainómenon familiar to us through sciences such as physics, chemistry, and astronomy. Such a speculation lead me to further postulate that this ‘acausal continuum’ could simply be ‘extra dimensions’ beyond four-dimensional causal space-time (a causal space-time currently conceptualized by mathematical models such as the one involving a Riemannian metric) with the cosmos therefore being an n-dimensional space-time of both causal and acausal dimensions where n (the number of dimensions) is greater than four but less than or equal to infinity, with the extra ‘acausal’ dimensions then offering an explanation for the difference in φύσις between living beings and ordinary matter. Which lead to another postulate regarding the existence of ‘acausal energy’ different from the causal energy known from sciences such as physics, and which ‘acausal energy’ is assumed to be what animates physical matter, imparting to that matter what we observe as life [3], with such animation not the result of some cause-and-effect (or even some assumed acausal effect) but rather the state of such matter being alive – a living-being (a biological organism) as distinct from a non-living being (ordinary physical matter). Living beings are therefore a nexus – nexions – between the acausal aspect (or dimensions) and the causal aspect (or four causal dimensions) of n-dimensional space-time. A further speculation is that of assuming that such acausal energy is a possibly observable attribute of a living-being having the hitherto causally-observed attributes of life. This then leads to the postulation of such acausal energy having certain attributes [4], and of some or all of these attributes possibly being observable by the development of observational/experimental techniques perhaps partly based on acausal energy, and of such acausal energy therefore being manifest or capable of being manifest, as energy sans beings, in the causal continuum, with such acausal energy forming the basis for an ‘acausal technology’ as distinct from our current causal technology of electronics, and machines, powered by electrical energy and/or involving the flow of things such as electrons.

Regarding these speculations about ‘acausal energy’, there is the analogy of the discovery of electricity. Static electricity was known for many centuries, but not really understood until the concept of positive and negative charges was postulated. Later, instruments such as the gold-leaf electroscope were invented for detecting and measuring such charges, followed by the invention of other instruments, such as frictional machines and the Leyden jar, to produce and accumulate, or store, electric charges, and to produce small ‘galvanic currents’ or electricity. Then the experimental scientist Faraday showed that ‘galvanic currents’, magnetism and static charges were all related, and developed what we now call an electro-magnetic generator to produce electricity. Thus, from such simple experimental beginnings, our world and our lives have been transformed by machines and equipment using electricity, and by the electronics developed from electricity. One might therefore speculate that the experimental discovery of the ‘acausal energy’ that animates living beings making them ‘alive’ and different from ordinary matter, might similarly transform our lives.

Conclusion

Such speculations aside, all that the acausal-knowing which empathy currently reveals to us is: (i) of a personal and wordless knowing of other living-beings and of ourselves in the immediacy-of-the-moment, and (ii) of how the acausal itself is not some ‘essence’ behind or beyond the causal and beyond causal forms, since such an ‘essence’ is but itself a postulated ideation.

Or, expressed somewhat differently, our acausal-knowing is simply a revealing of the matrix of nexions which are living-beings, and thus of The Cosmic Perspective: of an acceptance of ourselves as but one fragile fallible microcosmic nexion only temporarily presenced on one planet orbiting one star in one Galaxy in a Cosmos of billions of Galaxies. This is the essence of wu-wei – a knowing, a feeling, of Being; a knowing, a feeling, of the numinous. It is also the same kind of wordless understanding hinted in that ancient wisdom termed Tao, and yet which even then, as now, could not and cannot be described by or contained within that one, or any, particular term, such as ‘the acausal’ or ‘gnosis’.

David Myatt
2011
(Revised September 2014)

Notes

[1] Among these Aristotelian essentials are: (i) Reality (existence) exists independently of us and our consciousness, and thus independent of our senses; (ii) our limited understanding of this independent ‘external world’ depends for the most part upon our senses – that is, on what we can see, hear or touch; that is, on what we can observe or come to know via our senses; (iii) logical argument, or reason, is perhaps the most important means to knowledge and understanding of and about this ‘external world’; (iv) the cosmos (existence) is, of itself, a reasoned order subject to rational laws.

[2] I briefly touched on the question of empathy in relation to ethics in my 2013 essay Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God – Some Personal Musings.

[3] Currently, we observe or assume life by the following seven attributes: a living organism respires; it moves; it grows or changes; it excretes waste; it is sensitive to, or aware of, its environment; it can reproduce itself, and it can nourish itself.

