Myatt And The Zeitgeist Of The Modern West

°°°°°°°°°

David Myatt

Myatt And The Zeitgeist Of The Modern West

A recent (January 2019) mention of David Myatt in an academic journal in connection with terrorism {1} is another reminder of not only how the life of Myatt is compartmentalized by others but also how denotata is used and sometimes invented and leads to a simplistic portrayal of a person and thus to a lack of understanding of their physis, their character, and – sometimes – to the dehumanization of the person because what is described by the denotatum or denotata is considered to be “bad” or “evil” or morally reprehensible as in the case of what modern Western governments and the mainstream Media describe by the denotatum “nazi”.

In terms of compartmentalizing the life of Myatt, some people as in the aforementioned article consider him an example of political and/or of religious “extremism”. Others – based on the assumption he is a certain “Anton Long” of Order of Nine Angles fame – consider him an example of a modern ‘satanist’ with some going so far as to express the view that Myatt’s decades of extremism is an example of what the satanism of the Order of Nine Angles means and implies.

In terms of how denotata is used and sometimes invented, the aforementioned article provides a relevant example, for the authors have invented a new category, “fringe fluidity”, which they describe as “a distinct radicalization pathway” and which they give Myatt as an example of. In addition, they claim that such “fringe fluidity” explains the beliefs and actions of such extremists and terrorists.

Those familiar with Myatt’s philosophy of pathei-mathos {2} will appreciate why applying denotata – abstractions – to describe and “explain” a person or persons or an entity is a fundamental philosophical error. For according to Myatt such denotata always relate to a dialectic of opposites and obscure the physis of beings. In his 2015 essay Personal Reflexions On Some Metaphysical Questions he writes that formulating a question

“in such terms – [as] causal/acausal; whole/parts; eternal/temporal; ipseity/unity; emergent from/genesis of – is a mis-apprehension of what-is because such denoting is ‘us as observer’ (i) positing, as Plato did, such things as a theory regarding ‘the ideal’, and/or (ii) constructing a form or abstraction (ἰδέᾳ) which we then presume to project onto what is assumed to be ‘external’ to us, both of which present us with only an illusion of understanding and meaning because implicit in such theories and in all such constructed forms are (i) an opposite (an ‘other’) and (ii) the potentiality for discord (dialectical or otherwise) between such opposites and/or because of a pursuit of what is regarded as ‘the ideal’ of some-thing.”

In the case of Myatt, the prevalent denotata used to describe him, by academics and others, is based on (i) ignoring or on ignorance of important aspects of his life such as his time as a Catholic monk, his time as a vagabond, his work as a farm labourer and as a gardener, his now reclusive life-style; (ii) ignoring or an ignorance of his post-2012 writings about his philosophy of pathei-mathos; (iii) ignoring or an ignorance of his poetry; and (iv) ignoring or an ignorance of his translations of and commentaries on tracts from the Corpus Hermeticum as well his translations of the likes of Aeschylus, Sappho, Sophocles, and his iconoclastic translation of chapters from the Gospel of John.

That his Greek translations, and his writings about his philosophy of pathei-mathos – rooted as his philosophy is in the Western philosophical tradition – are in quantity far greater than his political or “Jihadi” polemics seems to have escaped the notice of academics and others.

This neglect of Myatt’s philosophical writings and translations and poetry, and neglect of his reclusive mystical life since 2010, results in and has resulted in bias, in a prejudice toward him; and a bias and a prejudice that is perhaps natural given the zeitgeist of the modern West, born as that zeitgeist was in the Allied victory in the Second World War with the subsequent demonization of German National Socialism and the acceptance of the dogma of “racial equality” and of the myth of the Shoah.

That not one academic, and not one critic of Myatt – be such a critic an “anti-fascist” or some self-described ‘satanist’ or Occultist – has penned a scholarly analysis of Myatt’s philosophical writings, of his Greek translations, or of his poetry, is indicative, and seems to suggest how such academics, such Myattian critics, are not only in thrall to the zeitgeist of the modern West, but are unable or unwilling to free themselves from the tyranny of denotata with the dehumanization that inevitably results when such denotata are applied to individuals.

A thralldom perhaps placed into perspective by two lone academic voices who described Myatt as an “extremely violent, intelligent, dark, and complex individual,” {3} and as having “fluency in the classical languages (Greek and Latin), as well as Arabic and possibly Persian, [and] possessed of a gifted intellect and apparently a polymath.” {4}

That Myatt’s complexity – his physis – remains undiscovered, undocumented, is perhaps also indicative of the zeitgeist of the modern West.

Hence why there are two very different tales of two reformed racists. {5} For Myatt

“seems to have become, to some individuals involved with some sub-cultures (occult and otherwise) not only some sort of iconoclastic anti-Establishment figure but also disliked and reviled by many more individuals around the world who have apparently developed a prejudice against him.” {5}

Haereticus The Younger
Oxonia
2019
v. 1.03

{1} Daveed Gartenstein-Ross & Madeleine Blackman (2019). Fluidity of the Fringes: Prior Extremist Involvement as a Radicalization Pathway. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism. Taylor & Francis.

{2} See The Mystic Philosophy Of David Myatt (pdf) which provides an overview of Myatt’s philosophy and in which book the terms denotatum and abstraction feature prominently.

{3} Susan Raine. The Devil’s Party (Book review). Religion, Volume 44, Issue 3, July 2014.

{4} Connell Monette. Mysticism in the 21st Century, Sirius Academic Press, 2013.

{5} https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/two-reformed-racists/

°°°°°°°°°


Advertisements

Myatt: A Failure To Understand

David Myatt

°°°°°°°°°

 

A Perplexing Failure To Understand
Being a slightly revised extract from a letter to friend,
with some footnotes added post scriptum

 

One of the multitude of things that I have, for years, failed to understand – sans any belief in an all-powerful supra-personal deity – is why I am still alive while people like Sue and Fran – and the millions of others like them – died or were killed, too early. For they neither caused any deaths nor inflicted any suffering on another living being, human and otherwise, while I – and the millions like me, worldwide – continued to live despite having so caused, directly and/or indirectly, deaths and suffering. And in my case, directly and indirectly as my documented so lamentable extremist amoral decades – of violence, hatred, incitement, of being a “theoretician of revolution/terror” – so clearly reveal.

Yet – over twenty years after the death of Sue, and almost ten years since the death of Fran – here I am, still breathing, still pontificating. And all I have – despite years of interior reflexion – is a feeling, an intuition: of the how and why our thousand of years old human culture of pathei-mathos is important because – or so it seems to me – it might bring (at least to some others) a wordless intimation of one possible answer to such a perplexing question.

For it is a culture that includes, for example, such diverse artisements as the Oresteia of Aeschylus, the Lamentations of Jeremiah by Thomas Tallis, and the life – and death – of people such as Jesse James, Mohandas K Gandhi, and Edith Cavell; and which culture, enshrined as it is in Studia Humanitatis, can perchance teach some of each new generation that valuable lesson about our human physis, jumelle as our physis is [1] and thus paradoxical as we honourable/dishonourable (often hubriatic) mortals are:

ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ
πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν:
πολλῶν δ᾽ ἀνθρώπων ἴδεν ἄστεα καὶ νόον ἔγνω,
πολλὰ δ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ ἐν πόντῳ πάθεν ἄλγεα ὃν κατὰ θυμόν,
ἀρνύμενος ἥν τε ψυχὴν καὶ νόστον ἑταίρων.
ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ὣς ἑτάρους ἐρρύσατο, ἱέμενός περ:
αὐτῶν γὰρ σφετέρῃσιν ἀτασθαλίῃσιν ὄλοντο,
νήπιοι, οἳ κατὰ βοῦς Ὑπερίονος Ἠελίοιο
ἤσθιον: αὐτὰρ ὁ τοῖσιν ἀφείλετο νόστιμον ἦμαρ

The Muse shall tell of the many adventures of that man
Of the many stratagems
Who, after the pillage of that hallowed citadel at Troy,
Saw the towns of many a people and experienced their ways:
He whose vigour, at sea, was weakened by many afflictions
As he strove to win life for himself and return his comrades to their homes.
But not even he, for all this yearning, could save those comrades
For they were destroyed by their own immature foolishness
Having devoured the cattle of Helios, that son of Hyperion,
Who plucked from them the day of their returning [2]

A lesson about ourselves which so many others have attempted to communicate to us, as recounted in a certain tragedy:

οὕτω δ᾽ Ἀτρέως παῖδας ὁ κρείσσων
ἐπ᾽ Ἀλεξάνδρῳ πέμπει ξένιος
Ζεὺς πολυάνορος ἀμφὶ γυναικὸς
πολλὰ παλαίσματα καὶ γυιοβαρῆ
γόνατος κονίαισιν ἐρειδομένου
διακναιομένης τ᾽ ἐν προτελείοις
κάμακος θήσων Δαναοῖσι
Τρωσί θ᾽ ὁμοίως. ἔστι δ᾽ ὅπη νῦν
ἔστι: τελεῖται δ᾽ ἐς τὸ πεπρωμένον

Thus were those sons of Atreus sent forth
By mighty Zeus, guardian of hospitality, against Alexander
On account of that woman who has had many men.
And many would be the limb-wearying combats
With knees pushed into the dirt
And spears worn-out in the initial sacrifice
Of Trojans and Danaans alike.
What is now, came to be
As it came to be. And its ending has been ordained [3]

and as described – millennia ago – by a certain poetess:

φαίνεταί μοι κῆνος ἴσος θέοισιν
ἔμμεν᾽ ὤνηρ, ὄττις ἐνάντιός τοι
ἰσδάνει καὶ πλάσιον ἆδυ φωνεί-
σας ὐπακούει
καὶ γελαίσας ἰμέροεν, τό μ᾽ ἦ μὰν
καρδίαν ἐν στήθεσιν ἐπτόαισεν
ὠς γὰρ ἔς σ᾽ ἴδω βρόχε᾽, ὤς με φώναι-
σ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἒν ἔτ᾽ εἴκει,
ἀλλ᾽ ἄκαν μὲν γλῶσσα <ἔαγε>, λέπτον
δ᾽ αὔτικα χρῶι πῦρ ὐπαδεδρόμηκεν,
ὀππάτεσσι δ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἒν ὄρημμ᾽, ἐπιρρόμ-
βεισι δ᾽ ἄκουαι,
<έκαδε μ᾽ ἴδρως ψῦχρος κακχέεται / κὰδ’ δέ ἴδρως κακχέεται> τρόμος δὲ
παῖσαν ἄγρει, χλωροτέρα δὲ ποίας
ἔμμι, τεθνάκην δ᾽ ὀλίγω ᾽πιδεύης
φαίνομ᾽ ἔμ᾽ αὔται

I see he who sits near you as an equal of the gods
For he can closely listen to your delightful voice
And that seductive laugh
That makes the heart behind my breasts to tremble.
Even when I glimpse you for a moment
My tongue is stilled as speech deserts me
While a delicate fire is beneath my skin –
My eyes cannot see, then,
When I hear only a whirling sound
As I shivering, sweat
Because all of me trembles;
I become paler than drought-grass
And nearer to death [4]

and as, for example, described by the scribe of an ancient Hermetic MS:

Solum enim animal homo duplex est; et eius una pars simplex, quae, ut Graeci aiunt οὐσιώδης, quam vocamus divinae similitudinis formam; est autem quadruplex quod ὑλικὸν Graeci, nos mundanum dicimus, e quo factum est corpus, quo circumtegitur illud quod in homine divinum esse iam diximus, in quo mentis divinitas tecta sola cum cognatis suis, id est mentis purae sensibus, secum ipsa conquiescat tamquam muro corporis saepta.

Humans are the only species that is jumelle, with one aspect that foundation which the Greeks termed οὐσιώδης and we describe as being akin in appearance to divinity, and yet also being quadruplex, termed by the Greeks ὑλικός and which we describe as worldly; whereby from such is the corporeal [body] that, as mentioned, is of – in humans – the divinity, and in which is that divine disposition, to which it is solely related, that is in character a singular perceiveration and untoiling since enclosed within the corporeal. [5]

But will we – can we – mortals, en masse, read, listen, reflect, experience, and so learn? Or will we, as our tragic history of the past three millennia so seems to indicate, continue to be divided – individually, and en masse – between the masculous and the muliebral; between honour and dishonour; between war and peace; between empathy and ipseity?

I do so wish I knew. But all I have to offer, now in the fading twilight of my own mortal life, is an appreciation (perhaps contrary, these days, to οἱ πλέονες) of what some schools, independent (‘private’) or otherwise, still fortunately do understand is the importance of a ‘classical education’, and of what may possibly be apprehended by such poor words of mine as these:

Here, sea, Skylark and such a breeze as rushes reeds
Where sandy beach meets
To meld with sky
And a tumbling cumuli of cloud
Briefly cool our Sun.

I am no one, while ageing memory flows:
For was there ever such a bliss as this
While the short night lasted
And we touched kissed meshed ourselves together
To sweat, sweating, humid,
Fearing so many times to fully open our eyes
Lest it all really was
A dream

But Dawn arrived as it then arrived bringing with its light
Loose limbs and such a reminder
As would could should did
Make us late that day for work.

So, here: a tiredness of age
Brightened by such a June as this
When sandy beach meets
To meld with sky
And that tumbling cumuli of cloud
Briefly cools a Sun

For there are so many recollections of centuries of a so human love, so many memories of years – centuries – of hubris and dishonour, that I can now only live each slowly passing daylight hour modus vivendi:

And the lost heart stiffens and rejoices
In the lost lilac and the lost sea voices
And the weak spirit quickens to rebel [6]


David Myatt
January 2015

[1] Pœmandres (Corpus Hermeticum), 15:

καὶ διὰ τοῦτο παρὰ πάντα τὰ ἐπὶ γῆς ζῷα διπλοῦς ἐστιν ὁ ἄνθρωπος, θνητὸς μὲν διὰ τὸ σῶμα, ἀθάνατος δὲ διὰ τὸν οὐσιώδη ἄνθρωπον. ἀθάνατος γὰρ ὢν καὶ πάντων τὴν ἐξουσίαν ἔχων τὰ θνητὰ πάσχει ὑποκείμενος τῇ εἱμαρμένῃ

Which is why, distinct among all other beings on Earth, mortals are jumelle; deathful of body yet deathless the inner mortal. Yet, although deathless and possessing full authority, the human is still subject to wyrd

See also Sophocles, Antigone, v. 334 & vv. 365-36:

πολλὰ τὰ δεινὰ κοὐδὲν ἀνθρώπου δεινότερον πέλε…
σοφόν τι τὸ μηχανόεν τέχνας ὑπὲρ ἐλπίδ᾽ ἔχων
τοτὲ μὲν κακόν, ἄλλοτ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἐσθλὸν ἕρπει

There exists much that is strange, yet nothing
Has more strangeness than a human being…
Beyond his own hopes, his cunning
In inventive arts – he who arrives
Now with dishonour, then with chivalry

[2] Homer, Odyssey, Book 1, v. 1-9

[3] Aeschylus, Agamemnon, v. 60-68

[4] Sappho, Fragment 31

[5] Asclepius, VII, 13-20

[6] TS Eliot, Ash Wednesday

°°°°°°°°°

cc David Wulstan Myatt 2015
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
(Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0) License
and can be copied and distributed according to the terms of that license.
All translations by DW Myatt

°°°°°°°°°



Myatt: A Letter By Pope Francis

David Myatt

°°°°°°°°°

Two Metaphysical Contradictions Of The Modern West

The letter written by Pope Francis, dated 1° de enero de 2019 and sent to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, seems to me to encapsulate two of the metaphysical contradictions of the modern Western world in regard to the numinous and the profane.

For in the letter Pope Francis, commenting on what the Media has described as “the scandal of clerical abuse” within the Roman Catholic Church, wrote that

La credibilidad de la Iglesia se ha visto fuertemente cuestionada y debilitada por estos pecados y crímenes, pero especialmente por la voluntad de querer disimularlos y esconderlos. [1]

and also used Biblical quotations in support of his arguments.

The use of the phrase pecados y crímenes – sins and crimes – seems to indicate an acceptance of the metaphysical equality of Church and State: of a sin, as defined by the teachings of the Church, and of a crime as defined in laws made by some State [2].

Sins And Crimes: Sacred And Secular

Pope Francis provides the context for one metaphysical contradiction, for in respect of the response he believes is required regarding such “sins and crimes” he writes

Hoy se nos pide una nueva presencia en el mundo conforme a la Cruz de Cristo, que se cristalice en servicio a los hombres y mujeres de nuestro tiempo [3]

That is, there should be a change, a new presencing, and one that serves the people now; the people of our epoch, of our age, of the ‘times’ in which we now live.

