The Sadness Of Michael Aquino, Part Two

O9A Insight Role

O9A Insight Role

It is sometimes somewhat sad – and/or amusing – when someone who has been respected, in some particular field by some others for his/her assumed knowledge and sagacity, is finally revealed for who and what they really were and are.

An example here is Michael Aquino, founder of the Temple of Set, who – in recent postings on some internet forum in some obscure corner of cyberspace – has pontificated, yet again, about David Myatt and the Order of Nine Angles and who with such pontifications has revealed his true, rather sad, character.

° On some internet forum Aquino wrote:

{quote} Myatt is Long, Brown, Beest {/quote}

It’s most amusing and sad that Aquino is still under the illusion that Myatt is Christos Beest when the real person behind that nym is well-known to academics and when that real person (Richard Moult) has more than once publicly acknowledged his former involvement with the O9A. So much for Aquino doing some research before sounding-off, again, via the internet.

° On some internet forum Aquino wrote:

{quote} Myatt has this to say {/quote}

Hilarious, because it was Anton Long – or someone else connected with the O9A – who had “that to say.”

It is rather sad and indicative as well as amusing that Aquino persists in paranoically believing that all published books about the O9A or containing O9A texts – from those authored by R. Parker to those collections of old O9A texts published by Chretien Sauvage and others {1} – were written, produced, and published by Mr Myatt.

And especially sad and indicative and amusing because Aquino has never provided any evidence, based on primary sources, that Myatt is Anton Long or is behind those published O9A books. All he has – all he has ever had – is hearsay and a willingness to believe various rumors and allegations about Myatt. So much then for his intellect and his knowledge.

° On some internet forum Aquino wrote:

{quote} they have not publicly acknowledged or verified their identities/authorships. {/quote}

So what? We are talking about Satanists here: those who by the nature of their calling can be sly, deceptive, manipulative, and often shape-shifting ‘criminals’ who may use false identities and assume various personae to order to achieve certain goals, personal, financial, sinister, or otherwise.

That Aquino seems to expect Satanists to behave ‘decently’ and be truthful is not only hilarious but also exposes the difference between the amoral Satanism of the Order of Nine Angles and the pathetic pseudo-Satanism propagated by the likes of Howard Stanton Levey.

° On some internet forum Aquino wrote:

{quote} [Myatt] went on to become a Muslim, later “Numinous Way”, and has now come full-circle to translating the New Testament Gospel of John. All the while publishing his series of “Satanism” books.  {/quote}

Again, sad and indicative and amusing because Aquino persists in paranoically believing – without a shred of actual evidence – that Myatt is and must be behind whatever O9A books have been published. [Note to Aquino: hearsay and allegations are not evidence.]

° On some internet forum Aquino wrote:

{quote} I didn’t and still don’t care about Myatt {/quote}

Yet Aquino is still posting about Myatt and has for years posted items about Myatt on a certain internet forum (and has for years mentioned Myatt in various correspondence with others) and also has, for over a quarter of a century, propagated (to anyone who would listen) the allegation that Myatt is Anton Long and propagated the canard that the O9A is “without substance” and propagated the lie that Myatt “ripped off” what Aquino alleged (against scholarly opinion and contrary to the historical evidence) was his “invention” of the term nine angles.

Yet again, it is sad and indicative and amusing that Aquino – for example – persists in alleging that Anton Long “ripped off” the term ‘nine angles’ from a text that Aquino wrote even though it has been pointed out to him many times over the years – including on his favorite internet forum – that “it is clear despite claims that the term nine angles was introduced in the twentieth century, the term is centuries older, especially in esoteric or cosmological discourse.”

° On some internet forum Aquino wrote:

{quote} I’ve been visiting 600C for some years now, and have still not seen anything substantive from any O9A knowledge base. Instead the common, and overwhelming characteristic of avowed O9Aers is just endless Pancho Pillow: pissing and moaning and flaming. So if there’s something more to O9A affiliation than being Pancho, impress 600C with it. {/quote}

That here, as in previous years, Aquino commits The Fallacy of Illicit Transference (and yet again references popular culture) is amusing, sad, and indicative.

For he seems to assume or believe that those who post on internet forums about the O9A in some positive way are representative of the O9A and its esoteric philosophy, while also assuming that an internet forum is a place where knowledge about the O9A can be and should be found.