[4] For convenience, the acausal energy that may (if it exists) be detected in the causal could be considered to be manifest, to us, in our causal phenomenal universe, by means of what we may call acausal charge (analogous to electrical charge), such that the acausal energy that manifests itself in the causal – within, for example, living causal beings – possessess the property of propagating, or emitting, by its flux (change), such ‘acausal charge’. Hence, a living causal being could be conceptualized as physical, causal, matter plus ‘acausal charge’.

Some of the attributes of acausal energy, expressed in terms of acausal mass (analogous to causal mass/energy) might be the following:

(1) An acausal object, or mass, can change without any external force acting upon it – that is, the change is implicit in that acausal matter, by virtue of its inherent acausal charge.

(2) The rate of change of an acausal object, or mass, is proportional to its acausal charge.

(3) The change of an acausal object can continue until all its acausal charge has been dissipated.

(4) Acausal charge is always conserved.

(5) An acausal object, or mass, is acted upon by all other acausal matter in the cosmos.

(6) Each acausal object in the cosmos attracts or repels every other acausal object in the physical cosmos with a magnitude which is proportional to the product of the acausal charges of those objects, and inversely proportional to the distance between them as measured in causal space.

°°°°°
Article source: https://perceiverations.wordpress.com/towards-understanding-the-acausal/
°°°°°°°
Related:
The Pagan O9A (pdf)

A Phantom Menace? Part Two

Order Of Nine Angles
Order Of Nine Angles
A Phantom Menace, Part Two

 

Recent comment made by the author of a blog-post about the Order of Nine Angles:

§ {quote} “Never being in UK, I tend to suspend judgement about who could be under the protection of British internal secret service, yet [David] Myatt’s CV just forces one to assume this, even from my distant vantage point. He himself declares, in his autobiographical sketch A Wyrdful Life how at one point he joined Column 88 and adds that the group was widely considered to be a part of GLADIO network for England. Moreover, the fact that charges against him always tend to be dropped is also interesting. The mentality of insight role, on the other hand, is detectable in the whole range of nefarious characters in the domain of alt media, especially pro-Russian, far Right ones like Katehon. Consequent practitioner of this method would make a very useful intelligence asset […]

Nazi street fighter and quite accomplished Classical philologist. Very intelligent, very sinister.” {/quote}

Comment made in a podcast (via blogtalkradio) about recent ‘terrorist’ events in Charlottesville:

§ {quote} “The order of the nine angles controls both sides in this manufactured conflict…” {/quote}

The usual conspiracy theories, via twitter and snapchat:

§ {quote} Charlottesville: The violent cult Order of the Nine Angles is celebrating their victory. {/quote}

§ {quote} The satanic neo-nazi terrorist supporting group order of the nine angels were behind the violence. Avoid at all costs. {/quote}

§ {quote} Is Bannon a Member of the Order of Nine Angles? {/quote}

§ {quote} Been researching the Order of the Nine Angles for a novel I’m writing: they are a horrific cult for so many reasons {/quote}

§ {quote} Islamic State: the psychopathic O.N.A. in action. They promote beheading their enemies just like I.S.” {/quote}

§ {quote} Beheading: check out the ONA mousa of swords card from their sinister tarot pack.” {/quote}

Finally, just to be fair and balanced, The Usual Magian Cliches from “We Love Levey” mundanes:

§ {quote} I can’t believe I used to take this garbage seriously. Anton Long is a joke and anybody who’s anybody knows it. {/quote} N.B. In another comment the person stated he loved the Tyson book “Undisputed Truth” so much he wanted it tattooed on his face…

§ {quote} The ONA are nothing more than a bunch of High School kids posting stuff on the net for Shitz N Giggles.” {/quote}

°°°°°°°
Related:
https://wyrdsister.wordpress.com/2017/06/28/myatt-a-phantom-menace/

Satanists Relying On Translations

Order Of Nine Angles
ΔΔΔΔΔ

One of the many indicative things about many modern self-described satanists – and self-described followers of a Western Left Hand Path – is that they pride themselves on their knowledge and understanding while having to rely on the translations of others.

This pride and reliance is obvious whenever such people write or pontificate about satanism, about occultism, or about other matters, and when they discuss such matters on internet forums and the like. It is indicative about them because they believe – and are prone to prattle on about – that their modern satanism (based as it is on, or inspired as it is by, the works of Howard Stanton Levey) means, among others things, self-empowerment, an abnegation of self-deceit, and a self-reliance.