This is the epoch in which the Media, using such expressions as a “culture of abuse” – cultura del abuso – can question the credibility of the Roman Catholic Church, and by repetition of particular instances of abuse and the reporting of other ones, demand not only a response from the hierarchy of the Church but a response that conforms to the popular, or to the Media created, expectations of the epoch. Which expectations are that secular justice – as understood and as implemented by the State – has a higher priority than judicium divinum, the divine justice of God or of the gods.

Which divine justice was, at least according to my fallible understanding and as I noted in part two of my In Defence Of The Roman Catholic Church, “often considered more important than secular recompense and secular punishment” especially as personal confession to a Priest, personal penitence, and undertaking the penance prescribed were, in the Roman Catholic Church, a connexion to the Divine. Hence why many of those who, via the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation, confessed to abuse were not “publicly named and shamed” by the Catholic hierarchy, were not brought to the attention of State authorities, but instead given penance and, in some instances, quietly moved and expected to begin a new penitential life in the service of God.

That Pope Francis uses the expression cultura del abuso and writes that la credibilidad de la Iglesia se ha visto fuertemente cuestionada y debilitada por estos pecados y crímenes suggests to me at least two things. First, that the move toward the change he suggests is in part at least placatory, in conformity with our epoch with its powerful secular Media and its powerful modern secular States; and second that the religious, the numinous, the spiritual, balance presenced for millennia by aspects of the Roman Catholic Church [4] – the devotion to the sacred over and above the secular – is continuing to be lost within the Roman Catholic Church, with judicium divinum and the secular justice of some State now apparently considered by the Pope as metaphysically equal. Hence why in a speech to the Roman Curio in December 2018 he said that those who abused children should “hand themselves over to human justice.” [5]

A Revealed Religion

The second metaphysical contradiction, between the sacred and the profane in the modern world, which the Papal letter reveals is the unsurprising and traditional use of Biblical quotations in support of, and to frame, the presented suggestions and argument.

This reliance on written texts and reliance on their exegesis and thus on the varied interpretations that result [6] is an implicit part of all revealed religions from Judaism, to Christianity, to Islam. Since these interpretations can vary and have varied over the centuries the result is schism, reformation and counter-reformation, leading as these did in the past to such things as the suppression of the monasteries, the theft of monastic lands and wealth, and the persecution and martyrdom of Catholics, by a tyrannos named Henry; and leading as they have in more modern times, to the reforms of the Second Vatican Council, and to the proliferation of Christian sects and denominations who have diverse views about such matters as same-gender love and abortion.

Such reliance on such texts, such varying interpretations, are as I have noted elsewhere the fundamental weakness of revealed religions [7] with, in my fallible view, the sacred – the numinous – unable to fully be presenced by such religions.

Thus it does not surprise me that the Roman Catholic Church apparently now considers judicium divinum and the secular justice of some State as metaphysically equal since the conflict between varying interpretations, the apparent desire for placatory reforms – of being “a new presence in the world” – as a consequence of Media attention, and the increasing move away “in this epoch” from a belief in the superiority of judicium divinum (the primacy of the sacred) are necessary consequences of the dialectic of exegesis.

Which is one reason why my personal spiritual belief is now not that of Catholicism even though I sense that Catholicism does still presence some aspects of the numinous.

Instead, I incline toward an apprehension of the divine, the sacred, which is paganus and thus individual, undogmatic, and empathic, since my paganus metaphysics is that of

(i) an (often wordless) awareness of ourselves as a fallible mortal, as a microcosmic connexion to other mortals, to other life, to Nature, and to the Cosmos beyond our world, and (ii) a new civitas, and one not based on some abstractive law but on a spiritual and interior (and thus not political) understanding and appreciation of our own Ancestral Culture and that of others; on our ‘civic’ duty to personally presence καλὸς κἀγαθός and thus to act and to live in a noble way. For the virtues of personal honour and manners, with their responsibilities, presence the fairness, the avoidance of hubris, the natural harmonious balance, the gender equality, the awareness and appreciation of the divine, that is the numinous. [8]

David Myatt
7.i.19

Extract from a reply to someone
who enquired about a Papal Letter in relation to my text
In Defence Of The Roman Catholic Church

°°°°°

[1] “The credibility of the Church has been seriously questioned and undermined by these sins and crimes but especially by a desire to hide or to disguise them.”

The official Vatican translation is “The Church’s credibility has been seriously undercut and diminished by these sins and crimes, but even more by the efforts made to deny or conceal them.”

[2] By the term State is meant the concept of both (i) organizing and controlling – over a particular and large geographical area – land (and resources); and (ii) organizing and controlling individuals over that same geographical particular and large geographical area.

[3] “Today, what is asked of us is to be a new presence in the world that, in conformity with the Cross of Christ, is made clear in service to the men and women of our epoch.”

The official Vatican translation is “What is being asked of us today is a new presence in the world, conformed to the cross of Christ, one that takes concrete shape in service to the men and women of our time.”

[4] As I noted in part one of my In Defence Of The Roman Catholic Church,

“Listening to Messe De La Nativité: Gaudeamus Hodie; Puer Natus Est Nobis performed by Ensemble Gilles Binchois – I am so reminded how the Roman Catholic Church inspired such numinosity, such beauty, century following century. For it is as if such music presenced the Divine to thus remind us, we fallible error-prone mortals, of another realm beyond the material and beyond our own mortal desires.”

[5] Catholic News Agency, December 21, 2018.

[6] Qv. my Tu Es Diaboli Ianua, and Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos.

[7] Qv. (i) Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God; (ii) Tu Es Diaboli Ianua; (iii) Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos.

[8] Tu Es Diaboli Ianua.

°°°°°°°

Article Source:
https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2019/01/07/two-metaphysical-contradictions-of-the-modern-west/

°°°°°°°°°


David Myatt: Forty Years Of Learning

David Myatt

David Myatt

°°°°°°°°°

Q. How would you summarize what you have learnt from your forty years as an activist?

One of the conclusions of such retrospection as I have undertaken in the past few years is of understanding the deeds and the intolerant striving of my extremist decades as reprehensible. Another conclusion concerns my own reprehensible character. Yet another concerns my hubris, or perhaps more correctly my stupidity born of arrogance and fanaticism resulting in a failure, a refusal, to learn from our thousands of years old human culture of pathei-mathos. For such a learning would have placed me and my extremism – me as a masculous talking-mammal – in a supra-personal context, providing a knowledge of those deeds and that striving as having the opposite effect of what I intended or arrogantly believed they would achieve, and of only inflicting, causing, more and more unnecessary suffering.

This supra-personal context is the Cosmic Perspective: of the reality of our individual selves as but one fragile mortal short-lived biological life-form on one planet orbiting one star in one galaxy in a Cosmos of billions of galaxies; of our nations, our national cultures – and everything we manufacture or bring-into-being or presence, from ideas to ideologies to religions to cities to industries to products to archetypes – being not only by their φύσις subject to change and transmutation but also having a certain limited life span, be such in terms of years, decades, centuries, or millennia; of how our pride in our achievements or in our presencings, individual or collective – and such achievements/presencings themselves – should be considered in the context of the possibility of sentient life, some probably more advanced than us, on other planets in our own galaxy and in the billions of galaxies in the Cosmos; of how all life on our own planet, just like ourselves, is fragile, changing, and subject to extinction; and of how what we, as individuals, do or do not do affects or can affect other living beings.

For the Cosmic Perspective is an empathic awareness of not only our place in the Cosmos but also of the affective and acausal connexions that bind all life, on this planet and elsewhere in the Cosmos, and be such life sentient or otherwise. And it is this empathic awareness which, according to my mutable understanding, can provide us with a personal appreciation of the numinous sans the abstractions, the theology, the cosmogony, the dogma, and sans the God/gods, of an organized religion.

My hubriatic error in those extremist decades was essentially two-fold: (i) to aspire to bring-into-being some-thing that would not and could not, in centennial terms (let alone in millennial or cosmic terms) endure; and (ii) to use violence and incite hatred, intolerance, and killing, in order to try and presence that causal some-thing. My perspective, for example, during my neo-nazi decades was very limited, sometimes egoistical. Egoistical in that I enjoyed the striving, the conflict, the incitement, the excitement, and even the violence. Limited, in that my foreseeing was of the next meeting, the next fight, the next demonstration, the next piece of propaganda to produce, my next speech, and of the victory I and others dreamed of or believed in; a victory that would be at most a decade or two ahead.

Of course, I believed that what we or others after us might bring-into-being would endure, most probably at the cost of further conflict; and endure for decades, possibly a century or more. But the reality always was of me and my kind striving to stop or somehow try to control, to shape, the natural flux of change; to preserve, whatever the cost, what we or others after us might bring-into-being.

For we believed we would or could do what no one in human history had been able to do: make our presencings immortal, or at least immune to the natural cycle of birth-life-decay-death. A natural cycle so evident in the rise, the flourishing, the decline, the decay, the death, of empire after empire; national culture after national culture; city after city; language after language; and of a people of a particular size and in a particular area naturally changing, moving, emigrating, immigrating, and thus naturally melding with others. In brief, we (with our simple causal-only perception) hubristically believed or felt that we could, and would, not only master and control Nature and the very forces of the Cosmos but also that our interventions would endure far beyond our own lives. In retrospection, this was fantasy, with the rise and fall and destruction of The Third Reich being just one of the many examples from reality that should have informed us about that fantasy.

           In contrast, my understanding now is that the Cosmic Perspective reveals a particular truth not only about the Anthropocene (and thus about our φύσις as human beings) but also about how sustainable millennial change has occurred and can occur. Which change is via the progression, the evolution – the development of the faculties and the consciousness – of individuals individually. This is the interior, the a-causal, change of individuals wrought by a scholarly learning of and from our thousands of years old human culture of pathei-mathos, by our own pathei-mathos, and by that personal appreciation of the numinous that both the Cosmic Perspective and the muliebral virtues incline us toward.

This aeonic change voids what we now describe by the terms politics and religion and direct social activism of the violent type. There is thus a shift from identifying with the communal, the collective – from identifying with a particular contemporary or a past society or some particular national culture or some particular causal form such as a State or nation or empire or some -ism or some -ology – toward that-which has endured over centuries and millennia: our human culture of pathei-mathos.

For the human culture of pathei-mathos records and transmits, in various ways, the pathei-mathos of individuals over thousands of years, manifest as this sustainable millennial culture is in literature, poetry, memoirs, aural stories, in non-verbal mediums such as music and Art, and in the experiences – written, recorded, and aural – of those who over the centuries have appreciated the numinous, and those who endured suffering, conflict, disaster, tragedy, and war, and who were fundamentally, interiorly, changed by their experiences. And it is this shared human culture of pathei-mathos that extremists of what[ever] kind, and those who advocate -isms and -ologies, scorn and so often try to suppress when, for however short a time, they have political or social or religious power and control over the lives of others.

It is this human culture of pathei-mathos which – at least according to my experience, my musings, and my retrospection – reveals to us the genesis of wisdom: which is that it is the muliebral virtues which evolve us as conscious beings, which presence sustainable millennial change. Virtues such as empathy, compassion, humility, and that loyal shared personal love which humanizes those masculous talking-mammals of the Anthropocene, and which masculous talking-mammals have – thousand year following thousand year – caused so much suffering to, and killed, so many other living beings, human and otherwise.

°°°

Source:
Some Questions For DWM, 2014 (pdf)


Esoteric Notes Concerning The Numinous

°°°°°°°°°

Order of Nine Angles

O9A

Given that the term numinous is part of the O9A expression ‘the sinister-numinous tradition’ – and thus relevant to understanding the esotericism of the Order of Nine Angles – we present here two articles which discuss the term in some detail.

The articles provide the required historical, metaphysical, and esoteric, context for correctly understanding the term; and which context reveals, contrary to a popular misunderstanding, that the term ‘numinous’ – implying “of or relating to a god or a divinity, revealing or indicating the presence of a divinity; divine, spiritual” – was used in English centuries before Rudolf Otto appropriated it to describe mysterium tremendum et fascinans and thus restricted it to religions and to religions experience, which restrictive religious use is quite different from David Myatt’s metaphysical usage:

“The numinous is what manifests or can manifest or remind us of (what can reveal) the natural balance of ψυχή; a balance which ὕβρις upsets. This natural balance – our being as human beings – is or can be manifest to us in or by what is harmonious, or what reminds us of what is harmonious and beautiful.”

Concerning The Numinous
(pdf)

Contents:

° Preface
° I. A Note Regarding The Term Numinous.
° II. The Muliebral Numinous.

°°°°°°°°°


One Exquisite Silence

David Myatt

One Exquisite Silence
(pdf)

°°°°°°°°°

This particular collection of autobiographical poems by David Myatt – first privately circulated under the name DW Myatt in 2010 and with a revised edition printed and published in 2012 under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License – was mentioned by former White House speech-writer Ben Coes in his best-selling novel Power Down. Ben Coes worked in the White House for both President Reagan and President George Bush.

The poems express a little known side of Myatt’s character, the pagan itinerant mystic whose poetry like that of many poets often expresses intensely personal feelings.

This collection of Myatt’s poetry is also available in print: DW Myatt, One Exquisite Silence, ISBN 978-1484179932.

RDM Crew
October 2018


The Myattian Saga Continues

David Myatt

David Myatt

°°°°°°°°°

The Myattian Saga Continues

In the decades long and on-going saga of whether or not David Myatt is or was Anton Long of Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A) fame {1} some of Mr Myatt’s latest writings are intriguing and seem to provide more proof that, as he has maintained all along, he is not and was not Anton Long, founder of the O9A, author of most of its vast Occult corpus, and “paramount to the whole creation and existence of the ONA.” {2}

These latest writings of his include the two part In Defence Of The Catholic Church {3} and his Persecution And War {4}. His In Defence Of The Catholic Church as the title indicates is a defence of the Catholic Church, and in particular in respect of allegations of sexual abuse by priests and monks. The article is based on his personal experience of the Catholic religion from boy to Catholic monk. His Persecution And War is a fascinating, if somewhat annoyingly brief, autobiographical account of some of his experiences as a visiting Catholic in Northern Ireland during The Troubles and of how those experiences helped him when he came to develop his philosophy of pathei mathos.

In part one of In Defence Of The Catholic Church he has many positive things to say about the Catholic Church. Mentioning some medieval liturgical music he writes that he is

“so reminded how the Roman Catholic Church inspired such numinosity, such beauty, century following century. For it is as if such music presenced the Divine to thus remind us, we fallible error-prone mortals, of another realm beyond the material and beyond our own mortal desires.”

He goes on to write that he

“from personal experience appreciate[s] that for all its many faults – recent and otherwise – and despite my disagreement regarding some of its teachings it still on balance does, at least in my fallible opinion, presence – as it has for centuries presenced – aspects of the numinous and which presencing has over centuries, again in my fallible opinion, had a beneficial affect on many human beings.”

He then recounts a journey of his in Africa, commenting about the Christian folk he met that he

“admired them and respected their belief and understood what that faith seemed to have given them. Who was – who am – I to try and preach to them, to judge them and that faith? I was – I am – just one fallible human being who believes he may have some personal and fallible answers to certain questions; just one person among billions aware of his past arrogance and his suffering-causing mistakes.”

As for the allegations of sexual abuse made against priests and monks he is adamant, based on his personal experiences as a Catholic and especially as a Catholic monk, that “they, and the few others like them over the years, were the exception” and that those who believe otherwise commit the logical fallacy of a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter, which basically is to use particular individual cases to form a general rule to then use that rule to describe, and thence to blame, or to castigate, or to defame a whole group. {5}

Such statements by Myatt regarding Catholicism, and such personal feelings as he describes, are not those of a Satanist and not those of someone who associating with the O9A is expected to despise both Christianity in all its forms and Christians themselves. {6}

Part two of his In Defence Of The Catholic Church presents a theological defence of the actions, the response, of the Catholic hierarchy when cases of sexual abuse by priests and monks were made known to them. This is the more interesting part of his article since this theological defence is not only clearly explained by Myatt but also has seldom featured in all the media and other criticism of the response of the Catholic hierarchy.

Myatt’s argument is that in regard to the individuals involved, the Catholic church has a higher spiritual responsibility. Which is to consider and take care of their eternal souls and thus apply the Catholic “sacrament of penance and reconciliation” to them.

Naturally in the modern world of the capitalist West with its secular governments and secular laws this theological view is not popular. Nor a view which many would even consider or understand. Which explains why some States in America, and governments in other lands, have tried to introduce secular laws to break such things as the Catholic “seal of the confessional”. {7}

That Myatt presents and defends a Christian theological argument is not something a Satanist nor someone associating with the O9A would do.

In his Persecution And War Myatt uses his “Catholic remembering” – of Catholic civilians killed by the British army in Northern Ireland – to make a point about prejudice, intolerance, and propaganda, concluding that

“the real tragedy is that events similar to those of my very personal remembering have occurred on a vaster scale millennia after millennia and are still occurring, again on a vaster scale and world-wide, despite us having access to the wisdom of the past.”