This is most amusing, given that most O9A texts, amounting to several thousands of pages over some thirty years, are readily available in printed books and/or on the internet, with the likes of Jacob Senholt and Connell Monette having provided an academic overview of O9A esotericism. {2}

That Aquino has never bothered to pen a rational – or a scholarly – critique of O9A esoteric philosophy and praxis, probably because he couldn’t be bothered to study the O9A in detail given his prejudice regarding and assumptions about the O9A, is indicative of his non-intellectual character.

 ° On some internet forum Aquino wrote:

{quote} [Howard Stanton Levey] was erudite […] He had an impressive library covering an entire wall. {/quote}

So, according to Aquino if someone – such as a showman – has a wall of various books it must mean they are erudite.

Levey erudite, as in being able to read, and having read, Plato and Aristotle in Ancient Greek and Renaissance books on Alchemy in Latin and magical texts such as Shams I-Maarif in Arabic? Of course not. Yet again another silly assumption by yet another pseudo-intellectual.

JB
2016

Nota Bene: There is a reason why this blog has the term ‘polemics’ in its title; a reason why ‘we’ do not represent the O9A, and a reason why so many O9A critics commit
The Fallacy of Illicit Transference.

 

°°°

{1} For example, the compilation of ONA texts in the book The Sinister Tradition. 2012 (ISBN 978-1479324613) and the book The Pagan Order Of Nine Angles authored by R. Parker, published in 2015, ISBN 978-1518885143.

{2} (a) Senholt, Jacob. Secret Identities in the Sinister Tradition: Political Esotericism and the Convergence of Radical Islam, Satanism, and National Socialism in the Order of Nine Angles, in Per Faxneld and Jesper Aagaard Petersen (editors), The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity. Oxford University Press. 2013.  (b) Monette, Connell. Mysticism in the Twenty First Century. Sirius Academic Press, 2013

 


 

The Sad Sad Story of Michael Aquino

Order of Nine Angles

O9A

Michael Aquino, founder of the Temple of Set, former colleague of Howard Stanton Levey, and a former officer in the US military, is now reduced to not only eagerly corresponding with anyone who, considering him an authority on matters Occult, seeks his opinion, but also is reduced to posting on a certain internet forum where he takes every opportunity to advertise – and post links to – his published books and where he inevitably in his replies references some manifestation of popular culture or quotes some author (such as Plato) in translation.

Furthermore, that such a person with such a past spends so much time on a certain internet forum, hyping his books, and referencing popular culture, is both sad and indicative. What emerges – from his books, his writings, his correspondence, his internet posts, his love of dressing up like some character in The Munsters – is a pseudo-intellectual whose unoriginal Setian philosophy is indebted to Crowley, to Magian occultism, and to the likes of HP Lovecraft.

Just as indicative are his continued – decades-long – attacks on the Order of Nine Angles (a rival to his Temple of Set and to the Church of Satan), and his reliance on hearsay and rumour and assumptions in the matter of Anton Long.

For he – perhaps sincerely – believes that Anton Long is David Myatt. Why? Because (i) some UK-dwelling (now long disappeared) member of his Temple of Set told him so, back in the day, and he implicitly believed what that person said, and (ii) because he assumed that typewritten letters sent to him – signed Stephen Brown – were and must be by Myatt, and (iii) because someone else may have used the same or a similar typewriter as Stephen Brown, and (iv) because he believes there is some similarity in style between Myatt’s writings and those of Stephen Brown/Anton Long, even though several academics have disputed that connection, with one stating that he considered that the identification of Myatt with Long was “implausible and untenable based on the extent of variance in writing style, personality, and tone.” {1}

That Mr Aquino has never in over a quarter of a century bothered to conduct his own research into Myatt using primary sources, and has never deigned to conduct and publish a forensic analysis to substantiate his claims about typewriters and a similarity in style between Myatt’s writings and those of Stephen Brown/Anton Long, and yet continues to make such assumptions and use such hearsay in his decades-long campaign against Myatt and the O9A, is surely indicative of his character.

Just as indicative is his failure for over thirty years to pen a scholarly critique of O9A esoteric philosophy and praxis: for all he can do now – as in the past quarter of a century – is write propaganda and post, via the internet, quips such as “the O9A is off-the-cuff philosophy/magick without any substance.”

Perhaps even more indicative is that Aquino has never bothered to undertake any research into the actual documented life and writings of David Myatt himself.