For example, such self-described satanists – in reference to matters such as ‘satan’ and ‘evil’ – are often prone (to bolster their argument) to quote from the Old Testament, while in those and other matters they quote from the likes of Nietzsche, or Jung, or Plato, or Epicurus, or whatever author is flavor of the month, but with all their quotations being in translation and translated by others. So much for their “self-reliance”.

Thus they are relying on the interpretations and/or on the opinions of others and do not seem to understand that such prideful insistence (contrary to the facts) and such a reliance on, such a trust in, the interpretations/opinions of others fundamentally contradicts the satanism they adhere to or believe in or defend.

For when confronted with this reliance – with this taking on faith what someone else or some many has and have written – they do not have the self-honesty, the self-knowing, to accept and to openly state that their own knowledge about such matters is limited but instead make excuses, insisting, for example, that “using a translation is irrelevant as long as my reasoning is correct,” that “it’s not about semantics,” and – of course – often claiming that they really do know what they are talking about even though they have no first-hand knowledge and understanding of primary sources, such as – in the case of the Old Testament – LXX, and in the case of authors such as Plato the appropriate texts in Ancient Greek.

Lacking such knowledge and understanding, they are – whatever excuses they make – merely presenting their own personal opinion about matters they are ill-informed about. In some cases, this lack of self-honesty, this lack of self-knowing, amounts to pretentiousness or pseudo-intellectualism; in other cases it is simply a manifestation of unchecked egoism and arrogance.

That so many self-described modern satanists – and so many self-described followers of a modern Western Left Hand Path – cannot bring themselves to admit, to themselves and to others, that their knowledge and understanding of certain matters is profoundly limited, certainly says a lot about the type of person that such ‘modern satanism’ – and such modern Left Hand Paths – attract, and a lot about the type of modern satanism and the type of Left Hand Paths such persons follow, believe in, or have been inspired by.

KS
2016


On Sorcery In Virgil’s Aeneid

O9A Insight Role
O9A Insight Role
°°°°°°°

 

On Sorcery In Virgil’s Aeneid

 
Editorial Note: Given the interest generated by this part of the recent O9A text Some Questions And Answers About The Order of Nine Angles (2017) Part Two we reproduce it here as stand-alone post.

The item in question – titled On Sorcery In Virgil’s Aeneid – was a note written by Anton Long around six years ago which was published in Azoth, an internal ONA bulletin. The note includes Anton Long’s translation of the Latin quote by Virgil.

To provide some context, what is evoked by Virgil – the immolation of a lady (Dido) who would rather die than dishonour herself by having to live with a barbarian, and who is angry at Aeneas for deserting her and who seeks aid through The Craft via a Dragon-friendly priestess – is a manifestation of the Western ethos and a world away from what is evoked by the medieval grimoire, Magian influenced, tradition with its profusion of hierarchical ‘demons’, its alleged ‘secrets’, and its hollow promises that anyone can control such ‘demonic’ entities if they have the right accoutrements and the right Magian names.

 
[Beginning of article]

On Sorcery In Virgil’s Aeneid

 

The following text – along with an awful lot of classical literature – has long been misunderstood.

hinc mihi Massylae gentis monstrata sacerdos,
Hesperidum templi custos, epulasque draconi
quae dabat et sacros servabat in arbore ramos, (485)
spargens umida mella soporiferumque papaver.
haec se carminibus promittit solvere mentes
quas velit, ast aliis duras immittere curas,
sistere aquam fluviis et vertere sidera retro,
nocturnosque movet Manis: mugire videbis (490)
sub pedibus terram et descendere montibus ornos.
testor, cara, deos et te, germana, tuumque
dulce caput, magicas invitam accingier artis.

Here is a misinterpretation of the Latin, published in 1910, which completely distorts the meaning:

       “From thence is come a witch, a priestess, a Numidian crone, who guards the shrine of the Hesperides and feeds the dragon; she protects the fruit of that enchanting tree, and scatters there her slumbrous poppies mixed with honey-dew. Her spells and magic promise to set free what hearts she will, or visit cruel woes on men afar. She stops the downward flow of rivers, and turns back the rolling stars; on midnight ghosts she calls: her votaries hear earth bellowing loud below, while from the hills the ash-trees travel down. But, sister mine, thou knowest, and the gods their witness give, how little mind have I to don the garb of sorcery.”