These again are not the kind of things a Satanist nor someone associating with the O9A would write.

One final point deserves mentioning. The erudite nature of the articles. There are, as to be expected with Myatt, quotations from the ancient Greek together with his own translations, quotations in Old English and Latin as well as detailed explanations of terms such as “sin” in relation to the New Testament with relevant quotations from the Greek New Testament again with his own translations.

Conclusion

It is conceivable that believers in the Myatt=Long theory, who exist both outside and within the O9A and who seem intent on demonizing Myatt if for different reasons, will in support of that theory claim that someone who was O9A might be devious enough – à la O9A year long Insight Roles – to pretend to write or act as someone who has a diametrically opposite personal character or life to his or her own. Hence someone O9A dialectically praising Christianity.

The fundamental flaw to such a claim in respect of Myatt is that he has been writing similar and consistent things about Christianity, Catholicism, and about prejudice and intolerance since at least 2011, and since then has also penned voluminous other writings about his philosophy of pathei mathos, about compassion, humility, and extremism which echo the sentiments found in the recent writings we have been discussing.

As someone wrote in this regard in 2016,

“All these sentiments, these feelings, are so consistent over so many years, chime so well with his poetry, with the feelings that run through his pre-2009 letters, with his autobiography Myngath, and with post-2011 writings about his philosophy of pathei-mathos, that it seems inconceivable to me that they are artful constructions – fakes – by someone else (or some others) or the product of some ‘sinister trickster’ who has consciously adopted a certain persona in order to try and fool people. Also, what they express is a mysticism, a reverence for and an appreciation of the numinous, so at odds with the ethos and the practice of Satanism – of whatever variety – that it is also inconceivable that they were written by a Satanist or even by a practising Occultist.” {8}

One has for instance only to read essays by Myatt such as his Numinous Expiation {9} and Catholic Still In Spirit? {10} and his book Understanding and Rejecting Extremism {11} to appreciate this.

These latest writings therefore on balance provide more proof that Myatt is not and was not Anton Long. As I wrote in my article Demonizing Mr Myatt

“The demonizers of Myatt have ignored such things because those things reveal a very different Myatt. One at odds with the ‘sinister’ image of him they have all in their own way strived to manufacture and have propagated in pursuit of their aims. For the image of Myatt that emerges from his poetry and his post 2011 writings is of a reclusive man who regrets his extremist past, who values virtues such as empathy and compassion.” {12}

Rachael Stirling
October 2018
v.1.03

{1} The book published earlier this year titled A Modern Mysterium: The Enigma of Myatt And The O9A is a detailed and neutral study of the controversy, including both articles which support the Myatt=Long idea and articles which provide evidence to the contrary, allowing readers to arrive at their own conclusion. The book is available as a gratis open access (pdf) file from https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/myattian-mystery/

See also The Real Anton Long?

{2} Jacob C. Senholt. The Sinister Tradition. A paper presented at the international conference Satanism in the Modern World, Trondheim, 19-20th of November 2009.

{3} The two-part article is available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/in-defence-rc.pdf

{4} https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2018/09/09/persecution-and-war/

{5} In naming the fallacy a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter Myatt pedantically uses the complete Latin phrase rather than the shortened version secundum quid et simpliciter.

{6} Anti-Christian sentiments abound in fundamental O9A texts such as The Black Book of Satan and in the three volumes of Hostia: Secret Teachings Of The ONA.

{7} See for example The Wall Street Journal, October 2, 2018. New Laws Require Priests to Break the Seal of Confession.

{8} JR Wright. The Strange Life Of David Myatt. The essay is included in A Modern Mysterium: The Enigma of Myatt And The O9A.

{9} https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/numinous-expiation/

{10} https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/numinous-expiation/a-catholic-still-in-spirit/

{11} Available from https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/rejecting-extremism/

{12} The article is included in A Modern Mysterium: The Enigma of Myatt And The O9A.

°°°°°°°°°


Myatt: Expiation And Penance

David Myatt

°°°°°°°°°

In Defence Of The Catholic Church
Part Two: Expiation And Penance

Two of the guiding practical principles of living as a Roman Catholic seem to me, on the basis of personal experience and fallible understanding, to be expiation and penance, related as they are to what was termed the Sacrament of Confession – now re-named the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation – and thence related to one of the founding principles of the Roman Catholic Church: that an ordained Priest has the religious authority [1] to give absolution for the “sins” [2] a person has committed, and the authority to specify what penance is required for expiation, but which absolution is dependant on the person making a full and truthful confession and being repentant.

Such personal confession, penance, and expiation, are evidential of how a practising Catholic interacts with the Divine and is thus personally reminded of what is spiritual, eternal, numinous, and beyond the causal everyday world. As I wrote in my essay Numinous Expiation,

“One of the many problems regarding both The Numinous Way and my own past which troubles me – and has troubled me for a while – is how can a person make reparation for suffering caused, inflicted, and/or dishonourable deeds done […]

One of the many benefits of an organized theistic religion, such as Christianity or Islam or Judaism, is that mechanisms of personal expiation exist whereby such feelings can be placed in context and expiated by appeals to the supreme deity. In Judaism, there is Teshuvah culminating in Yom Kippur, the day of expiation/reconciliation. In Catholicism, there is the sacrament of confession and penance. In Islam, there is personal dua to, and reliance on, Allah Ar-Rahman, Ar-Raheem, As-Salaam.

Even pagan religions and ways had mechanisms of personal expiation for wrong deeds done, often in the form of propitiation; the offering of a sacrifice, perhaps, or compensation by the giving or the leaving of a valuable gift or votive offering at some numinous – some sacred and venerated – place or site.” [3]

This personal – and via the Confessional, this priestly – connexion to the Divine, with the attendant penitence, penance, personal expiation, seems to me to have been somewhat neglected when non-Catholics, and even some Catholics criticize the Roman Catholic Church for their past response to those accused of placing their personal (often sexual) desires before compassion, empathy, and humility.

That is, such criticism is secular; based on what is temporal, causal, such as some secular law or some personal emotive reaction, with the spiritual – the eternal – dimension to mortal life unconsidered. Which spiritual dimension is for Catholics based on allowing for personal expiation by spiritual means such as confession, penitence, and penance.

This allowance for such personal expiation by such spiritual means is what, according to my fallible understanding, informed the treatment by the Catholic hierarchy of many of those accused of placing their personal desires before obedience to their God.

For judgement according to such a spiritual dimension was, rightly or wrongly, often considered more important than secular recompense and secular punishment. Understood thus, there were no – to use a vernacular term – “cover-ups”, just the application of certain spiritual considerations, considerations which are the foundations of the Catholic faith based as such considerations are on the belief in the Eternal Life – in Heaven or in Hell – which awaits all mortals, one portal to such an Eternal Life in Heaven being, according to Catholic faith, the sacrament of confession.

Another aspect of this Catholic priority of the spiritual over the secular is the sanctity (the seal) of the confessional and which sanctity is adjudged to be more important than secular laws relating, for example, to disclosure of or information regarding actions deemed to be criminal.

            As for my personal opinions on the matter, I have none, for who am I – with my decades of hubris, my knowledge of my plenitude of mistakes – to judge others, to judge anyone? I have tried to rationally understand both the secular and the spiritual dimensions involved, having personal experience of both, and as so often these days remain somewhat perplexed by our human nature and by the need so many humans, myself included, still have for a belief in a spiritual dimension whereby we can connect ourselves to the numinous, to the Divine – however the Divine is presenced to and in us – enabling us to perhaps find some peace, some happiness, some solace, some answers, among the turmoil, the suffering, the changement, of the secular world.

My portal to the spiritual remains ‘the way of pathei-mathos’, the way of striving to cultivate, striving to live by, the virtues of humility, empathy, compassion, honour, non-interference, and self-restraint. A very individual way devoid of mythoi and anthropomorphic deities.

Perhaps it would be easier to believe in God, to accept again the Catholic expiation of the sacraments of Confession and the Mass. It would perhaps be even easier to accept some tangible votive wordless means in the form of offering some paganus propitiation, some libation, some talismata left, at some numinous paganus site.

But as Aeschylus so well-expressed it,

ἔστι δ᾽ ὅπη νῦν
ἔστι: τελεῖται δ᾽ ἐς τὸ πεπρωμένον:
οὔθ᾽ ὑποκαίων οὔθ᾽ ὑπολείβων
οὔτε δακρύων ἀπύρων ἱερῶν
ὀργὰς ἀτενεῖς παραθέλξει [4]

What is now, came to be
As it came to be. And its ending has been ordained.
No concealed laments, no concealed libations,
No unburnt offering
Can charm away that firm resolve.

Which type of sentiment I feel philosophers such as Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius also saught to express.

David Myatt
4.x.18

In Defence Of The Roman Catholic Church, Part One

°°°

[1] Qv. John 20:22-23,

λάβετε πνεῦμα ἅγιον ἄν τινων ἀφῆτε τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἀφέωνται αὐτοῖς ἄν τινων κρατῆτε κεκράτηνται

Receive Halig Spiritus: if you release anyone from their errors, they are released; if you hold onto them, they are held onto.

In regard to the term Spiritus in my commentary on John 1:31, I wrote:

τὸ πνεῦμα. Almost without exception, since Wycliffe’s Bible the Greek here has been translated as “the spirit”, although the ASV [the Anglo-Saxon Version] has gast (gast of heofenum), whence the later English word ‘ghost’. However, given what the terms ‘spirit’ and ‘ghost’ – both in common usage, and as a result of over a thousand years of Christian exegesis – now impute, it is apposite to offer an alternative and one which is germane to the milieu of the Gospels or which at least suggests something of the numinosity presenced, in this instance, via the Gospel of John. Given that the transliteration pnuema – with its modern association with terms such as pneumatic – does not unequivocally suggest the numinous, I have chosen spiritus, as referenced in respect of gast in Wright’s Anglo-Saxon And Old English Vocabularies.

In regard to the translation Halig Spiritus in my commentary on John 5:33, I wrote:

I have here used the Old English word Halig – as for example found in the version of John 17.11 in the Lindisfarne Gospel, ‘Du halig fæder’ – to translate ἅγιος rather than the later word ‘holy’ derived as that is from halig and used as it was by Wycliffe in his 1389 translation of this phrase, “in the Hooly Gost”, which itself echoes the ASV, “on Halgum Gaste.”

The unique phrase in Halig Spiritus – in place of the conventional ‘with the Holy Spirit’ – may thus express something of the numinosity, and the newness, of the original Gospel, especially as the word ‘holy’ has been much overused, imputes particular meanings from over a thousand years of exegesis, and, latterly in common parlance, has become somewhat trivialized.

[2] As I have noted in several essays, and in my translation of the Gospel of John, I prefer to translate the Greek term ἁμαρτία not by the conventional ‘sin’ but rather by ‘error’ or ‘mistake’. As I wrote in the essay Exegesis and Translation,

One of the prevalent English words used in translations of the New Testament, and one of the words now commonly associated with revealed religions such as Christianity and Islam, is sin. A word which now imputes and for centuries has imputed a particular and at times somewhat strident if not harsh moral attitude, with sinners starkly contrasted with the righteous, the saved, and with sin, what is evil, what is perverse, to be shunned and shudderingly avoided.

One of the oldest usages of the word sin – so far discovered – is in the c. 880 CE translation of the c. 525 CE text Consolatio Philosophiae, a translation attributed to King Ælfred. Here, the Old English spelling of syn is used:

Þæt is swiðe dyslic & swiðe micel syn þæt mon þæs wenan scyle be Gode

The context of the original Latin of Boethius is cogitare, in relation to a dialogue about goodness and God, so that the sense of the Latin is that it is incorrect – an error, wrong – to postulate/claim/believe certain things about God. There is thus here, in Boethius, as in early English texts such as Beowulf, the sense of doing what was wrong, of committing an error, of making a mistake, of being at fault; at most of overstepping the bounds, of transgressing limits imposed by others, and thus being ‘guilty’ of such an infraction, a sense which the suggested etymology of the word syn implies: from the Latin sons, sontis.

Thus, this early usage of the English word syn seems to impart a sense somewhat different from what we now associate with the word sin, which is why in my translation of John, 8.7, I eschewed that much overused and pejorative word in order to try and convey something of the numinous original:

So, as they continued to ask [for an answer] he straightened himself, saying to them: “Let he who has never made a mistake [ Αναμαρτητος ] throw the first stone at her.”

ὡς δὲ ἐπέμενον ἐρωτῶντες αὐτόν, ἀνέκυψεν καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· ὁ ἀναμάρτητος ὑμῶν πρῶτος ἐπ’ αὐτὴν βαλέτω λίθον.

Jesus here is not, in my view, sermonizing about sin, as a puritan preacher might, and as if he is morally superior to and has judged the sinners. Instead, he is rather gently and as a human pointing out an obvious truth about our human nature; explaining, in v.11, that he has not judged her conduct:

ἡ δὲ εἶπεν· οὐδείς, κύριε. εἶπεν δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς· οὐδὲ ἐγώ σε κατακρίνω· πορεύου, ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν μηκέτι ἁμάρτανε

[And] she answered, No one, my Lord. Whereupon Jesus replied “Neither do I judge [κατακρίνω] you, therefore go, and avoid errors such as those.”

The essay is available at https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2013/04/26/exegesis-and-translation/ and was included as an Appendix to my Mercvrii Trismegisti Pymander (ISBN 978-1495470684)

[3] The essay is available at https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/numinous-expiation/

[4] Agamemnon, 67-71

°°°°°

All translations by DWM


Source: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2018/10/04/expiation-and-penance/


In Defence Of The Catholic Church

numinous-religion

°°°°°°°°°

In Defence Of The Roman Catholic Church
Part One

Listening to Messe De La Nativité: Gaudeamus Hodie; Puer Natus Est Nobis performed by Ensemble Gilles Binchois – I am so reminded how the Roman Catholic Church inspired such numinosity, such beauty, century following century. For it is as if such music presenced the Divine to thus remind us, we fallible error-prone mortals, of another realm beyond the material and beyond our own mortal desires.

Such presencing of the Divine – such a numinous reminder of our fallibility, century following century, as for example in Kyrie Orbis Factor as performed by Ensemble Organum – seems to have become somewhat lost in all the recent Media propaganda about how some Catholic priests and monks have allowed their personal desires to overwhelm such a presencing of the numinous and which presencing of the divine is and was manifest in compassion, empathy, and a personal humility.

Lost, in all the Media propaganda, because I from personal experience know that such incidents are perpetrated by a minority of individuals and that the vast majority of Catholic priests and monks are good individuals who strive, who often struggle, each in their own way and according to their physis, to manifest the virtues of compassion, empathy, and humility. That so many writers and readers of such Media propaganda in this our modern world seem to commit the fallacy of a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter no longer, unfortunately, surprises me.

In respect of personal experience I have to admit that I was somewhat dismayed by a recent report issued by a government sponsored Inquiry Panel. For I personally had known two of the individuals mentioned in that report, knowing from personal experience in a certain monastery that they, and the few others like them over the years, were the exception out of dozens and dozens of the other monks and priests there. I was also somewhat dismayed by what I felt was the personal opinion of the authors of that report – stated in their “Conclusions” – that those involved in placing their personal desires before compassion, empathy, and humility, are “likely to be considerably greater than numbers cited in the convictions” since no evidence was presented to substantiate such an opinion. Another example of individuals committing the fallacy of a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter? Probably.

            But why does someone who has developed a somewhat paganus weltanschauung – the mystical individualistic numinous way of pathei-mathos – now defend a supra-personal organization such as the Roman Catholic Church? Because I from personal experience appreciate that for all its many faults – recent and otherwise – and despite my disagreement regarding some of its teachings it still on balance does, at least in my fallible opinion, presence – as it has for centuries presenced – aspects of the numinous and which presencing has over centuries, again in my fallible opinion, had a beneficial affect on many human beings.

As I wrote some years ago in respect of visiting my father’s grave in Africa:

“Once I happened to be travelling to an area which colonial and imperialist Europeans formerly described as part of ‘darkest Africa’. Part of this travel involved a really long journey on unpaved roads by bus from an urban area. You know the type of thing – an unreliable weekly or sporadic service in some old vehicle used by villagers to take themselves (and often their produce and sometimes their livestock) to and from an urban market and urban-dwelling relatives. On this service, to a remote area, it [seemed to be] the custom – before the journey could begin – for someone to stand at the front and say a Christian prayer with every passenger willingly joining in.

It was quite touching. As was the fact that, at the village where I stayed (with a local family) near that grave, everyone went to Church on a Sunday, wearing the best clothes they could, and there was a real sense (at least to me) of how their faith helped them and gave them some guidance for the better, for it was as if they, poor as they were, were in some way living, or were perhaps partly an embodiment of, the ethos expressed by the Sermon of the Mount, and although I no longer shared their Christian faith, I admired them and respected their belief and understood what that faith seemed to have given them.