It is therefore unsurprising, given all these things, that more and more people are realizing that Aquino’s reputation as some sort of authority of matters Occult is undeserved.

As one perspicacious person recently wrote:

“The only thing necessary is to take everything with a grain of salt and realize that what you are dealing with is the mythos and not necessarily reality. I make a distinction between the mythos and propaganda/social engineering. The former one can be a source of insight like ancient myths are, like some religions can be. Damn even fairy tales can teach us some ancestral wisdom. The latter one is extremely limiting, it gives you the extremely polarized, black and white simplified picture of the world, makes you rely on empty slogans etc.

Some of Myatt’s writings, including his personal letters, can give some insight into his motivations behind his life decisions but only if you are willing to believe that the author is honest with you. FFS, we don’t even know whether Myatt’s personal letters that have been published are indeed his personal letters. Actually, we know little to nothing about real Myatt and a lot about Myatt as a mythical figure, some sort of an archetype. It might be better this way, who knows? Mythical super heroes are cool while real people often suck.”

As someone else also recently wrote, until academics or others provide “credible evidence based on research using primary sources it will remain a mystery as to whether David Myatt really is (or was) Anton Long”. {2}

Furthermore, scholarly research using primary sources – such as Myatt’s letters and post 2011 writings, and public documents (and Court and police and other records) relating to his diverse activities – would settle once and for all the question of who he is, and was, and whether his philosophy of pathei-mathos genuinely reflects his learning from decades of varied experiences.

Until such research is undertaken, and published, individuals such as Aquino will doubtless – because of their character – continue to believe what they do about the O9A and about Myatt. As no doubt some or many of them will – because of their character – continue to believe what they do irrespective of such research.

JB
2016

°°°

{1} Sieg, George. Angular Momentum: From Traditional to Progressive Satanism in the Order of Nine Angles. International Journal for the Study of New Religions, volume 4, number 2. 2013. p.257.
{2} https://sinisterpolemics.wordpress.com/2016/09/25/the-question-of-anton-long-and-david-myatt/

°°°°°

Related:

Michael Aquino Sounds Off Again

David Myatt And Anton Long

Knowledge Verses Pretentiousness


The Question of Anton Long And David Myatt

David Myatt

David Myatt

For decades allegations have been made that Anton Long – founder of the Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A) in the early 1970s {1}{2} and author of most of its Occult texts {3} – was the pseudonym of David Myatt, a former neo-nazi activist regarded as “the leading hardline Nazi intellectual in Britain since the 1960s” {4} and as “England’s principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution.” {5}

Such allegations – including the one that since Myatt is Long he is also a Satanist – have led to some academics, and many Occultists, to assume – or to accept without question – that Myatt is Long {6}, despite Myatt’s persistent denials and despite no one, in some thirty years, having provided any credible evidence based on research using primary sources {7}. The only detailed examination, so far, of a possible connection has been by Senholt who devoted some 24 pages to the topic {8} although his conclusion that there is a connection is ‘not proven’ because his analysis is based on secondary – not primary – sources and he relies on various assumptions, such as there being some similarity between some events in Myatt’s life (neo-nazi activism and involvement with radical Islam) and some of the Insight Roles suggested by the O9A, and that Myatt’s idea of a ‘Galactic Imperium’ is echoed in some texts written by Anton Long.

As JR Wright mentioned in her essay about Myatt and the ONA {9}, those who accept that Myatt is Anton Long and therefore a Satanist have to explain:

not only the lack of factual evidence proving he is a satanist but also many other things about Myatt’s life, among which are the following:
1) His time as a Christian monk and his many subsequent writings praising Catholicism in particular and Christianity in general.
2) His Occultism and National-Socialism text – written in the 1980’s and republished in the 1990’s and again around 2006 – and in which he denounced occultism.
3) The “small matter” of him being married in Church in accordance with the Christian ceremony of marriage.
4) His semi-autobiographical poetry.
5) His voluminous writings about the hubris of extremism, and about his rejection of and his remorse concerning his extremist past.
6) An extensive seven hour search of his home by six Detectives from Scotland Yard in 1998 failed to find any occult items or literature.
7) A forensic analysis, by the police, of Myatt’s seized computers following his arrest in 1998 failed to find any occult material.