Here is an interpretation which seeks to express what Virgil actually wrote:

       From there a priestess of the Massylian clan was made known to me – custodian as she was of the Temple of Hesperidum – who delivers food to the Dragon and protects the sacred branches of the Tree, sprinkling there moist honey and soporific seeds of poppy. She offers – to whomsoever she chooses – to release through song their feelings, and – for others – to let in lasting anxiety: to still the flowing waters and redirect the constellations to where they were; to drive away the Shades of Night. You shall perceive the Earth shake beneath her feet and the Mountain-Ash descend the mountains. And, my sister, upon the gods and by your dear life I bear witness that I reluctantly undertake the practice of The Craft.”

a) The word translated by song is carmen (as in Orff’s Carmina Burana) and might well be a reference to the power of song as evident in the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice.

The word translated by ‘feelings’ is mentes, although a suitable alternative translation would be ‘to free through song the heartache’ since the Latin and the context – abolere nefandi cuncta viri monumenta iuvat monstratque sacerdos, “that slimy man” – suggests the place in the body where strong emotions and feelings are considered to reside.

b) The phrase sistere aquam fluviis et vertere sidera retro is not meant to be taken literally, but rather metaphorically; as in ‘still the tears of heartache’ and ‘return to how things were’ before the anxiety. Similarly, nocturnosque movet Manis is turn away, move away, banish, the ‘ghosts’ that might haunt our sleepless nights.

c) The word translated by The Craft is magicas and which Latin word is derived from the Greek μαγικός with the etymology of the Greek word being uncertain, although μαγικός is the title of a work attributed, in the Suda, to Antisthenes, and by Diogenes Laertius to Aristotle (qv. V. Rose, Aristotelis Qui Ferebantur Librorum Fragmenta, Leipzig 1886). One suggestion was that the word derives from Magi, with the (popular but unproven) assumption being that the Magi were skilled in what is now termed ‘magick’ (or sorcery, γοητικός, qv. Aristotle Fragment 36), although there is evidence to suggest (qv. Fragments 33 and 35) that the ‘lost work’ with the title μαγικός – whomsoever the author was – treated the Magi as philosophers and not as sorcerers, with Plutarch in Adversus Colotem mentioning a work which dealt with Zoroaster as a philosopher.

In Ovid, Tacitus, and Pliny the Elder, magicus can be taken as meaning one or more of the following: (i) a particular type of chanting or singing, of an ancient kind different from what the word ‘incantation’ now implies; (ii) certain types of divination including what is now known as astrology; (iii) certain rites and practices, including human sacrifice (homo immolaretur); and (iv) the use of herbs to cure ailments and sickness. Pliny (Book XXX, iii) also comments that britannia hodieque eam adtonita celebrat tantis caerimoniis, ut dedisse Persis videri possit, “even now Britannia practices it so enthusiastically with such large ceremonies it is conceivable they gave it to the Persians.”

Hence to translate magicas here as ‘magic’ or ‘sorcery’ – replete as those words now are with accumulated meanings irrelevant to ancient times – is unhelpful, particularly as Pliny writes (in Book XXX, ii) that Homer’s Odyssey is based upon the Art (ars) in question and relates a legend that Pythagoras, Empedocles, Democritus, and Plato, all journeyed abroad to learn that Art.

Given what Ovid, Tacitus, and especially Pliny the Elder – and Homer in The Odyssey if we accept Pliny’s suggestion – wrote regarding the art that is magicas, then The Craft is a most suitable translation, redolent as it is of an ancient and almost forgotten Western esoteric tradition.

[End of article]


Questions For DM 2017: Swan Song Of A Mystic?

odal3

 

Swan Song Of A Mystic?

The latest effusion from Mr David Myatt, titled Some Questions For DWM 2017, is interesting for a variety of reasons not least of which is that it is permeated – as is his philosophy of pathei-mathos – with references to the classical culture of ancient Greece and Rome. It is also – perhaps unintentionally – revealing about Myatt’s character providing as it does facts about his life and how he now views his philosophy of pathei-mathos, which philosophy he has previously described as his weltanschauung, his own outlook on life.