Who was – who am – I to try and preach to them, to judge them and that faith? I was – I am – just one fallible human being who believes he may have some personal and fallible answers to certain questions; just one person among billions aware of his past arrogance and his suffering-causing mistakes.” [1]

Is to not judge others without a personal knowing of them, to not commit fallacies such as a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter, to allow for personal expiation, perhaps to presence the numinous in at least one small and quite individual way? Personally, I am inclined to believe it is.

Pietatis fons immense, ἐλέησον
Noxas omnes nostras pelle, ἐλέησον [2]

David Myatt
2.x.18

In Defence Of The Roman Catholic Church, Part Two

°°°

[1] https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2012/10/30/just-my-fallible-views-again/

[2] “Immeasurable origin of piety, have mercy. Banish all our faults, have mercy.” Kyrie Orbis Factor.

Although the Greek phrase Κύριε ἐλέησον is considered to be a Christian doxology, deriving from the Old Testament, it is possible that it was a common phrase in Greco-Roman culture, with origins dating back to the classical period, for it occurs in the Discourses of Epictetus – Book II, vii, 13 – in relation to a discussion about divination,

καὶ τὸν θεὸν ἐπικαλούμενοι δεόμεθα αὐτοῦ κύριε ἐλέησον

and in our invocations to the theos our bidding is: Master, have mercy.

°°°°°°°°°


Article source: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2018/10/02/in-defence-of-the-catholic-church/


Myatt’s Philosophy: Honour, Empathy, A Rejection Of Extremism

David Myatt

°°°°°°°°°

Editorial Note:

The following essay is an extract from the book The Mystic Philosophy Of David Myatt by JR Wright and R. Parker, second edition 2018 {1}.

The book provides a detailed analysis of Myatt’s philosophy of pathei mathos; a philosophy, or weltanschauung, which Myatt developed between 2011 and 2015 following his rejection of extremism which, as the author of the following writes,

“was a consequence of pathei mathos – primarily, the suicide of his partner in 2006 – and which learning from grief resulted in him developing what he termed a philosophy of pathei-mathos centred around personal virtues such as humility, compassion, empathy and personal honour.”

It is those virtues which form the core of Myatt’s philosophy, and in our view this extract gets to the heart of that philosophy providing as it does relevant quotations from Myatt’s post-2011 writings.

We have corrected a few typos in the essay.

RDM Crew,
2018

°°°

{1} The book is available as a gratis open access (pdf) document here: https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/myatt-mystic-philosophy-second-edition.pdf

The contents of the book are:

I. A Modern Mystic: David Myatt And The Way of Pathei-Mathos.
II. A Modern Pagan Philosophy.
III. Honour In The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos.
IV. An Overview of The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos.
           Part One: Anti-Racism, Extremism, Honour, and Culture.
           Part Two: Humility, Empathy, and Pathei-Mathos.
V. Classical Paganism And A New Metaphysics.
Appendix I. A Note On Greek Terms In The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos.
Appendix II. Towards Understanding Ancestral Culture.
Appendix III. From Mythoi To Empathy: Toward A New Appreciation Of The
Numinous.

°°°°°°°°°

An Overview of The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos, Part One

It is now generally acknowledged that David Myatt – once renowned as an ideologue {1} and as a ‘theoretician of terror’ {2} – has rejected the extremism that dominated his life for some forty years, thirty of which years were spent as a neo-nazi activist and ten as a “fierce Jihadist” {3} and apologist for Al-Qaeda {4}.

According to his own account {5} this rejection was a consequence of pathei mathos – primarily, the suicide of his partner in 2006 – and which learning from grief resulted in him developing what he termed a philosophy of pathei-mathos centred around personal virtues such as humility, compassion, empathy and personal honour {6}{7}. In addition he has written several interesting, if rather neglected, essays in which he discourses about culture and – politically relevant today – about topics such as extremism. In these discourses, which apply his philosophy to the topics discussed, he is at pains to point out that he presents only his “personal, fallible, opinion about such matters” and that these opinions derive from his decades of “experience of extremists and my decade of study and personal experience of, and involvement with, Islam.” {8}

Culture, Civilization, and Politics

Given Myatt’s predilection during his extremist decades, and especially as a neo-nazi ideologue, for pontificating about both ‘culture’ and ‘civilization’, his mature view of such things, resulting from his recent seven or so years of interior reflection following his learning from grief {9}, are of especial interest.

For he writes that:

“The very usage of the term civilization, for instance, implies a bias; a qualitative often pejorative, prejudiced, assessment and thence a division between something judged ‘better than’ – or ‘superior to’ or ‘more advanced than’ – something else, so that ‘to civilize’ denotes “the action or process of being made civilized” by something or someone believed or considered to be more distinguished, or better than, or superior to, or more advanced.

In common with some other writers, my view is that a clear distinction should be made between the terms culture, society, and civilization, for the terms culture and society – when, for example, applied to describe and distinguish between the customs and way of life of a group or people, and the codes of behaviour and the administrative organization and governance of those residing in a particular geographical area – are quantitative and descriptive rather than qualitative and judgemental. It is therefore in my view inappropriate to write and talk about a European or a Western ‘civilization’ […]

[T]he essence, the nature, of all cultures is the same: to refine, and develope, the individual; to provide a moral guidance; to cultivate such skills as that of reasoning and learning and civility; to be a repository of the recorded/aural pathei-mathos, experiences, and empathic understanding of others (such as our ancestors) over decades, centuries, millennia, as manifest for example in literature, music, memoirs, poetry, history, Art, and often in the past in myths and legends and religious allegories. A recorded/aural pathei-mathos and empathic understanding – a human learning – which teach the same lessons, whatever the culture, whatever the people, whatever the time and whatever the place. The lesson of the importance of a loyal love between two people; the lesson of the importance of virtues such as εὐταξία and honour; the lesson of the need to avoid committing the error of hubris. The lesson of hope, redemption, and change. And the lesson concerning our own nature […]

Ultimately, the assumed or the perceived, the outer, differences do not matter, since what matters for us as human beings capable of reason and civility is our shared humanity and the wisdom that all cultures guide us toward: which wisdom is that it is what is moral – it is what keeps us as mortals balanced, aware of and respective of the numinous – that should guide us, determine our choices and be the basis of our deeds, for our interaction with other human beings, with society, and with the life with which we share this planet.

As outlined in my philosophy of pathei-mathos, my personal view is that the criteria of assessment and judgement are the individual ones of empathy, reason, and the presumption of innocence; which means that abstractions, ideations, theories, and categories, of whatever kind – and whether deemed to be political, religious, or social – are considered as unimportant. That what matters, what is moral, is a very personal knowing in the immediacy-of-the-moment so that what is beyond the purveu of our empathy, of our personal knowing, knowledge, and experience, is something we rationally accept we do not know and so cannot judge or form a reasonable, a fair, a balanced, opinion about. Hence, and for example, individuals and people we do not know, of whatever faith, of whatever perceived ethnicity, sexual orientation, or perceived or assumed or proclaimed culture – whom we have no personal experience of and have had no interaction with over a period of causal time – are unjudged by us and thus given the benefit of the doubt; that is, regarded as innocent, assumed to be good, unless or until direct personal experience, and individual and empathic knowing of them, as individuals, proves otherwise […]

What matters are our own moral character, our interior life, our appreciation of the numinous, and the individual human beings we interact with on the personal level; so that our horizon is to refine ourselves into cultured beings who are civil, reasoned, empathic, non-judgemental, unbiased, and who will, in the words of one guide to what is moral, Ἀπόδοτε οὖν τὰ Καίσαρος Καίσαρι καὶ τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τῷ Θεῷ.” {8}

Myatt’s emphasis is thus on the individual; on their interior life, and their personal interaction with others in what he terms, in his philosophy of pathei-mathos, the immediacy of the personal moment:

“Since the range of our faculty of empathy is limited to the immediacy-of-the-moment and to personal interactions, and since the learning wrought by pathei-mathos and pathei-mathos itself is and are direct and personal, then the knowledge, the understanding, that empathy and pathei-mathos reveal and provide is of the empathic scale of things and of our limitations of personal knowing and personal understanding. That is, what is so revealed is not some grand or grandiose theory or praxis or philosophy which is considered applicable to others, or which it is believed can or should be developed to be applicable to others or developed to offer guidance beyond the individual in political and/or social and/or religious and/or ideological terms; but rather a very personal, individual, spiritual and thus interior, way. A way of tolerance and humility, where there is an acceptance of the unwisdom, the hubris, the unbalance, of arrogantly, pejoratively, making assumptions about who and what are beyond the range of our empathy and outside of our personal experience.” {10}

There is, therefore, a rejection of involvement with politics:

“Given that the concern of the philosophy of pathei-mathos is the individual and their interior, their spiritual, life, and given that (due to the nature of empathy and pathei-mathos) there is respect for individual judgement, the philosophy of pathei-mathos is apolitical, and thus not concerned with such matters as the theory and practice of governance, nor with changing or reforming society by political means.” {11}

In line with the virtues of his philosophy, Myatt is scathing regarding extremism in general:

“One of the worst consequences of the extremism of extremists – of modern hubris in general – is, or seems to me to be, the loss of what is personal, and thus what is human; the loss of the empathic, the human, scale of things; with what is personal, human, empathic, being or becoming displaced, scorned, forgotten, obscured, or a target for destruction and (often violent) replacement by something supra-personal such as some abstract political/religious notion or concept, or some ideal, or by some prejudice and some often violent intolerance regarding human beings we do not personally know because beyond the range of our empathy.

That is, the human, the personal, the empathic, the natural, the immediate, scale of things – a tolerant and a fair acceptance of what-is – is lost and replaced by an artificial scale posited by some ideology or manufactured by some τύραννος; a scale in which the suffering of individuals, and strife, are regarded as inevitable, even necessary, in order for ‘victory to be achieved’ or for some ideal or plan or agenda or manifesto to be implemented. Thus the good, the stability, that exists within society is ignored, with the problems of society – real, imagined, or manufactured by propaganda – trumpeted. There is then incitement to disaffection, with harshness and violent change of and within society regarded as desirable or necessary in order to achieve preset, predetermined, and always ‘urgent’ goals and aims, since slow personal reform and change in society – that which appreciates and accepts the good in an existing society and in people over and above the problems and the bad – is anathema to extremists, anathema to their harsh intolerant empathy-lacking nature and to their hubriatic striving.” {12}

All this amounts to viewing matters – events in the external world, and our relation to other humans – in terms of two principles rather than in terms of politics, ideology, dogma, or revolutionary social change. The first principle is personal honour; the second what Myatt terms ‘the cosmic perspective’, of which perspective Myatt writes:

“The Cosmic Perspective reveals a particular truth not only about the Anthropocene (and thus about our φύσις as human beings) but also about how sustainable millennial change has occurred and can occur. Which change is via the progression, the evolution – the development of the faculties and the consciousness – of individuals individually. This is the interior, the a-causal, change of individuals wrought by a scholarly learning of and from our thousands of years old human culture of pathei-mathos, by our own pathei-mathos, and by that personal appreciation of the numinous that both the Cosmic Perspective and the muliebral virtues incline us toward. This aeonic change voids what we now describe by the terms politics and religion and direct social activism of the violent type. There is thus a shift from identifying with the communal, the collective – from identifying with a particular contemporary or a past society or some particular national culture or some particular causal form such as a State or nation or empire or some -ism or some -ology – toward that-which has endured over centuries and millennia: our human culture of pathei-mathos. For the human culture of pathei-mathos records and transmits, in various ways, the pathei-mathos of individuals over thousands of years, manifest as this sustainable millennial culture is in literature, poetry, memoirs, aural stories, in non-verbal mediums such as music and Art, and in the experiences – written, recorded, and aural – of those who over the centuries have appreciated the numinous, and those who endured suffering, conflict, disaster, tragedy, and war, and who were fundamentally, interiorly, changed by their experiences.” {13}

Given this perspective, and given that personal honour “cannot be extracted out from the living moment and our participation in the moment” {7} and is a necessary virtue, then Myatt’s philosophy, while somewhat redolent of Buddhism, Taoism, and the Catholic contemplative tradition, is rather unique in that the personal use of force (including lethal force) in the immediacy of the moment is justified in personal defence of one’s self or of others, since

“the personal virtue of honour, and the cultivation of wu-wei, are – together – a practical, a living, manifestation of our understanding and appreciation of the numinous; of how to live, to behave, as empathy intimates we can or should in order to avoid committing the folly, the error, of ὕβρις, in order not to cause suffering, and in order to re-present, to acquire, ἁρμονίη. For personal honour is essentially a presencing, a grounding, of ψυχή – of Life, of our φύσις – occurring when the insight (the knowing) of a developed empathy inclines us toward a compassion that is, of necessity, balanced by σωφρονεῖν and in accord with δίκη.” {14}

Given the mention of wu-wei in many of Myatt’s recent writings, it is no surprise that Myatt admits (or, rather, overstates) his debt to Taoism:

“According to my limited understanding and knowledge, I am not expressing anything new here. Indeed, I feel (and I use the word ‘feel’ intentionally) that I am only re-expressing what I intuitively (and possibly incorrectly) understood nearly half a century ago about Taoism when I lived in the Far East and was taught that ancient philosophy by someone who was also trying to instruct me in a particular Martial Art.” {13}

It is therefore possible to speculate that the archetypal follower of Myatt’s philosophy of pathei-mathos – if there were or could be such followers of such a personal philosophy of life – might be akin to one of the following: (i) a reclusive or wandering, or communal living, mystic, concerned only with their interior life and/or with scholarly study, yet prepared – in the immediacy of the moment and when confronted by someone or some group being dishonourable – to do what is honourable in defence of themselves or others even if that meant their own death; (ii) someone outwardly ordinary who was in, or who was seeking, a loving relationship, and who – compassionate and sensitive and cultured – was unconcerned with politics or conventional religion, and yet prepared – in the immediacy of the moment and when confronted by someone or some group being dishonourable – to do what is honourable in defence of themselves or others even if that meant their own death; (iii) someone with an interior sense of what is honourable whose occupation or career or way of life enables them, in a personal manner and within their milieu, to individually do what is honourable, fair, and just; and (iv) someone who – compassionate and empathic by nature – whose occupation or career or way of life enables them, in a personal manner and within their milieu, to individually do what is compassionate and who would – in the immediacy of the moment and when confronted by someone or some group being dishonourable – do what is honourable in defence of themselves or others even if that meant their own death.

In Myatt’s view, such individuals would be acting in a wise way – in accord with the aforementioned cosmic perspective – since:

“The only effective, long-lasting, change and reform that does not cause suffering – that is not redolent of ὕβρις – is the one that changes human beings in an individual way by personal example and/or because of πάθει μάθος, and thus interiorly changes what, in them, predisposes them, or inclines them toward, doing or what urges them to do, what is dishonourable, undignified, unfair, and uncompassionate. That is what, individually, changes or rebalances bad φύσις and thus brings-into-being, or restores, good φύσις.” {15}

For:

“It is inner, personal, change – in individuals, of their nature, their character – that is is the ethical, the numinous, way to solve such personal and social problems as exist and arise. That such inner change of necessity comes before any striving for outer change by whatever means, whether such means be termed or classified as political, social, economic, religious. That the only effective, long-lasting, change and reform is understood as the one that evolves human beings and thus changes what, in them, predisposes them, or inclines them toward, doing or what urges them to do, what is dishonourable, undignified, unfair, and uncompassionate.” {11}

Extremism, Racism, And Prejudice

In Myatt’s philosophy, the personal knowing of others provided by empathy and the self-knowing that pathei-mathos reveals replace the categorizations by which we have assumed we can know and understand others and ourselves:

“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.” {16}

In Myatt’s view, extremism – whether political or religious – makes some category an ideal to be strived for or returned to, since:

“All extremists accept – and all extremisms are founded on – the instinctive belief or the axiom that their cherished ideation(s) or abstraction(s) is or are more important, more valuable, than the individual and the feelings, desires, hopes, and happiness, of the individual. The extremist thus views and understands the world in terms of abstractions; in terms of a manufactured generalization, a hypothesis, a posited thing, an assumption or assumptions about, an extrapolation of or from some-thing, or some assumed or extrapolated ideal ‘form’ of some-thing. Sometimes, abstractions are generalization based on some sample(s), or on some median (average) value or sets of values, observed, sampled, or assumed. Abstractions can be of some-thing past, in the present, or described as a goal or an ideal which it is assumed could be attained or achieved in the future.

The abstractions of extremism are manifest in the ideology, which posits or which attempts to explain (however irrationally and intolerantly) some ideated form, some assumed or believed in perfect (ideal) form or category of some-thing, and which ideated form is or can be or should be (according to the ideology) contrasted with what is considered or assumed to be its opposite.” {17}

Thus in racism individuals are assigned to, associated with, some ‘race’ with the various ‘races’ assigned a qualitative value – describing their ‘worth’ – based on what some ideology or some ideologue state or believe is their contribution to ‘civilization’ and on how useful or harmful they might be to those deeming themselves ‘superior’.