The Early Life Of David Myatt

Several academics have referred to Myatt’s early life {1}{8}{10}(11}(12}, stating that he was born, in 1950, in Tanganyika (now known as Tanzania) when that land was still under British control; that he was educated there; that he later lived in the Far East, and came to live in England in the late 1960s. While these details are sketchy, Myatt himself in his autobiography Myngath provides a few more details {13}. He relates, for example, that he was privately educated in Africa, and that during his teens in the Far East he studied Ancient Greek and learned to read Sanskrit. In several letters and later writings he mentions trips, in the early 1970s, to the Middle East and Iran accompanied on at least one trip by a gay female (possibly Iranian) friend he had met at university. {14} In addition Myatt has mentioned that his father provided him, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, with an allowance sufficient to enable him to travel where he liked and purchase whatever books he happened to be interested in.

This rather eclectic, somewhat itinerant, and possibly privileged early life (in a letter to one correspondent Myatt mentions his family having servants), is certainly interesting and most certainly deserves further research based on primary sources. Which research might provide some clarification in respect of the assumption that Myatt was/is Anton and thus whether or not “the role of David Myatt [is] paramount to the whole creation and existence of the ONA.” {15}

Hearsay And Rumours

For decades, individuals such as Michael Aquino – famed for his foundation of the Occult group the Temple of Set and for his earlier friendship with Howard Stanton Levey – have, for whatever personal and/or ideological reasons, circulated rumours about Myatt and about the O9A. Thus, in a recent (2016) posting on some internet forum Aquino not only made known his ignorance of O9A esoteric philosophy but also unequivocally stated, yet again, that “he [Myatt] was confirmed to me as Anton Long,” while failing to provide any evidence from primary sources to confirm such hearsay. {16}

Given such hearsay, and the continued allegations that Myatt is Anton Long, it is incumbent on those who repeat such hearsay and such allegations to provide evidence based on primary sources. Until they do – and until academics also provide credible evidence based on research using primary sources – it will remain a mystery as to whether David Myatt really is (or was) Anton Long.

R. Parker
2016

Notes

{1} Monette, Connell. Mysticism in the Twenty First Century. Sirius Academic Press, 2013. p.86

{2} Senholt, Jacob. Secret Identities in the Sinister Tradition: Political Esotericism and the Convergence of Radical Islam, Satanism, and National Socialism in the Order of Nine Angles, in Per Faxneld and Jesper Aagaard Petersen (editors), The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity. Oxford University Press. 2013. pp. 254–256

{3} Senholt, op.cit. p.256; Monette, op.cit. p.86

{4} Simon Wiesenthal Center: Response, Summer 2003, Vol 24, #2

{5} Michael, George. The New Media and the Rise of Exhortatory Terrorism. Strategic Studies Quarterly (USAF), Volume 7 Issue 1, Spring 2013.

{6} For instance, Goodrick-Clarke, in his book Black Sun simply states that Myatt is Long and then proceeds to use their names interchangeably. Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas. Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity. New York University Press. 2003, pp.215-216.

{7} Primary sources include direct evidence such as original documents dating from the period under study, and accounts and works (written, verbal, published or unpublished) by such individuals whose life or whose writings or whose works form part of the research. In addition, if such sources – documents or accounts or writings – are in another language, then it is incumbent upon the scholar to have knowledge of that language and thus be able to translate such documents themselves, for a reliance upon the translations of others relegates such sources from the position of primary ones to secondary ones.

{8} Senholt, op.cit. pp.250–274.

{9} JR Wright. David Myatt, Satanism, and the Order of Nine Angles. e-text, 2012 (revised 2016). A pdf version is currently (September 2016) available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/david-myatt-and-the-o9a/

{10} Michael, George. The Enemy of My Enemy: The Alarming Convergence of Militant Islam and the Extreme Right. University Press of Kansas. 2006. pp. 142-144.

{11}  Kaplan, Jeffrey. Encyclopedia of White Power: A Sourcebook on the Radical Racist Right. Rowman & Littlefield. 2000. p. 216ff; p.512f

{12} Goodrick-Clarke, op.cit. pp.216ff

{13} Myatt, David. Myngath: Some Recollections of a Wyrdful and Extremist Life. 2013. ISBN 9781484110744. It should be noted that, according to academic criteria, an autobiography is a primary source.