The overall impression is of a man steeped in Western culture who is still ineluctably part of that culture but who – even though already withdrawn from the world – desires as a mystic might to cut what few ties still bind him to the world of vanity and materialism.

The Philosophy of Pathei Mathos

One of these ties appears to be his philosophy of pathei-mathos. This is a philosophy which is not only clearly pagan and part of the Western philosophical tradition {1} but also one which provides we Westerners with a cultured – a philosophical – paganism relevant to the modern world which is completely different from and even at odds with what has been termed both “contemporary paganism” and “neopaganism” with its invented rituals and ceremonies, its belief in and revival of ancient deities, and its lack of philosophical rigour. In effect, Myatt has continued, refined, and evolved the Western paganism – the ancient, the classical, paganism – evident in the works Homer, Hesiod, Aeschylus, Cicero, the Corpus Hermeticum, and Marcus Aurelius, stripping away the old idea of gods and goddesses and replacing them with a modern mysticism centred around philosophical concepts such as Being and physis {2}, and virtues such as personal honour, pathei mathos, and empathy. Such a philosophical approach also conveniently does away – sans polemics – with conventional religions such as Christianity. {3}

Why then – given this gift to those seeking a Western alternative to the likes of Christianity who are unable to take “contemporary paganism” and “neopaganism” seriously – does Myatt in his latest effusion seem, as some have commented, to reject his own pagan philosophy? For among other things he writes,

       “All that ‘philosophy’ seems to be to me now is a rather wordy and a rather egoistic, vainful, attempt to present what I (rightly or wrongly) believed I had learned about myself and the world as a result of various experiences.”

My own view is that he is not rejecting that philosophy, only moving on, as a composer of musical works – finding themselves unsatisfied with their creations – moves on to other things, to new compositions. In other words, Myatt is only re-expressing what he said some years ago, which was that the philosophy of pathei-mathos was

       “simply my own weltanschauung, a weltanschauung developed over some years as a result of my own pathei-mathos. Thus, and despite whatever veracity it may or may not possess, it is only the personal insight of one very fallible individual.” {4}

In Myatt’s case he is simply moving on to concentrate on translations, and to live as his conscience dictates, or rather as his own pathei mathos informs him he should, which is life as a modern recluse and a learned mystic.

That he is not rejecting his own philosophy but instead is just not going to write anymore about it – or as he says, is not going to “pontificate” about it anymore – is evident in two of his replies. For in one reply he writes “I would suggest the tentative answers expressed by my weltanschauung,” while in another that such philosophical essays “can be, and in my case seem to have been, manifestations of vanity.”

But whether he will really write no more philosophical essays remains to be seen for there have been many writers, artists and musicians who, having forsworn their craft, nevertheless return to it at some stage.

A Western Heritage

In his latest effusion Myatt acknowledges his Western heritage, writing that as a schoolboy he read in Greek the likes of Thucydides, Homer, Plato, Aristotle, and Herodotus, and in a rather remarkable admission that what he

       “imbibed in those early years from such books of Ancient Hellas was nothing particularly philosophical but instead martial, and I could not but help admire those ‘thinking warriors’, those ‘perspicacious inventive gentlemen’ (περιφραδὴς ἀνήρ as Sophocles described them, cunning in inventive arts who arrive now with dishonour and then with honour, τι τὸ μηχανόεν τέχνας ὑπὲρ ἐλπίδ ̓ἔχων τοτὲ μὲν κακόν, ἄλλοτ ̓ ἐπ ̓ ἐσθλὸν ἕρπει) nurtured as I was then and had been for years by and in various colonies and outposts of what was still the British Empire. Thus it was natural that when, a short time later, I first learned about the Third Reich and about the loyalty of a soldier such as Otto Ernst Remer and the heroic actions of warriors such as Leon Degrelle I admired such men and intuited that something of the warrior ethos of ancient Hellas and Sparta may have manifested itself in our modern world.”

He also admits that

       “some aspects of some of the tractates of the Corpus Hermeticum have influenced my thinking, just as Aristotle, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Marcus Aurelius, and other classical and Hellenistic Greek and Latin writers have.”

That he does not mention any non-Western literature I find indicative.

Thus it is my view that Myatt – despite some of his past peregrinations or perhaps because of some of those peregrinations – is still rooted in and still contributing to the ethos of the West, a fact evident in his philosophy of pathei-mathos and also in his on-going translations of texts from the Corpus Hermeticum and his on-going translation of the Gospel of John, both of which are important for understanding the past and the current ethos of the West itself particularly as Myatt notes, in one of his replies, that his presumption is “of early Christianity probably being influenced by the diverse hermetic traditions which existed and flourished during the Hellenistic period.”