This is immoral, according to Myatt, not only because it is dishonourable but because of the primacy of empathic, of personal, knowing:

“Everything others associate with an individual, or ascribe to an individual, or use to describe or to denote an individual, or even how an individual denotes or describes themselves, are not relevant, and have no bearing on our understanding, our knowledge, of that individual and thus – morally – should be ignored, for it is our personal knowing of them which is necessary, important, valid, fair. For assessment of another – by the nature of assessment and the nature of empathy – can only be personal, direct, individual. Anything else is biased prejudgement or prejudice or unproven assumption.

This means that we approach them – we view them – without any prejudice, without any expectations, and without having made any assumptions concerning them, and as a unique, still unknown, still undiscovered, individual person: as ‘innocent’ until proven, until revealed by their actions and behaviour to be, otherwise. Furthermore, empathy – the acausal perception/knowing and revealing of physis – knows nothing of temporal things and human manufactured abstractions/categories such as assumed or assigned ethnicity; nothing of gender; nothing of what is now often termed ‘sexual preference/orientation’. Nothing of politics, or religion. Nothing of some disability someone may suffer from; nothing of social status or wealth; nothing regarding occupation (or lack of one). Nothing regarding the views, the opinions, of others concerning someone. For empathy is just empathy, a perception different from our other senses such as sight and hearing, and a perception which provides us, or which can provide us, with a unique perspective, a unique type of knowing, a unique (acausal) connexion to the external world and especially to other human beings.

Empathy – and the knowing that derives from it – thus transcends ‘race’, politics, religion, gender, sexual orientation, occupation, wealth (or lack of it), ‘status’, and all the other things and concepts often used to describe, to denote, to prejudge, to classify, a person; so that to judge someone – for example – by and because of their political views (real or assumed) or by their religion or by their sexual orientation is an act of hubris.

In practice, therefore, in the revealing of the physis of a person, the political views, the religion, the gender, the perceived ethnicity, of someone are irrelevant. It is a personal knowing of them, the perception of their physis by empathy, and an acceptance of them as – and getting to know them as – a unique individual which are important and considered moral; for they are one emanation of the Life of which we ourselves are but one other finite and fallible part.” {12}

However, Myatt’s analysis of extremism goes much further. Based on his forty years of personal experience he considers that the extremist is a particular type of person “by nature or becomes so through association with or because of the influence of others, or because of ideological indoctrination” and that

“it is in the nature of extremists that they disdain, and often despise, the muliebral virtues of empathy, sensitivity, humility, gentleness, forgiveness, compassion, and the desire to love and be loved over and above the desire for conflict, territorial identity, and for war. Thus we find in extremism a glorification of the masculous at the expense of the muliebral; a definite personal certitude of knowing; a glorification of toughness and aggression
and war; an aggressive territorial pride; a tendency to believe, or the forthright assertion, that ‘might is right’ and kampf is necessary; the desire to organize/control; a prominent desire for adventure and/or for conflict/war and/or violence and competition.” {17}

Thus, in Myatt’s philosophy, the extremist is hubriatic: unbalanced because lacking in – or having rejected or suppressed – the muliebral virtues which are or which should be an essential part of our human nature and the genesis of all culture; with the need for such muliebral virtues, for such a balance, and the necessity of culture, among the important things that ‘our culture of pathei-mathos’ informs us about {18}. Little wonder, then, that

“it is [our] shared human culture of pathei-mathos that extremists of whatever kind, and those who advocate -isms and -ologies, scorn and so often try to suppress when, for however short a time, they have political or social or religious power and control over the lives of others. It is this human culture of pathei-mathos which – at least according to my experience, my musings, and my retrospection – reveals to us the genesis of wisdom: which is that it is the muliebral virtues which evolve us as conscious beings, which presence sustainable millennial change. Virtues such as empathy, compassion, humility, and that loyal shared personal love which humanizes those masculous talking-mammals of the Anthropocene, and which masculous talking-mammals have – thousand year following thousand year – caused so much suffering to, and killed, so many other living beings, human and otherwise.” {13}

Furthermore, according to Myatt:

“Given the masculous nature and the masculous ethos of extremism, it is no surprise that the majority of extremists are men; and given that, in my own opinion, the predominant ethos of the last three millennia – especially within the societies of the West – has been a masculous, patriarchal, one it is no surprise that women were expected to be, and often had no option but to be, subservient, and no surprise therefore that a modern movement has arisen to try and correct the imbalance between the masculous and the muliebral […]

[Yet] it is only by using and developing our faculty of empathy, on an individual basis, that we can apprehend and thence understand the muliebral; [for] the muliebral can only be manifested, presenced, individually in our own lives according to that personal, individual, apprehension. Presenced, for example, in our compassion, in our honour, by a personal loyal love, and in that appreciation of innocence and of the numinous that inclines us, as individuals, to reject all prejudice and to distance ourselves from that pride, that certainty-of-knowing about ourselves and those presumptions we make about others, which are so redolent of, and which so presence and have so presenced, the patriarchal ethos.” {13}

Extremism and racism, therefore, are understood in Myatt’s philosophy in relation to hubris and enantiodromia:

“Enantiodromia is the term used, in the philosophy of pathei-mathos, to describe the revealing, the process, of perceiving, feeling, knowing, beyond causal appearance and the separation-of-otherness and thus when what has become separated – or has been incorrectly perceived as separated – returns to the wholeness, the unity, from whence it came forth. When, that is, beings are understood in their correct relation to Being, beyond the causal abstraction of different/conflicting ideated opposites, and when as a result, a reformation of the individual, occurs. A relation, an appreciation of the numinous, that empathy and pathei-mathos provide, and which relation and which appreciation the accumulated pathei-mathos of individuals over millennia have made us aware of or tried to inform us or teach us about.” {14}

“For what the culture of pathei-mathos reveals is that we human beings, are – personally – both the cause and the cure of suffering; and that our choice is whether or not we live, or try to live, in a manner which does not intentionally contribute to or which is not the genesis of new suffering. The choice, in effect, to choose the way of harmony – the natural balance – in preference to hubris.” {19}

Conclusion

In his seminal and scholarly essay Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God {19}, Myatt places the ethics of his philosophy in the context of the theories of ethics postulated by Christianity, by Islam, and by the proponents of the modern State. He concludes, in respect of his philosophy and its ethics, that:

“The alternative ontology, derived from the culture of pathei-mathos, suggests that the answer to the question regarding the meaning of our existence is simply to be that which we are. To be in balance, in harmony, with Life; the balance that is love, compassion, humility, empathy, honour, tolerance, kindness, and wu-wei. This, by its nature, is a personal answer and a personal choice; an alternative way that compliments and is respectful of other answers, other choices, and of other ways of dealing with issues such as the suffering that afflicts others, the harm that humans do so often inflict and have for so long inflicted upon others. The personal non-judgemental way, of presumption of innocence and of wu-wei, balanced by, if required, a personal valourous, an honourable, intervention in a personal situation in the immediacy of the moment.”

However, this answer is contingent on understanding, via empathy and pathei-mathos, not only ‘the illusion of ipseity’ {16} – the ‘separation-of-otherness’ – but also the cosmic perspective and thus the temporary nature of all our human manufactured forms, categories, and abstractions, for according to Myatt:

“There has been, as there still is, at least in my view, a failure to appreciate two things. Firstly, the causal (the mortal) nature of all forms: from institutions, governments, laws, States, nations, movements, societies, organizations, empires, to leaders and those embodying in some manner the authority, the volksgeist, the ideations, the principles, the aspirations, of their time. Secondly, and possibly most important of all, that what is muliebral cannot be embodied in some organization or movement, or in some -ism, or in any causal form – and certainly cannot be expressed via the medium of words, whether spoken or written – without changing it, distorting it, from what it is into some-thing else. For the muliebral by its very φύσις is personal, individual, in nature and only presenced in the immediacy-of-the-moment, and thus cannot be the object of a supra-personal aspiration and thus should not be ‘idealized’ or even be the subject of an endeavour to express it in some principles or principles (political or otherwise), or by some axiom or axioms, or by some dogma. For all such things – forms and words included – are manifestations, a presencing, of what is, in φύσις, masculous and temporal. Or, expressed more simply, the muliebral presences and manifests what is a-causal – what, in the past, has often inclined us to appreciate the numinous – while the masculous presences and manifests what is causal, temporal, and what in the past has often inclined us toward hubris and being egoistic.” {13}

Myatt’s comprehensive philosophy – propounded in various writings between 2012 and 2014 and which he recently described as being just his personal weltanschauung rather than a philosophy {20} – thus provides an interesting, intriguing, and insightful if iconoclastic, analysis of extremism and contemporary society as well as offering an understandable ethics centred on personal honour, a rather mystical ontology, and a somewhat mystical answer to the question of existence; and although his philosophy certainly deserves to be more widely studied and more widely appreciated, it will doubtless – given Myatt’s outré and controversial life – continue to be neglected for many, many, decades to come.

R. Parker
2014

Notes

{1} (a) Barnett, Antony. Right here, right now, The Observer, February 9, 2003. (b) Michael, George. The Enemy of My Enemy: The Alarming Convergence of Militant Islam and the Extreme Right. University Press of Kansas, 2006, p. 142ff.
{2} Searchlight, July 2000.
{3} Amis, Martin. The Second Plane. Jonathan Cape, 2008, p.157
{4} (a) Simon Wiesenthal Center: Response, Summer 2003, Vol 24, #2. (b) Wistrich, Robert S. A Lethal Obsession: Anti-Semitism from Antiquity to the Global Jihad, Random House, 2010.
{5} (a) Myatt, David. Myngath – Some Recollections of a Wyrdful and Extremist Life. 2013. ISBN 978-1484110744. (b) Myatt, David. Understanding And Rejecting Extremism. 2013. ISBN 978-1484854266
{6} Myatt’s philosophy of pathei-mathos is described in the following three published collections of his essays: (a) The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos. 2013. ISBN 978-1484096642. (b) One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings. 2014. ISBN 978-1502396105. (c) Religion, Empathy, and Pathei-Mathos. 2013. ISBN 978-1484097984
The three collections of essays are also available, as of October 2014 and as pdf files, from his weblog at http://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/
{7} Of the virtue of personal honour, Myatt writes that it

“presences the virtues of fairness, tolerance, compassion, humility, and εὐταξία – as (i) a natural intuitive (wordless) expression of the numinous (‘the good’, δίκη, συμπάθεια) and (ii) of both what the culture of pathei-mathos and the acausal-knowing of empathy reveal we should do (or incline us toward doing) in the immediacy of the personal moment when personally confronted by what is unfair, unjust, and extreme […]

[For] such honour – by its and our φύσις – is and can only ever be personal, and thus cannot be extracted out from the ‘living moment’ and our participation in the moment; for it only through such things as a personal study of the culture of pathei-mathos and the development of the faculty of empathy that a person who does not naturally possess the instinct for δίκη can develope what is essentially ‘the human faculty of honour’, and which faculty is often appreciated and/or discovered via our own personal pathei-mathos.” The Way Of Pathei-Mathos – A Précis, in One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings.

{8} Myatt, David. Let Us Then Try What Love Can Do. 2012. e-text.
{9} The Development of the Numinous Way. The essay is included, as an appendix, in the printed version of his autobiography Myngath, ISBN 978-1484110744
{10} Conspectus of The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos. 2012. The essay is included in Myatt’s book The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos, ISBN 978-1484096642
{11} Society, Politics, Social Reform, and Pathei-Mathos. 2012. The essay is included in The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos, ISBN 978-1484096642
{12} Some Personal Musings On Empathy In Relation to the Philosophy of πάθει μάθος. 2012. The essay is included in The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos, ISBN 978-1484096642
{13} Some Questions For DWM. 2014. The essay is included in One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings, 2014, ISBN 978-1502396105
{14} The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos. 2013. ISBN 978-1484096642
{15} The Way of Pathei-Mathos – A Philosophical Compendium. 2012. The essay is included in The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos, ISBN 978-1484096642
{16} See: (a) Toward Understand The Acausal, and (b) The Way Of Pathei-Mathos – A Précis. Both essays are included in One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings, 2014, ISBN 978-1502396105
{17} Myatt, David. Understanding And Rejecting Extremism. 2013. ISBN 978-1484854266
{18} Regarding ‘the culture of pathei-mathos’ – a key part of his philosophy – see Myatt’s 2014 essay Education And The Culture Of Pathei-Mathos, which is included in One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings, ISBN 978-1502396105
{19} Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God. 2013. The essay is included in Religion, Empathy, and Pathei-Mathos, ISBN 978-1484097984


A Very Different Perspective

odal3

°°°°°°°°°

A Very Different Perspective
(pdf)

The compilation conveniently gathers together articles published in late 2017 and early 2018 all but one of which discuss or which review some of David Myatt’s recent books and essays. The articles draw attention to or explain various aspects of Mr Myatt’s philosophy and metaphysical writings such as his usage of terms such as “the numinous” and the “new pagan metaphysics” which he has proposed.

The one exception is the article titled Decoding The Life Of Myatt which provides an overview of Mr Myatt’s controversial life.

As the authoress of one of the articles included notes, “there is a cultural revolution in the truths embedded in the book Regarding Western Paganism And Hermeticism and in the [Myattian] texts referenced therein. But whether such truths can replace the prevalent and mistaken belief that Christianity is somehow the embodiment of Western culture remains to be seen.”

As noted in another article also included, recent works by Myatt provide “an intellectual basis for a new, an enlightened, paganism firmly rooted in an understanding of our debt to Greco-Roman, pagan, culture.”


Book Review: Western Paganism And Hermeticism

odal3

°°°°°°°

Regarding Western Paganism And Hermeticism
(pdf)

The book, available as a gratis open access pdf document, is comprised of nine essays by various authors which deal with or which review David Myatt’s translations of Hermetic texts and his two recent books Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos and Tu Es Diaboli Ianua; plus – as an appendix – a reprint of Myatt’s relevant article Concerning ἀγαθός and νοῦς in the Corpus Hermeticum.

In her Preface, the editor – authoress of one of the essays in the book – succinctly expresses the raison d’etre of those Myatt books and translations of Hermetic texts, and also of the included essays, writing that

“Myatt’s thesis […] is that Western paganism is essentially the classical paganism of Ancient Greece and Rome and represents the ethos of the culture of the West, which ethos the Hebraic religion of Christianity supplanted. It is our view that those translations, the associated commentaries, and such books enable an insight into, and thus the evolution of, Western culture.”

She also quotes from one of those essays – Re-discovering Western Paganism – whose authors wrote that Myatt’s translations of classical and hermetic texts “when studied together enable us to appreciate and understand the classical, pagan, ethos and thence the ethos of the West itself.”

Collectively the essays present a decidedly new view of Western paganism which is contrary to that of Western neopagan revivals (sometimes described as contemporary Western paganism) and which neopagan revivals mostly devolve around ancient named gods and goddesses, such as those of Viking or Germanic mythology or those associated with Celtic legends of ancient Britain and Ireland. In addition, such modern revivals often involve romanticized rituals and ceremonies such as those now associated with the self-described Druids at Stonehenge during Summer Solstice sunrise at Stonehenge.

As the authoress of the eighth essay – A New Pagan Metaphysics – explains, referencing Myatt’s books Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos and Tu Es Diaboli Ianua as well as his essay From Mythoi To Empathy, this new view of Western paganism is an evolution, a move away from perceiving paganism in terms of mythology and legends to a modern philosophical, ethical, and rational understanding of it. This understanding is of καλὸς κἀγαθός – of nobility of personal character – and which Ancient Greek expression, according to Myatt, represents the ethos of not only Greco-Roman culture but also the non-Christian West. As Myatt notes in his Tu Es Diaboli Ianua, it involves

“an awareness and acceptance of one’s civic duties and responsibilities undertaken not because of any personal benefit (omni utilitate) that may result or be expected, and not because an omnipotent deity has, via some written texts, commanded it and will punish a refusal, but because it is the noble, the honourable – the gentlemanly, the lady-like, the human – thing to do.”

The book therefore takes us on a journey to a different – and for many of us to a new – world, far away from the religious attitudes of the old world as evoked, not only by Christianity, but also by neopaganism with its rituals, mythologies, polytheism and – in some manifestations – ‘magical’ spells, charms, and beliefs.

This new world is, as the authoress of the seventh essay – Suffering, Honour, And The Culture Of The West – makes clear, one where personal honour reigns manifesting as it does what is ethical and noble and ineluctably Western.

The book is highly recommended.