{14} Some his letters have been published in a 2009 pdf collection edited by JR Wright and titled Selected Letters of David Myatt, 2002-2008. They are currently (September 2016) available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/selected-letters/

Some of Myatt’s other correspondence is included in part 2 and 3 of his book Understanding and Rejecting ExtremismA Very Strange Peregrination [ISBN 9781484854266], while many of his post-2012 essays are autobiographical, such as the two Questions for DWM of 2014 and 2015, and the Development Of The Numinous Way, available (as of September 2016) at https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/

(15} Senholt, Jacob. The Sinister Tradition. Paper presented at the international conference, Satanism in the Modern World, Trondheim, 19-20th November, 2009.

{16} In respect of Aquino’s latest rumour-mongering, qv. Michael Aquino Sounds Off Again.


Michael Aquino Sounds Off Again

Order of Nine Angles

O9A

Michael Aquino Sounds Off Again
About The Order Of Nine Angles

 

The following item of propaganda – replete with silly assumptions and unproven allegations, and revealing a remarkable lack of knowledge – was posted, on the 24th September 2016, by Aquino on a self-described satanist internet forum.

{Begin quote}
For [those] unfamiliar with the “Order of Nine Angles/o9A”, it was the mythical creation of a Briton named David Myatt, who borrowed the name from my “Ceremony of the Nine Angles” in Anton LaVey’s Satanic Rituals (1972). By the 1980s Myatt, under the name of “Anton Long” was writing various “O9A” papers, and initiated letter-contact with me under both “Anton Long” and “Stephen Brown”.

You can get a pretty good idea of Myatt from Wikipedia and of his “O9A” activities here.

Myatt never asked me [or Anton] for permission to use the “Nine Angles” (whose significance obviously escaped him) for his enterprise, and in our brief correspondence my principal concern was his publication of a literal “Satanic human sacrifice ritual”, which was hardly what was needed at the height of the “Satanic Panic” in both the USA and Britain. As soon as the Temple of Set in Britain advised me of “Long/Brown”‘s true identity, I cut contact, since I don’t like deception.

I just went to the linked Amazon page and used the “Look Inside” to sample Myatt’s book. If I were going to review it there, I’d give it 1-star, both because of the author-deception and because of its flagrant phoniness: fabricated history and off-the-cuff philosophy/magick without any substance.

Obviously David Myatt can write whatever he wishes, and if his books appeal to certain people, so be it. Ultimately it comes down to whether truth is important to you, and if so how can you ascertain it. In another thread here I posted an article of mine on just this issue. In this context Myatt and his “O9A” are merely just another symptom of a much greater “disease”.
{End quote}


Myatt And The ONA

It is interesting and indicative how Aquino not only repeats the unproven allegation that David Myatt is Anton Long but also directs readers to the Wikipedia page about Myatt rather than to Myatt’s own weblog or internet site.

It is also interesting and indicative how Aquino not only mentions a book allegedly by Myatt without providing the title of the book but has the temerity to condemn the book after having read only a few pages, Given his mention that the book deals with “magick” one can be pretty sure that he is writing about a book that deals with the ONA and was not authored by Myatt all of whose books are written under the names David Myatt or DW Myatt.

In both instances the lack of research by Aquino, his propagandistic assumptions, and his use of Wikipedia as a source, are most amusing.


The Term Nine Angles

Obviously Aquino, with his dislike of and silly assumptions about the ONA, had not bothered to read either (i) the ONA text titled The Order of Nine Angles Rite of The Nine Angles – subtitled A Comparison with the Ceremony of Nine Angles by Aquino And A Brief Study of The Meaning of The Nine Angles – or (ii) what Professor Monette wrote about the term and whose conclusion was:

It is clear despite claims that the term ‘nine angles’ was introduced in the twentieth century, the term is centuries older, especially in esoteric or cosmological discourse. See Pingree, D. The Latin Version of the Ghayat al-Hakim, Studies of the Warburg Institute, University of London (1986); Ritter, H. ed. Ghāyat Al-Hakīm Wa-Ahaqq Al-Natījatayn Bi-Altaqdīm (Leipzig : B.G. Teubner, 1933); al Buni, Shams al-Ma’arif (Birmingham: Antioch Gate, 2007).

A reading of that O9A text – and of compilations such as ἀρρενόθηλυς: Alchemical And Hermetic Antecedents Of The Seven Fold Way Of The Order Of Nine Angles – would have revealed how very different ONA usage of the term is from his prosaic two-dimensional “angles”.