This rootedness in the culture of the West is also evident in another of his replies, with Myatt lamenting that

       “for so many in the modern West there is no longer an ancestral culture of which one is a living, dwelling, part – a connexion between the past and the future and a connexion with a rural place of dwelling – and which culture preserves the slowly learned wisdom of the past.”

Like a few others, my view is that his philosophy of pathei-mathos as well as his translations provide some of the links we need to reconnect ourselves with our Western ancestral culture.

Rachael Stirling
August 2017

{1} See https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2016/01/14/a-modern-pagan-philosophy/
{2} In one of his replies Myatt writes that in his philosophy “the apparent parts of the unity are expressed by descriptors such as masculous and muliebral, with that unity – The One, μονάς – not designated by terms such as theos (God, god) or theoi (gods) but rather metaphysically, as Being and the emanations/effluvia of Being such as ourselves, Nature, and the Cosmos itself.”
{3} A detailed analysis of Myatt’s philosophy is given in the 2016 book The Mystic Philosophy Of David Myatt, which is available as a free download – https://wyrdsister.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/mystic-philosophy-myatt-v1a.pdf – and as a printed book, ISBN 978-1523930135
{4} The Way Of Pathei-Mathos – A Précis. The essay is in the 2014 compilation titled One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings.


Hermetica: A Review Of The Myatt Translations

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

ΔΔΔΔΔΔΔ
Hermetica: A Review Of The Myatt Translations

 

In the Spring of this year (2017) David Myatt released his versions – translations and commentaries – of several more Corpus Hermeticum texts to complement his existing, published, versions of tracts I, III, IV, VIII, XI {1}. The new additions were tracts VI, XII, and the Cantio Arcana part (sections 17 and 18) of tract XIII. {2}

The latest additions – bringing his translations of Hermetica texts to seven – follow the same methodology as previous versions. That is, his penchant for transliterating certain Greek words, his use of often unusual English words in place of the standard translations and meanings given in Greek-English lexicons such as LSJ {3}, and the terms and expressions he invents or digs up from usually very old books of English literature. All of which combine to make his translations idiosyncratic and remarkably different from all previous translations into English, antique and modern. To his credit, he explains in his commentary – sometimes in pedantic detail – his choices, citing his reasons and often providing some quotation in Greek, Latin, or English.

In regard to his translations of hermetic texts, this results in two things. In translations with a technical vocabulary relating to hermeticism, and in translations which transports the reader to an ancient world. Both of these combine to breathe new life into the texts and thence into hermeticism itself. Thus, far from, as Myatt writes in his introduction to tract VI, giving the impression “of reading somewhat declamatory sermons about god/God and ‘the good’ familiar from over a thousand years of persons preaching about Christianity,” the hermetic texts he has translated give the impression of reading about a pagan mysticism that most readers will probably be unfamiliar with.

Thus while other translators write moralistically about god, righteousness, truth, and ‘the good’, Myatt previews a world of divinities, of respecting the customs of the gods, of honesty, and nobility. A good example of the difference is in Myatt’s rendering of part of the Cantio Arcana. Copenhaver – who follows the proto-Christian interpretation of earlier translators and whose recent translations of the Corpus Hermeticum are regarded as “the definitive versions”, has:

      “Holy knowledge, you enlightened me; through you, hymning the intellectual light, I take joy in the joy of Mind. Join me, all you powers, and sing me the hymn. You also, continence, sing me the hymn. My justice, through me hymn the just. My liberality, through me hymn the Universe. Truth, hymn the truth. Good, hymn the good.” (4}

Myatt has:

Numinous knowledge, from you a numinal understanding:
Through you, a song of apprehended phaos,
Delighted with delightful perceiverance.
Join me, all you Arts, in song.
You, mastery, sing; and you, respectful of custom,
Through me sing of such respect.
Sing, my companions, for All That Exists:
Honesty, through me, sing of being honest,
The noble, sing of nobility.