Kerri Scott
March 2018


Suffering, Honour, And The Culture Of The West

David Myatt

David Myatt

°°°°°°°

Suffering, Honour, And The Culture Of The West

A theme of David Myatt’s post-2011 writings – and of his philosophy of pathei-mathos {1} – is the question of human-caused suffering leading him to ask whether we humans have changed significantly, en masse, such that such suffering is less now than in the past three to four thousand years. Which question led him to write

“if we do not or cannot learn from our human culture of pathei-mathos, from the many thousands of years of such suffering as that culture documents and presents and remembers; if we no longer concern ourselves with de studiis humanitatis ac litterarum, then do we as a sentient species deserve to survive?” {2}

A century after the mechanized slaughter of the First World War which killed millions of people and injured millions more, and seventy-three years after the slaughter and suffering of millions more people in the Second World War, human-caused suffering continues around the world. War and armed conflict and destruction in the Middle East and Africa and elsewhere. Terrorist attacks in Europe, America, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, and elsewhere. Meanwhile humans, individually and in small groups, continue to kill, rape, and be brutal and violent and oppressive toward and injure and cause suffering to other human beings in hundreds of thousands of attacks every year all around the world.

As Myatt wrote in respect of the suffering caused by war and armed conflict,

“it is as if we, as a sentient species, have learnt nothing from the past four thousand years. Nothing from the accumulated pathei-mathos of those who did such deeds or who experienced such deeds or who suffered because of such deeds. Learnt nothing from four thousand years of the human culture that such pathei-mathos created and which to us is manifest – remembered, celebrated, transcribed – in Art, literature, memoirs, music, poetry, myths, legends, and often in the ethos of a numinous ancestral awareness or in those sometimes mystical allegories that formed the basis for a spiritual way of life.

All we have done is to either (i) change the names of that which or those whom we are loyal to and for which or for whom we fight, kill, and are prepared to die for, or (ii) given names to such new causes as we have invented in order to give us some identity or some excuse to fight, endure, triumph, preen, or die for. Pharaoh, Caesar, Pope, Defender of the Faith, President, General, Prime Minister; Rome, Motherland, Fatherland, The British Empire, Our Great Nation, North, South, our democratic way of life. It makes little difference; the same loyalty; the same swaggering; the same hubris; the same desire, or the same obligation or coercion, to participate and fight.” {3}

While in regard to humans killing, injuring, being violent toward and preying on other humans he asked,

“Must we therefore be resigned to suffering, to misery, to injustices, to the iniquity, to the continuing iniquity, of selfish, hubriatic, individuals who bully, rape, scheme, subjugate, manipulate, injure, maim, and kill? Reassured by judicium divinum or – perhaps – hoping, trusting, in the pending justice of some judge, some government, or some State?” {4}

Myatt writes that his

“fallible answer to the question of how to deal with the suffering that blights this world [is] the answer of a personal honour. That is, for each of us to gently try to carry that necessary harmony, that balance, of δίκη, wordlessly within; to thus restrain ourselves from causing harm while being able, prepared, in the immediacy of the moment, to personally, physically, restrain – prevent – others when we chance upon such harm being done. This, to me, is Life in its wholesome natural fullness – as lived, presenced, by the brief, mortal, consciously aware, emanations we are; mortal emanations capable of restraint, reason, culture, and reforming change; of learning from our pathei-mathos and that of others.” {4}

His “fallible answer” may seem to many to be somewhat idealistic given the reality that those (to use a Myattian term) with a bad or rotten physis are not going to suddenly change their personality or are congenitally incapable of learning from ‘the culture of pathei-mathos’. But understood in the context of his philosophy the answer is logical given Myatt’s analysis of what the actual problem is or might be. An analysis which reveals that his philosophy is far from idealistic and in truth is rather radical, for in respect of the causes of suffering he writes in one memorable essay that

“It is almost as if we – somehow flawed – need something beyond our personal lives to vivify us; to excite us; to test ourselves; to identify with. As if we cannot escape the barbarian who lies in wait, within; ready to subsume us once again so that we sally forth on behalf of some cause, some leader, or some ideal, or some abstraction, or as part of some crusade. As if we human beings, as Sophocles intimated over two thousand years ago, are indeed, by nature, and have remained sometimes honourable and sometimes dishonourable beings, able to sometimes be rational, thinking, beings, but also unable to escape our desire, our need, our propensity, to not only be barbaric but to try to justify to ourselves and to others our need for, and even our enjoyment of, such barbarity.

Or perhaps the stark truth is that it is we men who are flawed or incomplete and who thus need to change. As if we, we men, have not yet evolved enough to be able to temper, to balance, our harsh masculous nature with the muliebral; a balance which would see us become almost a new species; one which has, having finally sloughed off the suffering-causing hubriatic patriarchal attitudes of the past, learnt from the pathei-mathos of our ancestors, from the pathei-mathos of our human culture, born and grown and nurtured as our human culture was, has been, and is by over four thousand years of human-caused suffering. A learning from and of the muliebral, for the wyrdful thread which runs through, which binds, our human pathei-mathos is a muliebral one: the thread of kindness, of gentleness, of love, of compassion; of empathy; of the personal over and above the supra-personal.” {5}

In a later essay he is even more forthright, stating that

“it is men – unbalanced in physis – who have caused and are responsible for wars, invasions, and the deaths and destruction and suffering that results, just as most violent crime and murders are caused by men. And it is they, of course, who have – also for millennia – dominated and manipulated women (or tried to), who have raped women, who have physically abused them, and killed so many of them, and all because some men cannot control themselves lacking as they do the virtue of honour.” {6}

In regard to how he arrived at this conclusion he derived it as he derived most of his philosophy from his own pathei-mathos, from his own practical experiences extending over some four decades.

“As I know from my outré experience of life – especially my forty years of extremism, hubris, and selfishness; my terms of imprisonment, my experience with gangs, with people of bad intentions and with those of good intentions – it really is as if we terran men have, en masse, learnt nothing from the past four or five thousand years.” {7}

He is therefore not being idealistic or academic in an ‘ivory tower’ sort of way or basing his argument on statistics or on theories or ideologies propounded by others. He is instead writing from life having analysed his outré, his exeatic, his diverse experiences using ‘the human culture of pathei-mathos’ as a guide and it is therefore on that basis that his conclusions should be understood, judged and appreciated.

It is on that basis that in 2012 he wrote that

“the uncomfortable truth is that we, we men, are and have been the ones causing, needing, participating in, those wars and conflicts. We – not women – are the cause of most of the suffering, death, destruction, hate, violence, brutality, and killing, that has occurred and which is still occurring, thousand year upon thousand year; just as we are the ones who seek to be – or who often need to be – prideful and ‘in control’; and the ones who through greed or alleged need or because of some ideation have saught to exploit not only other human beings but the Earth itself. We are also masters of deception; of the lie. Cunning with our excuses, cunning in persuasion, and skilled at inciting hatred and violence. And yet we men have also shown ourselves to be, over thousands of years, valourous; capable of noble, selfless, deeds. Capable of doing what is fair and restraining ourselves from doing what is unethical. Capable of a great and a gentle love.

This paradoxy continues to perplex me. And I have no answers as to how we might change, reform, this paradoxical φύσις of ours, and so – perhaps – balance the suffering-causing masculous with the empathic muliebral and yet somehow in some way retain that which is the genesis of the valourous.” {7}

It is clear from his later writings that from 2012 on he pondered upon that paradoxy and arrived at a tentative and, in his words, a fallible answer. Which pondering he describes in some detail in his lengthy five part essay, published in 2013, titled Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God, and in which essay he gave voice to his doubts about the current solutions to the problem of personally-caused suffering – such as believing in judicium divinum (divine justice) or “trusting in the pending justice of some judge, some government, or some State.” In a poignant passage he asked in respect of those personally causing suffering whether it was wrong for him

“to still feel the need for someone, some many, somewhere, to somehow in some way forestall, prevent, such deeds by such persons as may unjustly harm some others so that there is no waiting for the divine justice of a deity; no waiting for some Court somewhere to – possibly, and sometimes – requite a grievous wrong. No waiting for that promised idealistic idyllic future society when we humans – having somehow (perhaps miraculously) been changed in nature en masse – have ceased to so grievously, harmfully, selfishly, inflict ourselves on others.” {4}

He then presented his fallible answer, which was that

“of a personal honour. That is, for each of us to gently try to carry that necessary harmony, that balance, of δίκη, wordlessly within; to thus restrain ourselves from causing harm while being able, prepared, in the immediacy of the moment, to personally, physically, restrain – prevent – others when we chance upon such harm being done.” {4}

Myatt thus championed not only personal self-defence and “valorous defence of another in a personal situation” but also “if our personal judgement of the circumstances deem it necessary, lethal force.” {8}

In respect of the question of suffering he therefore advocated something both quite practical, and quite radical at least the lands of the developed nations of the West.

The Practicalities of Personal Honour

As befits his decades of personal experience of the practicalities of life – thirty years as a violent political activist and propagandist, ten years as a Muslim activist, several years leading a criminal gang, among other experiences – Myatt was aware of how the governments of the nations of the West disapproved of individuals using their own judgement in regard to employing lethal force with many outlawing the carrying weapons enabling effective self-defence and the “valorous defence of another in a personal situation.”

In reply to a question asked of him in 2015 he wrote

“how – or even can – societies in the West and around the world promote the virtue of empathy and personal honour, and if they could, would they want to given how most such societies (especially those in the West) are based on law and justice being the prerogative of the State? In respect of empathy at least, there is – as I suggested – the solution of Studia Humanitatis; that is, the solution of educating citizens in what I have termed the culture of pathei- mathos.

But since personal honour means that individuals should have the right to bear and carry weapons, and be lawfully able – in the immediacy of the personal moment – to use such weapons in self-defence and in valorous defence of others dishonourably attacked, it is most unlikely the governments or politicians of modern Western societies would even consider such an honourable solution to the problem of suffering. Indeed, they seem to be moving toward even more restrictions on individuals bearing and carrying weapons; moving toward severely punishing those who use weapons in self-defence or even in valorous defence of others dishonourably attacked.

That is, that there is in many Western societies a desire, by governments and politicians, for more control over their citizens, for more interventions, at home and abroad, in the name of ‘security’, and for the use of force to be lawfully restricted to those – such as the Police or the armed forces – who are appointed and who serve on the basis of a chain of command which stops with some government representative or some politician or some military leader responsible to one of the foregoing.

Thus, while I personally strive to uphold what honour demands in the immediacy of the moment, most people – even if they agreed with the principle – would be wary of doing so, given current laws in a country such as Britain. Or, more probably, they would consider it an unnecessary and possibly a retrograde thing to do.” {9}

Although in the same reply he admits that his “own preoccupation in respect of personal honour may be somewhat misplaced” it is clear that regardless of such and other diplomatic language he personally supports the right of individuals to carry weapons for use in self-defence and in defence of others dishonourably attacked even though many Western governments have, fairly recently (in the last one hundred years), deemed the carrying of such weapons to be illegal despite the fact that the carrying of such weapons for such purposes was for thousands of years an acceptable cultural and ancestral custom among the peoples of the West.

Which perhaps – and yet again – places Myatt on the side of our ancestral Western culture. An ancestral culture whose metaphysics and ethos he has not only described in recent (2017) works of his such as Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos and Tu Es Diaboli Ianua but also and importantly evolved, beyond mythoi and thus beyond named gods and goddesses.

A Western culture exemplified, according to Myatt, by καλὸς κἀγαθός. That is, by those who “conduct themselves in a gentlemanly or lady-like manner and who thus manifest – because of their innate physis or through pathei-mathos or through a certain type of education or learning – nobility of character,” {10} and which nobility of character is manifest in “the virtues of personal honour and manners” {10} and which Western culture was also – according to Myatt and contra modern ‘political correctness’ – manifest in a natural and necessary aristocracy composed of those who possess nobility of character and who thus exemplify καλὸς κἀγαθός.

Rachael Stirling
February 2018

{1} The book The Mystical Philosophy of David Myatt by Wright & Parker is an informative guide to Myatt’s philosophy. The book is available as a gratis open access pdf document here: https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/myatt-mystic-philosophy-second-edition.pdf
{2} Education And The Culture Of Pathei-Mathos. 2014.
{3} A Slowful Learning, Perhaps. 2012.
{4} Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God, Part Five. 2013.
{5} A Slowful Learning, Perhaps. 2012.
{6} Questions For DWM. 2015.
{7} Blue Reflected Starlight. 2012.
{8} qv. The Numinous Balance of Honour section of the chapter The Way of Pathei-Mathos – A Philosophical Compendium in Myatt’s 2013 book The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos.
{9} Questions For DWM, 2015.
{10} Tu Es Diaboli Ianua. 2017

°°°°°

Further Reading:
Tu Es Diaboli Ianua
(pdf)
Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos
(pdf)


cc Rachael Stirling 2018

This work is issued under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0) license
and can be freely copied and distributed, under the terms of that license.


Myatt Mystical Philosophy, Second Edition

°°°°°°°

 

The second edition includes (i) a new essay, Classical Paganism And A New Metaphysics, describing how Myatt’s recent books – Tu Es Diaboli Ianua and Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos – illuminate aspects of his philosophy, and (ii) two short essays by Myatt published in January 2018 concerning his use of the terms numinous and ‘ancestral culture’.

Contents:

I. A Modern Mystic: David Myatt And The Way of Pathei-Mathos.
II. A Modern Pagan Philosophy.
III. Honour In The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos.
IV. An Overview of The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos.
V. Classical Paganism And A New Metaphysics.
Appendix I. A Note On Greek Terms In The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos.
Appendix II. Towards Understanding Ancestral Culture.
Appendix III. From Mythoi To Empathy: Toward A New Appreciation Of The Numinous.


A New Metaphysics

David Myatt

David Myatt

°°°°°°°

A New Pagan Metaphysics

In November of 2017 David Myatt published his book Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos in which he described his view of the difference between Christianity and the paganism of Ancient Greece and Rome and set out to, in his words, develope that “paganism in a metaphysical way, beyond the deities of classical mythos.”

This was followed a month later by his Tu Es Diaboli Ianua and in which iconoclastic work he provided his answers to particular metaphysical questions such as whether Christianity really is a suitable presencing of the numinous. If it is not, “then what non-Christian alternatives – such as a paganus metaphysics – exist, and what is the foundation of such an alternative.”

While these books are not expositions of his philosophy they not only provide interesting and relevant insights into Christianity and classical paganism but also illuminate particular aspects of his own philosophy. For instance, in Tu Es Diaboli Ianua he writes that “the numinous is primarily a manifestation of the muliebral,” and that revealed religions such as Christianity, Islam, and Judaism primarily manifest a presencing of the masculous. In Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos he writes that “the quintessence of such a weltanschauung, of the paganus ethos, is that ethics are presenced in and by particular living individuals, not in some written text whether philosophical or otherwise, not by some proposed schemata, and not in some revelation from some deity.”

In both books he makes use of the Greek term καλὸς κἀγαθός stating, in Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos, that this

“means those who conduct themselves in a gentlemanly or lady-like manner and who thus manifest – because of their innate physis or through pathei-mathos or through a certain type of education or learning – nobility of character.”

In Tu Es Diaboli Ianua he writes that

“καλὸς κἀγαθός is an awareness and acceptance of one’s civic duties and responsibilities undertaken not because of any personal benefit (omni utilitate) that may result or be expected, and not because an omnipotent deity has, via some written texts, commanded it and will punish a refusal, but because it is the noble, the honourable – the gentlemanly, the lady-like, the human – thing to do […]

[T]he virtues of personal honour and manners, with their responsibilities, presence the fairness, the avoidance of hubris, the natural harmonious balance, the gender equality, the awareness and appreciation of the divine, that is the numinous.”

Which in my view neatly sums up his philosophy of pathei-mathos, particularly given his statement that the numinous is primarily a manifestation of the muliebral, and that

“a muliebral presencing is or would be manifest [in] muliebral virtues, such as empathy, sensitivity, gentleness, compassion; and in the perception that personal love should triumph over and above adherence to abstractions. Considered exoterically – not interiorly, not esoterically – a muliebral presencing is manifest in a personal, varied, worship and devotion; in a personal weltanschauung and not in a religion; has no hierarchy; no creed, no article or articles of faith; and no texts whether written or aural.”

As he notes in his short essay From Mythoi To Empathy {1}, “the faculty of empathy is the transition from mythoi and anthropomorphic deities (theos and theoi) to an appreciation of the numinous sans denotatum and sans religion.”

He thus outlines a new ‘pagan’ metaphysics, or rather provides an understandable description of his own weltanschauung, which is

“of we human beings having a connexion to other living beings, a connexion to the cosmos beyond, and a connexion to the source of our existence, the source of the cosmos, and the source – the origin, the genesis – of all living beings. Which source we cannot correctly describe in words, by any denotata, or define as some male ‘god’, or even as a collection of deities whether male or female, but which we can apprehend through the emanations of Being: through what is living, what is born, what unfolds in a natural manner, what is ordered and harmonious, what changes, and what physically – in its own species of Time – dies.