A difference that can be summed up by pointing out that for the ONA the ‘nine angles’ refers to the nine combinations of the three basic alchemical substances and which combinations form the basis for The Star Game.

A Mythical Creation And Lack Of Substance

His propaganda that the ONA is a ‘mythical creation’ is further proof of his shallowness and lack of research, given that, currently and in the past, there are and have been ONA nexions (or groups or individuals inspired by the ONA) in various countries, including the ABG Lodge, Tempel ov Blood, WSA352, Deverills Nexion, Secuntra, to name but a few.

Aquino also seems unaware – or for propaganda purposes chose to ignore – the fact that several individuals with a public profile have written of their involvement with the ONA, and which individuals include Michael Ford and Richard Moult.

His propagandistic quip that the ONA is ‘without substance’ is also further proof of his shallowness and lack of research, for he obviously does not know – or for propaganda purposes chose to ignore – the ontology, epistemology, and ethics, and the occult praxis, set forth by the ONA. That he – despite his reputation as a knowledgeable occultist – did not and has not presented a reasoned analysis of ONA esoteric philosophy is interesting and indicative, given his past voluminous pontifications about the Church of Satan and the Temple of Set.

A Rant

That Aquino at his age took the trouble, yet again, to rant about – make allegations about, and write propaganda about – the ONA on some internet forum, rather than write a scholarly critique of ONA esotericism based on a detailed knowledge of O9A texts, is interesting of itself, and may suggest some things about Aquino himself, at least to the sagacious.

Such a rant – such propaganda, such allegations about the ONA and Myatt, by such a person – is also suggestive of just how much the ONA irks some modern occultists and many self-described satanists. Which of itself is a good thing, for the Order of Nine Angles.

JB
2016


Related:

° The Question Of Anton Long and David Myatt

° ἀρρενόθηλυς
(External link)


Learning From Practical Experience

Order of Nine Angles

O9A

All the many self-described satanists who are critical of the Order of Nine Angles seem to have forgotten, or never known, or have ignored (for whatever reason) what the ONA have been saying for over thirty years. As Anton Long noted decades ago:

“Each individual must learn for themselves – this is the crux. No one can do it for them. The essence, born via experiences, cannot even be taught – it must be experienced.” {1}

This learning has been emphasized again and again, including recently:

“The term pathei-mathos (πάθει μάθος) expresses the essence of the esoteric ethos of the Order of Nine Angles: the personal learning, by individuals, that often results from consciously undertaking practical exeatic experiences conventionally described as both ‘numinous’ and ‘sinister’.” {2}

“The essence [of O9A esoteric philosophy] is a consciously undertaken pathei-mathos, and thus the personal learning, by individuals – with the consequent internal (‘alchemical’) change in (and evolution of) the physis (φύσις) of the individual – that can result from consciously undertaking both esoteric and practical exeatic experiences conventionally described as both ‘numinous’ and ‘sinister’. Thus, abstractions (which impute an illusive/pretentious ‘knowing’) are replaced by a direct and personal understanding sans denotatum.” {3}

In addition,

“Satanism does not involve discussions, meetings, talks. Rather, it involves action, deeds. Words – written or spoken – sometimes follow, but not necessarily […] The essence that Satanism leads the individual towards, via action, is only ever revealed by that participation which action is. Words, whether written or spoken, can never describe that essence – they can only hint at it, point toward it, and often serve to obscure the essence. Satanism strips away the appearance of ‘things’ – living, Occult and otherwise, by this insistence on experience, unaided. What is thus apprehended by such experience, is unique to each individual and thus is creative and evolutionary. Discussions, meetings, talks, even books and such like, de-vitalize: they are excuses for not acting.”  {4} .