In Myatt’s version there are the two previously mentioned things. A technical vocabulary – such as numinal, phaos, perceiverance, Arts – requiring interpretation, and nothing reminiscent of Christianity, such as ‘hymn’ and ‘holy’ and being ‘good’. As Myatt writes in his commentary on the Cantio Arcana in respect of his use of the terms song, honesty and Arts:

   Song. ὕμνος. Not a ‘hymn’ in the Christian sense (which the word hymn now so often imputes) but rather celebrating the numinous, and theos, in song, verse (ode), and chant.

   Honesty. ἀλήθεια. Given that those who are urged to sing are personifications, this is not some abstract, disputable, ‘truth’ but as often elsewhere in classical literature, a revealing, a dis-covering, of what is real as opposed to what is apparent or outer appearance. In personal terms, being honest and truthful.

   Arts. As at Poemandres 31 – which is also a traditional doxology (δοξολογία) to theos – the sense of δυνάμεων [here] is not ‘powers’, forces (or something similar and equally at variance with such a laudation) but ‘arts’; that is, particular abilities, qualities, and skills. Here, these abilities and skills – the craft – relate to esoteric song; to be able to be an effective laudator in respect of theos and “every Physis of Kosmos.”

His reference to ‘every Physis of Kosmos’ is to the beginning of the ode:

Let every Physis of Kosmos favourably listen to this song
πᾶσα φύσις κόσμου προσδεχέσθω τοῦ ὕμνου τὴν ἀκοήν

which Copenhaver translates as “let every nature in the cosmos attend to the hearing of this hymn.”

The commentaries which accompany the translations deserve a mention. Each of them not only occupies far more pages than the actual translation but they reveal the author as erudite with pages of quotations from ancient Greek and Latin works – for most of which Myatt provides his own translation – and the occasional quotation from English literature. In the case of English literature usually to explain the meaning of the unusual English words of phrases he uses, quoting the likes of Chaucer, Coleridge, Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Chapman, and others.

       In effect what Myatt does in his translations is paint of picture of classical – and of Hellenic – culture and especially of Hellenic mysticism; a culture and a mysticism which is pagan and based on individuals, on tangible things such as honesty, and not on moralistic and religious and impersonal abstractions. That is, he reveals the Greco-Roman ethos – the pagan ethos – underlying the hermetic texts and which is in contrast to that of Christianity with its later, medieval and Puritanical, impersonal moralizing. He incidently leaves us with an interesting question. Which is whether such pagan Hellenic mysticism influenced Christianity in a positive way. In academia the assumption has always been that Christianity and earlier Judaic monotheism influenced hermeticism despite the fact of evidence from papyrus fragments indicating the opposite and despite the fact that the earliest texts of the Old Testament were written in Greek and not in Hebrew. {5}

Myatt himself is of the opinion that parts of ancient Greek mysticism and cosmogony – as described for instance in tract III of the Corpus Hermeticum – have influenced both Judaism and Christianity. {6}

Such controversial matters aside, his translations of tracts from the Corpus Hermeticism are decidedly iconoclastic and – when compared to those of other translators such as Copenhaver – idiosyncratic and as such are not and probably never will be mainstream at least in academia. They may therefore never gain widespread acceptance among established academics. Does that matter? Probably not because his actual and potential audience is much greater. Which audience is of those interested in Western mysticism, in Western paganism, and in Greco-Roman culture in general, and for such interested parties Myatt has done a great service since he places the hermetic texts firmly into those milieux.

One other thing about the translations and commentaries deserves a mention. As well a being available in printed form he has not only made all of them available as free downloads from the internet {7} but also issued them under a liberal Creative Commons license which allows others to freely copy and distribute them.

Rachael Stirling
Shropshire
May 2017

{1} D. Myatt. Corpus Hermeticum I, III, IV, VIII, XI. 2017. ISBN 978-1545020142.
{2} Tracts VI, XII, and the Cantio Arcana, are available at https://davidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/tractates-vi-xii-v3.pdf [Accessed May 2017].
{3} H. G. Liddell, R. Scott, H. S. Jones. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford University Press, 1996.
{4} B. Copenhaver. Hermetica. Cambridge University Press. 1992.
{5} The earliest written texts of the Old Testament – papyrus fragments found in Egypt – are in Hellenistic Greek and date from around 250 BCE and precede by over a century the earliest fragments written in Hebrew (some of the Dead Sea Scrolls) which date from 150 BCE to around 50 BCE.
{6} See Myatt’s introduction to his translation of tract III.
{7} https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/corpus-hermeticum/