An awareness of all these connexions is awareness of, and a respect for, the numinous, for these connexions, being acausal, are affective: that is, we are inclined by our physis (whether we apprehend it or not) to have an influence on that which, or those whom, the connexion is to or from. For what we do or do not do, consciously or otherwise, affects or can affect the cosmos and thus the other livings beings which exist in the cosmos, and it is a conscious awareness of connexions and acausal affects, with their causal consequences, which reason, perceiverance, and empathy make us – or can make us – aware of. Which awareness may incline us toward acting, and living, in a noble way, with what is noble known or experienced, discovered, through and because of (i) the personal virtue of honour, evident as honour is in fairness, manners and a balanced demeanour, and (ii) the wordless knowing of empathy, manifest as empathy is in compassion and tolerance.

For Being is also, and importantly, presenced – manifest to us, as mortals possessed of reason, empathy, and perceiverance – through certain types of individuals and thus through the particular ways of living that nurture or encourage such individuals. These types of individuals are those who have empathy and who live and if necessary die by honour and thus who have nobility of character.” {2}

Those “certain types of individuals” who presence Being are of course those who manifest καλὸς κἀγαθός, and thus those who, in Myatt’s words, manifest chivalry, manners, gentrice romance; and the muliebral virtues, {3} which virtues include “empathy, sensitivity, gentleness, compassion” as well as “the perception that personal love should triumph over and above adherence to abstractions.” {4}

JR Wright
2018

{1} The essay is available here: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/from-mythoi-to-empathy/

{2} Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos, Epilogos. CreateSpace, 2017. ISBN 978-1979599023.

{3} From Mythoi To Empathy.

{4} Tu Es Diaboli Ianua, chapter III. CreateSpace, 2017. ISBN 978-1982010935.


cc JR Wright, 2018
This work is issued under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0) license
and can be freely copied and distributed, under the terms of that license.


The Numinous, Ancestral Culture, And Myatt’s Philosophy

Richard Moult - Banais

°°°°°°°

The Numinous, Ancestral Culture, And Myatt’s Philosophy

Two recent essays by David Myatt – titled Towards Understanding Ancestral Culture and From Mythoi To Empathy {1} – though short compliment his two recent books Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos and Tu Es Diaboli Ianua since they deal with two of the topics that are central to both books. {2}

In the first essay Myatt explains what he means by the term ‘ancestral culture’ – δίκη understood as fairness, as the balance, the wisdom, that ancestral customs often represent – and in the process clarifies the somewhat obscure passages at the end of his Classical Paganism text, explicitly stating that the modern paganus weltanschauung he wrote about in that book is founded on καλὸς κἀγαθός and thus “on chivalry; on manners; on gentrice romance; and on the muliebral virtues [and] gender equality.”

In the second essay Myatt goes into some detail regarding what he means by the term ‘numinous’, details which are long-overdue and which explicitly distance him from the view of Rudolf Otto in respect of that term. For Myatt, the numinous is a perceiveration, an apprehension resulting from the human faculty of empathy, and therefore in his view goes beyond religion. Indeed, he writes that religions “have not presenced, and do not and cannot presence, the numinous as the numinous can be presenced.” Instead, what does presence the numinous is the knowing that empathy provides which is the move away from mythoi and anthropomorphic deities to “an appreciation of the numinous sans denotatum and sans religion.”

As with almost all of Myatt’s post-2011 philosophical writings the two essays – and indeed the two books – are not only derived from his own philosophical musings and his reflections on his own pathei-mathos, but also contain references to Greco-Roman culture. Which methodology is both a strength and a weakness.

A strength, in that he brings that ancient culture alive almost as if his writings are a bridge to that past and to a future where at least some of the ancient virtues he obviously so admires (such as chivalry) may live again and be melded with the virtues – the muliebral virtues – that he understands his own pathei-mathos and our ‘human culture of pathei-mathos’ have made him appreciate and consider are necessary if we human beings are to change and evolve.

A weakness, in that his writings contain no references to modern philosophies and philosophers and thus lack points of reference for those interested in philosophy as an academic subject. A lack which will undoubtedly deter many from studying Myatt’s somewhat complex – almost labyrinthine and undoubtedly unique – metaphysics. A metaphysics which – based as it is on concepts such as physis, πάθει μάθος, perceiveration, σωφρονεῖν, denotatum, and δίκη – will seem strange, indeed probably alien, to those nurtured on contemporary philosophy.

That said, those who make the effort to get to grips with Myatt’s terminology and who are undeterred that his philosophy of pathei-mathos is scattered in pieces among multiple books and scores of essays and appears still in the process of development, will be rewarded. They will find a most decidedly Western and a decidedly pagan philosophy, rooted in the culture of Ancient Greece and Rome, which manifests the ethos of the West in a manner it has never before been manifest. Not only that, it restores that Western ethos to us, and importantly evolves it, in a distinct philosophical and refreshingly unpolitical way.

That only a few today will appreciate any of this is a sign of our unchivalrous era and of just how few still appreciate the native, the fair, the reasoned, the scholarly, culture of the West subsumed as that culture has been and increasingly is being by the rise of the uncultured, the raucous, ones among us.

R.S & K.S
January 2018

Related:

A Review of Tu Es Diaboli Ianua

Review Of Myatt’s Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos

The Mystic Philosophy of David Myatt
(pdf)

°°°°°

{1} The two essays by Myatt are available on his weblog and also in the following pdf file: https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/two-essays-v1a.pdf

{2} Both books are available in printed format, and also as gratis open access documents from: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2017/10/30/david-myatt-collected-works/


Image credit: Banais, a painting by Richard Moult


A Review of Tu Es Diaboli Ianua

De Vita Coelitus Comparanda

The 39 page essay which is spectacularly titled Tu Es Diaboli Ianua {1} is David Myatt’s latest philosophical offering. In his Exordium – a preface by any other name – he outlines the questions which he answers in the essay. The questions are

“is Christianity a suitable presencing of the numinous… If it is not, then could that religion be reformed, by developing a Johannine Weltanschauung…Would such a reformation be a suitable presencing of the numinous, and if not, then what non-Christian alternatives – such as a paganus metaphysics – exist, and what is the foundation of such an alternative.”

He writes that the essay compliments his book Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos.

While his answers are somewhat convoluted and decidedly scholarly and thus other-worldly – given the copious quotations in ancient and Hellenic Greek and his own translations – he raises many interesting issues relevant to the “real world” which most of us inhabit. For he writes that

“the problem is – or so it seems to me – in impersonal written texts. Or, more precisely, in denotatum, and thus in assigning terms – in using words – to describe an apprehension of the numinous. Which leads us to the fundamental difference between a religious apprehension of the numinous – based on received and venerated texts, on exegesis – and the paganus apprehension of the numinous as manifest in Greco-Roman culture.”

And also that

[Greco-Roman] “paganism will be examined for two reasons. Firstly, because it is manifest in a multiplicity of primary sources – from Homer to Hesiod to Cicero and beyond – and secondly because Greco-Roman culture is inextricably bound to the culture of the West and formed the basis for the European Renaissance that emerged in the 14th century, one aspect of which was a widespread appreciation of classical Art, of classical literature, and of texts such as the Corpus Hermeticum.”

Having criticized Christianity, he also declaims that an important aspect of Greco-Roman paganism is a respect for ancestral custom, writing in the last section of the last chapter that the new ‘numinous metaphysics’ he proposes includes “a spiritual and interior (and thus not political) understanding and appreciation of our own Ancestral Culture.”

Which statement about Western ancestral culture is profoundly “politically incorrect” and will be music to the ears of those few intellectuals who still champion the culture of the West.

That said, the essay is not without its problems. One is that given the copious quotations in ancient and Hellenic Greek it is, as with his book Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos, difficult to classify and difficult to discern who the intended audience is. As we wrote in our review of that book, “many of those interested in Western paganism as a new way of life or as a modern, non-Christian, spirituality may find [this essay] too academic or too boring; while those academically interested in such matters will doubtless turn to other authors given Myatt’s experiential Faustian quests, his iconoclasm, his often underserved reputation, and thus his exclusion from academia.”

Personally, we think Myatt is simply making publicly available the result of his metaphysical questioning while also, as with his Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos, intending this new essay for those few Western individuals who, interested in re-discovering their Western pagan heritage, have been looking for the intellectual foundations of that pagan culture.

A second problem is that his conclusion – his description of his new pagan metaphysics – is brief to the point of almost being obscure, occupying as it does a short statement in the final paragraph, with no explanations provided.

But perhaps, given Myatt’s criticism of denotatum (words, and naming, by any other name) and his statement that “the culture of pathei-mathos has moved us, or can move us, beyond anthropomorphic deities, whether male or female; beyond myths and legends; beyond reliance on texts regarded as sacred and/or as divinely inspired; and even beyond the need for denotatum and religion” then this short statement that such “is the numinous” is all that is required.

R.S & K.S
December, 2017

{1} A copy of Myatt’s essay is available here: https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/06/tua-es-diaboli-ianua.pdf


Image credit: The beginning of the twenty-sixth chapter of the book De Vita Coelitus Comparanda by Marsilii Ficini published in 1489 CE


Corpus Hermeticum Book By Myatt

David Myatt

°°°°°

A welcome addition to the published works by Myatt is his Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates which brings together in one volume his eight translations and commentaries of hermetic texts, chapters 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12 and 13 of the Corpus Hermeticum.

The compilation is available as a pdf document {1} and as a 190 page printed book {2} and contains a Preface which outlines his translation methodology, and from which this is an extract:

{Begin quote}

This work collects together my translations of and commentaries on the eight tractates of the Corpus Hermeticum which were published separately between 2013 and 2017. From the fourteen Greek tractates that have been traditionally referred to as the Corpus Hermeticum, I chose the eight (the ogdoad) whose texts I considered were the most metaphysical and mystical and thus which can provide an understanding of what came to be termed hermeticism […]

The methodology of using some transliterations, some relatively obscure English words, and some new term or expression (such as noetic sapientia) results in a certain technical – an ‘esoteric’ – vocabulary which requires or may require contextual, usually metaphysical, interpretation. Often, the interpretation is provided by reference to the matters discussed in the particular tractate; sometimes by reference to other tractates; and sometimes by considering Ancient Greek, and Greco-Roman, philosophy and mysticism. Occasionally, however, the interpretation is to leave some transliteration – such as physis, φύσις – as a basic term of the particular hermetic weltanschauung described in a particular tractate and, as such, as a term which has no satisfactory English equivalent, metaphysical or otherwise, and therefore to assimilate it into the English language. All of which make these translations rather different from other English versions, past and present, with these translations hopefully enabling the reader to approach and to appreciate the hermetic texts sans preconceptions, modern and otherwise, and thus provide an intimation of how such texts might have been understood by those who read them, or heard them read, in the milieu of their composition.

One of the intentions of these translations of mine of various tractates of the Corpus Hermeticum is provide an alternative approach to such ancient texts and hopefully enable the reader without a knowledge of Greek (and of the minutiae of over a century of scholarly analysis of the Greek text) to appreciate the texts anew and understand why they have – in the original Greek – been regarded as important documents in respect of particular, ancient, weltanschauungen that have, over the centuries, proved most influential and which can still be of interest to those interested in certain metaphysical speculations and certain esoteric matters.

{end quote}

The publication of this work also marks a milestone, since Greek translations now account for well over half of Myatt’s published – printed – output. His printed works alone currently amount to almost 1,000 pages, and given that most of these books are large print format (11 inches x 8.5 inches) then were they published in the standard paperback format (6 inches by 9 inches) the total would in the region of 1,200 pages.

The RDM Crew
September 2017 ev

{1} Available here: https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2017/09/myatt-eight-tractates-print.pdf

The pdf document is published under the Creative Commons (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0) License, which allows for non-commercial copying and redistribution provided no alterations are made to the text and the document is attributed solely to the original author.

{2} David Myatt, Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates, 2017, ISBN 978-1976452369, BISAC: Philosophy / Metaphysics. The 190 page book is priced US$10, and is available direct from a well-known ‘internet publisher’ and from other book outlets such as Barnes & Noble. Like most of Myatt’s printed works it is idiosyncratic given its large size (8.5 x 11 inches). If printed in the standard paperback size (9 x 5 inches) it would amount to around 220 pages but, given the amount of Greek text, would probably be less readable.


Such Respectful Wordful Offerings As This

David Myatt

°°°°°

Selected Essays Of David Myatt

Edited by Rachael Stirling

Such Respectful Wordful Offerings As This
(Second Edition, pdf)

Contents

° Editorial Preface
° Bright Berries, One Winter
° The Leaves Are Showering Down
° Perhaps Words Are The Problem
° A Non-Terrestrial View
° Musings On Suffering, Human Nature, And The Culture of Pathei-Mathos
° Blue Reflected Starlight
° A Slowful Learning, Perhaps
° Toward Humility – A Brief Personal View
° A Catholic Still, In Spirit?
° Some Personal Perceiverations
° Twenty Years Ago, Today
° Some Questions For DWM, 2017
° Cantio Arcana
Appendix I – A Note On Greek Terms In The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos
Appendix II – On Translating Ancient Greek
Appendix III – Concerning ἀγαθός and νοῦς in the Corpus Hermeticum
Appendix IV – Cicero On Summum Bonum
Appendix V – Swan Song Of A Mystic
Appendix VI – Self-Dramatization, Sentimentalist, Or Chronicler Of Pathei Mathos?

From the Editorial Preface

This compilation of essays arose out of some enquiries sent or forwarded to us following our re-publication of Some Questions For DWM, 2017 and of Ms Stirling’s article – titled Swan Song Of A Mystic – commenting on those questions and answers. Included here are all of the Myatt texts enquired about, plus a few others for context including those 2017 questions and answers and Swan Song Of A Mystic. This second edition includes an essay – Self Dramatization, Sentimentalist, Or Chronicler Of Pathei Mathos? – which takes a critical look at Myatt’s post-2010 writings.

The title of the compilation is taken from Myatt’s translation of the Cantio Arcana of tractate XIII of the Corpus Hermeticum and which ‘Esoteric Song’ we include here.

Three Wyrd Sisters
2017 ev


Clouds In The Sky

800px-Cumulus_clouds_panorama

 

°°°°°°°°°

Clouds in the Sky

 
The one of understanding, feeling the timeless nature of Existence,
Does not exhort, nor preach, nor hold fast to any dogma:
They are Silent,
Pointing to the clouds in the sky.

For each must find their own goal, in their own time:
They who understand only guide those who earnestly seek,
Those whose time for understanding has arrived.

The tranquillity of life is in understanding of self,
For thereby comes acceptance of the illusion of Existence:
And they who are tranquillity become thus all life,
Realizing the folly of action breeding violence.
Yet they who are all life are Being, become –
Waiting with tranquillity for the coming of death.

With discarding of self comes the realization of eternity bringing sadness
And with the realization of eternity comes the tranquillity of compassion.
For they who are compassion merge with all existence
And live thus in the wisdom of sorrow bringing tears.


Yet they who cry know also the laughter of the moment:
Blown away by the wind like the clouds in the sky.
Thus does the seeker of the goal that is no goal
Realize the unwisdom of words:
Understanding wind in clouds in the sky.

Those who transcend self by their many errors of experience –
Understanding thus the serenity of silence –
Need no outward chattel
For they are richer than all the riches of Earth.
Thus do they who quest after transcendence become still,
A falling leaf turned Autumn brown
Following the wind of the moment:
Neither clinging to, nor striving against,
The force of existence ever a dream in the end.

They who are still
Seek not the folly of the wisdom of worship,
Nor the secrecy of shrines:
For their temple is a swaying branch in a glade of trees
Resting on a high hill beneath the wind-blown clouds in the sky;
And their prayer is Silence.

DW Myatt
(Written 1975 CE)

°°°°°°°°°


The Two Types Of Satanism

Order of Nine Angles

O9A

°°°°°°°°°

The Two Types Of Satanism

There are basically two types of Satanism: (i) the ‘modern American’ type manufactured and propagated by Howard Stanton Levey – better known under his aliases of Anton LaVey and Anton Szandor LaVey – and (ii) the ‘traditional Satanism’ as manifest in the Occult philosophy and the praxis of the Order of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA) as developed and expounded by the pseudonymous “Anton Long” which is widely believed to be a pseudonym used by the neo-nazi extremist, and “theoretician of terror” {1}, David Myatt. {2}{3}

The Satanism Of Levey

The modern Satanism of Levey is based on the premise that Satan is a symbol of the carnal, the selfish, the egoistic, nature of human beings, with satanism understood as manifesting the raison d’êtres of ‘might is right’, of ‘lex talionis’, and of the individualistic ideas expressed in Ayn Rand’s Objectivism {4}.

This type of Satanism promotes “the total satisfaction of the ego” {5} and obeying the law of the land {6}.