For such learning “leads the individual toward wisdom and the development of their own weltanschauung,” {5} which is a restatement of what Anton Long wrote in a 1980s text:

“An Adept is an individual who has undertaken an Occult quest and who has, as a result of that quest, the following abilities/attributes:
a) a real understanding of esoteric, Occult matters, and a deep esoteric knowledge/insight;
b) esoteric skills – chief of which is empathy: with both natural and ‘Occult’ forces (energies). An important aspect of this empathy (an intuitive understanding of things as those things are in their essence) is with living beings and that species mis-named Homo Sapiens;
c) a unique character – formed via experience;
d) a unique ‘philosophy of life attained via self-discovery and self experience – by finding answers unaided.” {6}

Over twenty years later Anton Long said the same thing:

“What matters is the individual developing, from their own years-long (mostly decades-long) practical experience, a personal weltanschauung: that is, discovering their own individual answers to certain questions concerning themselves, life, existence, the Occult, and the nature of Reality.” {7}

He also explicitly stated:

“I claim no authority, and my creations, profuse as they are, will in the end be accepted or rejected on the basis of whether they work. Satan forbid they should ever become ‘dogma’ or a matter of ‘faith’. I also expect to see them become transformed, by their own metamorphosis and that due to other individuals: changed, extended and probably ultimately transcended, may be even forgotten. They – like the individual I am at the moment – are only a stage, toward something else.” {8}

Thus all the talk by ONA critics of the Order of Nine Angles having become some sort of dogmatic ‘church’, with ‘Anton Long’ being revered, is bunk: the product of a lack of knowledge about the ONA and/or just silly anti-ONA propaganda.

JB
2016

{1} Letter to Ms Vera, dated 27th May 1992 eh. Published in Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown, Volume II, 1992
{2} Notes On The Esoteric Learning Presenced Through Pathei-Mathos, e-text, 2014.
{3} In The Name Of The Order Of Nine Angles, e-text, 2014
{4} Anton Long: The Hard Reality Of Satanism, 1985, published in Hostia, 1991
{5} The Esoteric Philosophy Of The Order Of Nine Angles: An Introduction. e-text, 2014
{6} Adeptship: Its Real Meaning and Purpose.
{7} Anton Long. The Discovery and Knowing of Satan. e-text, 2011.
{8} Letter to Michael Aquino, dated 20th October 1990 ev. Published in Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown, Volume I, 1992


ONA, O9A, Or Omega Nine Alpha?

Order of Nine Angles

O9A

ONA, O9A, Or Omega Nine Alpha?
A Pedantic Aside
°°°

While there is a certain and necessary distinction between the ‘outer’ ONA and the ‘Inner ONA’ (the Vindexian ONA and the Falciferian ONA) the use of the identifier O9A instead of ONA does not represent this distinction. As mentioned in the text Some Questions About The Order of Nine Angles (2014),

Q: Is there a meaning in saying O9A as opposed to ONA?

A: No. O9A is perhaps more distinctive, coming into use around 1998 (and was used on Usenet around that time). Plus, O9A is also now used as an alternative to “ONA” because in some languages “ona” has a specific meaning. {1}

For what represents – describes – the Inner ONA/Falciferian ONA is not the identifier O9A but rather the term omega-nine-alpha; that is, ω9α if one uses the Greek character set.

As mentioned in the 2013 text On Leaving, Joining, Leadership, and Time,

“The ONA has and always has had both an exoteric [causal] and an esoteric [acausal/Aeonic] purpose and nature; a dual nature [sinister/numinous; sinisterly-numinous] manifest in (α) a leaderless, a non-structured, non-hierarchical collective (or collection) of (often clandestine) individuals, groups, and nexions, who are all – in some way or other, and in whole or in part – guided by or inspired by the esoteric philosophy of Anton Long, and in (ω) the ancestral and occult pathei-mathos of the individual Rounwytha and of the Inner ONA.

Thus, α [alpha] implies – necessitates – the continuing development/reformation/counter-reformation of ‘the theory and praxis of the ONA’ by both individuals and groups, sans sycophancy, with the consequent subversion of existing forms and structures and the development of new ones; while ω [omega] implies – necessitates – the pursuit, over decades, of Lapis Philosophicus by a few (often reclusive) individuals and thus them adding to not only the occult pathei-mathos of the ONA but to the ancestral pathei-mathos germane to all human beings.”

The understandable confusion between ω9α and O9A (as a designation of the Inner ONA) seems to have arisen if one, to describe the inner ONA, uses the upper case of the Greek character set for the term omega-nine-alpha, which upper case is, of course, O9A (Omicron-Nine-Alpha).

So perhaps the best nomenclature to distinguish the outer from the inner ONA is to use the terms Vindexian ONA and Falciferian ONA.

KS
2016

°°°

{1} The text Some Questions About The Order of Nine Angles (2014), is available – along with other ONA Q&A, at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/o9a-q-a/