The Satanism Of Anton Long

The traditional Satanism of Anton Long is based on the scholarly premise that – as described in the O9A text The Geryne of Satan {7} – (i) hasatan – the satan – refers (in the Septuagint) to the chief adversary (of the so-called ‘chosen ones’) and to the chief schemer against those who regard themselves as the chosen people of God/Jehovah, and (ii) “a satan” historically (in the Septuagint) refers to someone who is an adversary of and who thus is pejoratively regarded (by those so opposed) as scheming, as plotting against those who regard themselves as the chosen people of God/Jehovah.

Thus, for the O9A, a satanist is someone who is heretically opposed to those who believe they are the chosen people of God/Jehovah, with O9A satanism understood as an antinomian – amoral, heretical – means to such exeatic personal experiences as shape and evolve an individual’s character and understanding. {8}{9}.

The contrast between the Satanism manufactured and propagated by Howard Stanton Levey and the Satanism developed and expounded by Anton Long is perhaps best illustrated by comparing their respective lives and their respective writings, for one would expect their respective types of Satanism to be reflected in their own lives and in their writings.

A Contrast Of Lives

The life of Howard Stanton Levey consisted of conducting carnivalesque – and sometimes fetishistic – ‘satanic’ rituals while dressed like Mephistopheles in some amateur production of Marlowe’s Faust; selling membership in his showmanry Church of Satan while telling members to “obey the law”; pontificating – and giving lectures – about his type of satanism; giving interviews to journalists; hosting parties for hedonists and Hollywood-types, and boasting about his past.

Levey, for instance, boasted that as a seventeen year old he worked in the Beatty circus and handled lions and tigers, although circus records from that time showed that no one named Levey or LaVey worked for them. He boasted that he had worked as a photographer for the San Francisco police department although they had no record of anyone called Levey or LaVey working for them.

Levey boasted that he had an affair with Marilyn Monroe, and yet again there is no documentary evidence to substantiate his claim. He boasted that he worked in a burlesque theatre called Mayan and met Marilyn Monroe there whom he claimed worked as a striptease artiste although the owner of the theatre at the time – Paul Valentine – denied it was a burlesque theatre, stated Levey never worked there, with there also being no documentary evidence that Monroe worked there as a striptease artiste.

Levey boasted that he enrolled on a criminology course at the City College in San Francisco although the college had no record of his enrolment under his real name, Levey, or under the La Vey alias he often used.

Thus the life of Howard Stanton Levey does indeed exemplify his type of Satanism: hedonistic, egoistic, boastful, materialistic, and showmanry. In common parlance: all mouth and trousers.

            In contrast to Levey, “Anton Long” – aka David Myatt – is a “principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution” {10}, was “the mentor” who drove someone to kill three people {11}, who before and after 9/11 publicly praised bin Laden and al Qaeda, called the 9/11 attacks ‘acts of heroism’ and urged the killing of Jews {12}, who preached “race war and terrorism” {13}, who wrote “a detailed step-by-step guide for terrorist insurrection with advice on assassination targets, rationale for bombing and sabotage campaigns, and rules of engagement” {14}, who travelled and spoke in several Arab countries about Jihad {15}, who was a bodyguard of England’s principle neo-nazi activist, Colin Jordan {16}, who took over the leadership of the violent neo-nazi group Combat 18 when its previous leader was jailed for murder {17}, who is an “example of the axis between right-wing extremists and Islamists” {17}, who is a Martial Arts expert {18}, who was imprisoned twice for violent offences in connection with his neo-nazi activism {17}, and who in 1998 was arrested for conspiracy to murder and for other offences {14}{19}.

The life of Myatt does indeed exemplify O9A Satanism: actually or potentially harmful, destructive, pernicious, baleful, misleading, deadly; bad in moral character; malevolent, offensive, sly; and hard and difficult. In common parlance: extremist, violent, and terrorist.

A Contrast Of Writings

The sources used by Howard Levey – evident in his much-vaunted ‘satanic bible’ and in his letters – are populist interpretations of the likes of Nietzsche and Ayn Rand, populist books about psychology, with the anonymous polemic titled Might Is Right much plagiarized. Since Levey could not read Ancient Greek, Latin, and Arabic, when writing about Satan, Iblis (Shaitan) and the medieval “grimoire” tradition of magic(k) that derived from such earlier Arabic works as Ghayat al-Ḥakim and also from some medieval Latin esoteric texts – such as those of Marsilio Ficino – Levey had no knowledge of such primary sources and had to rely on populist books and the interpretations and interpolations of others. Thus in his understanding of the Biblical Satan he had to rely on translations, unable as he was to read the κοινή Greek of the Septuagint.

Such sources and populist interpretations are also much in evidence in texts written by Aquino, who according to his own account {20} aided and contributed to the production of Levey’s ‘satanic bible’ and his ‘satanic rituals’ books. Like Levey, Aquino could not read Ancient Greek, Latin, and Arabic, and also used populist summaries of philosophies and weltanschauungen, ancient and modern. Thus, in his The Crystal Tablet of Set, populist summaries of philosophies and weltanschauungen, ancient and modern, precede a quite minimalist and vague presentation of ‘satanist’ and/or of Temple of Set ideas. Thus, a chapter on ‘ethics’ consists of 12 pages of populist summaries of the likes of Plato, Hegel, Marx, et al, followed by a meagre few paragraphs concerning good and evil in an occult context, and which paragraphs merely present rather cliched personal opinions, such as that “there is thus no easy answer to the question of whether a given magical act is good or evil” and that “it is up to the magician to determine what judgments – by which judges – will be important”. As befits such pseudo-intellectualism, the references in such texts are often to populist works (such as The Social Contract by Robert Ardrey) just as quotations from such people as Plato are invariably in translations, not by Aquino, but by someone else.

Thus the writings of Howard Stanton Levey – and those of Aquino, his helper – do indeed exemplify the type of Satanism found in The Church Of Satan: populist, plagiaristic, reliant on the interpretations and interpolations of others, and unoriginal. In common parlance: plebeian, mundane.

            In complete contrast, Myatt has “fluency in the classical languages (Greek and Latin), as well as Arabic and possibly Persian, [and is] possessed of a gifted intellect and apparently a polymath,” {21} and thus can read primary esoteric, classical, and alchemical sources, and the Greek texts of the Septuagint (the Old Testament) and the New Testament, in their original language. Thus when “Anton Long” writes in the O9A text The Geryne of Satan about Satan he does so based on a scholarly knowledge of the Greek text of the Old Testament.

In addition, when Myatt – in contrast to both Levey and Aquino – writes of ethics and about ‘good and evil’ in, for example, chapter IV – Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God – of his 2013 book Religion, Empathy, and Pathei-Mathos, he provides passages in Hebrew, Greek, and Arabic, along with his own translations. Similarly, when discussing ethics in his recent book Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos, Myatt provides the relevant Greek texts (such as from the Gospel of John) and his own translations.

Thus the O9A writings of Anton Long do indeed exemplify O9A Satanism: intellectually and historically based {22}, scholarly, original. In common parlance: a cut above the rest.

Conclusion

The contrast between the life and writings of Howard Levey and Anton Long could not be more stark.

Levey was a showman, a dilettante, a plagiarist, a charlatan, and a mundane.

Anton Long, however, was a practical – a hands-on – extremist and Faustian man as well as an intellectual, a scholar, a martial arts expert {18}, “emblematic of the modern syncretism of radical ideologies” {23}, and well-described as an “extremely violent, intelligent, dark, and complex individual” {24} who undertook “a global odyssey which took him on extended stays in the Middle East and East Asia, accompanied by studies of religions ranging from Christianity to Islam in the Western tradition and Taoism and Buddhism in the Eastern path. In the course of this Siddhartha-like search for truth, Myatt sampled the life of the monastery in both its Christian and Buddhist forms.” {25}.

Which global odyssey formed only part of his fifty year quest – his personal hermetic anados (ἄνοδος) {26} – along the Seven Fold (Sinisterly-Numinous) Way of the O9A culminating in his discovery of Lapis Philosophicus {27} and thence the living of the life of a reclusive Mage, and thus who is a modern example of the ancient Rounwytha tradition, whose

            “perceiveration is of the nameless, wordless, unity beyond our mortal, abstract, ideations of ‘sinister’ and ‘numinous’, of Left Hand Path and Right Hand Path, and also – and importantly – of ‘time’. For it is our ideation of ‘time’ – with its assumption of a possible temporal progression, via various temporary causal forms, toward something ‘better’ or more ‘advanced’ or more ‘perfect’ (in personal or supra-personal terms) – that underlies the magian/patriarchal/masculous approach that has dominated, and still dominates, Western occultism and esotericism in general, fundamental to which is a hubriatic egoism: the illusion that is the individual will.” {28}

Such is the modern heresy of the O9A which esoterically and exoterically contradicts the modern Satanism of Levey based as the Satanism of Levey is on the premise that Satan is a symbol for plebeians, and thus of the carnal, the selfish, the egoistic, the mundane, nature of human beings.

In stark contrast, the Satanism of the O9A is of a Faustian, a Promethean, and life-long endeavour to defy all ideations, all causal forms, and reach out to personally and in practical ways experience and learn from both the ‘sinister’ and the ‘numinous’ and to thus discover Lapis Philosophicus.

T.W.S. Nexion
July 2018 ev

This is a revised and enlarged extract from an article first published in May 2018 ev.

°°°

{1} “Theoretician of Terror”, Searchlight, July 2000.

{2} Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas (2003). Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity. New York University Press.

Editorial Note: Myatt himself has always denied being “Anton Long”. For an overview of the controversy see the book A Modern Mysterium, available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/myattian-mysterium-v7.pdf

{3} Senholt, Jacob C. (2013). Secret Identities in the Sinister Tradition: Political Esotericism and the Convergence of Radical Islam, Satanism, and National Socialism in the Order of Nine Angles. The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity. Per Faxneld and Jesper Aagaard Petersen (editors). Oxford University Press. pp. 250–274.

{4} According to Levey, his satanism is “Ayn Rand with trappings,” qv. K. Klein, The Washington Post, May 10, 1970: The Witches Are Back and So Are Satanists.

{5} Categorizing Modern Satanism, in The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity, Oxford University Press, 2012, p.92.

{6} The Black Pope and the Church of Satan, in The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity, Oxford University Press, 2012, p.80.

{7} The text The Geryne of Satan is available from https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/geryne-of-satan/

{8} The Place Of Satanism in the Order of Nine Angles, in The Joy Of The Sinister: The Traditional Satanism Of The Order Of Nine Angles. e-text, 2015. Available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/joy-of-the-sinister.pdf

{9} Pathei-Mathos and The Initiatory Occult Quest, in The Esoteric Hermeticism Of The Order Of Nine Angles. e-text, 2016. Available at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/the-esoteric-hermeticism-of-the-order-of-nine-angles/

{10} Michael, George. The New Media and the Rise of Exhortatory Terrorism. Strategic Studies Quarterly (United States Air Force), Volume 7 Issue 1, Spring 2013.

{11} Sunday Mercury, July 9, 2000.

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

{13} Searchlight, July 2000.

{14} Whine, Michael. Cyberspace: A New Medium for Communication, Command and Control by Extremists, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, Volume 22, Issue 3. Taylor & Francis. 1999.

{15} Mark Weitzmann, Anti-Semitism and Terrorism, in Dienel, Hans-Liudger (editor), Terrorism and the Internet: Threats, Target Groups, Deradicalisation Strategies. NATO Science for Peace and Security Series, vol. 67. IOS Press, 2010. pp.16-17.

{16} Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas. Hitler’s Priestess: Savitri Devi, the Hindu-Aryan Myth and Neo-Nazism, NYU Press, 2000, p.215

{17} Michael, George. (2006) The Enemy of My Enemy: The Alarming Convergence of Militant Islam and the Extreme Right. University Press of Kansas, p. 142ff.

{18} “Right here, right now”, The Observer newspaper, February 9, 2003.

{19} Vacca, John R. Computer Forensics: Computer Crime Scene Investigation, Charles River Media, 2005, p.420.

{20} See, for example, his two volume book The Church Of Satan, published in 2013, which documents the history of Levey’s Church of Satan.

{21} Monette, Connell. Mysticism in the 21st Century, Sirius Academic Press, 2013. pp. 85-122.

{22} qv. (i) The Esoteric Hermeticism Of The Order Of Nine Angles. e-text, 2016. Available at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/the-esoteric-hermeticism-of-the-order-of-nine-angles/ and (ii) https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/02/myatt-and-paganism-v3b.pdf

{23} Perdue, Jon B. The War of All the People: The Nexus of Latin American Radicalism and Middle Eastern Terrorism. Potomac Books, 2012. p.70-71.

{24} Raine, Susan. The Devil’s Party (Book review). Religion, Volume 44, Issue 3, July 2014, pp. 529-533.

{25} Kaplan, Jeffrey. Encyclopedia of white power: a sourcebook on the radical racist right. Rowman & Littlefield, 2000. p. 216ff; p.512f

{26} In regard to the hermetic anados, qv. Myatt’s translation of and commentary on the Poemandres tractate of the ancient Corpus Hermeticum, included in Myatt, David, Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates, 2017, ISBN 978-1976452369.

{27} qv. https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/the-enigmatic-truth/

{28} https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/the-rounwytha-way/

°°°°°°°°°

Source:
The essay is included in A Modern Mysterium (pdf)


Myatt: Three Numinous Emanations

David Myatt

°°°°°°°°°

David Myatt: Three Emanations
(pdf)

 
I. From Mythoi To Empathy: A New Appreciation Of The Numinous (2018)

II. Towards Understanding Ancestral Culture (2018)

III. Perhaps Words Are The Problem (2016)

°°°°°°°°°

Article source:
https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2018/12/29/three-emanations/


Reichsfolk National Socialism

°°°°°°°°°

odal3

Reichsfolk:
A New Interpretation Of National Socialism

What is not widely known in the modern Western world is that there are two very different interpretations of National Socialism. “Ours” – that of groups such as Reichsfolk and of those who know and who appreciate the writings and deeds of people such as Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle {1} – and that of the majority of latter-day self-described “neo-nazis”.

Latter-Day Neo-Nazism And The National-Socialism Of Reichsfolk

The first and most well-known latter-day interpretation of National Socialism is that of the majority of self-described “neo-nazis”, and which interpretation is accepted by most anti-fascists who actively oppose such modern “neo-nazis”.

This is the National Socialism with a belief in a strong, powerful, nation-State, and with an overt racist ideology. A National Socialism with a dislike – often hatred – of non-White immigrants and non-White neighbours; with a belief in the instinct of “might is right” and the necessity of kampf; with a dislike – even a hatred – of those whose love is for someone of the same gender; a National Socialism with a misogyny based on the masculous instinct that it is the natural duty of most women to be wives and home-makers; and a National Socialism with a dislike – even a hatred – of Islam and Muslims.

The second, and not very well-known, interpretation of National Socialism is that of the “revisionist”, non-racist, National-Socialism developed by David Myatt in the 1990s and manifest in the Reichsfolk group {2} inspired as this version was by Myatt’s meetings with Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle and by his correspondence with Jost Turner whose vision was of a new Aryan folk-community in America and of other “NS kindred” communities around the world.

In this Myattian interpretation of National-Socialism {3} it is regarded as both (i) “an ethnic philosophy which affirms that the different races, the different peoples, which exist are expressions of our human condition, and that these differences, this human diversity, should be treasured in the same way we treasure the diversity of Nature. National-Socialists believe our world would be poorer were these human differences to be destroyed through abstract ideas,” and as (ii) “a pure expression of our own unique Aryan ethics, based as these ethics are upon the idealism of duty to the folk, duty to Nature, and upon the nobility of personal honour.” {4}

It is also the National-Socialism which rejects the notion of a strong, powerful, modern nation-State in favour of new ethnic folk-communities and which National-Socialism is not politically active “on the streets” but instead is “a social, educational, cultural, and spiritual, movement based upon and dedicated to disseminating the noble principles of ethical, non-racist, National-Socialism which are honour, reason, fairness, loyalty, duty to one’s own folk and to Nature, and respect for and understanding of other cultures and other ways of life.” {2}

              In simple terms, the Myattian interpretation of National-Socialism is based on both honour and race, whereas the neo-nazism of most modern nazis and of modern neo-nazi political groups is based on the glorification of race and the glorification of “racial struggle” at the expense of personal honour; a difference Myatt emphasised is his essay A Brief Criticism of William Pierce, written in 114yf,

“The main weakness of the theorizing of Pierce is that he has failed to see that it is a combination of race and honour which defines National-Socialism, and which should define the racialist movement in general. Without the evolutionary, moral, concept of honour, there is only the inhuman ethics of the past, and in practice this leads to the creation of people who are ignoble and societies which are anti-evolutionary. Thus, Pierce is firmly stuck in the past: an ignoble past of unreason and dishonour.

This lack of an ethical dimension to his thinking leads to him supporting the old concept of racial struggle and the inhuman consequence of considering that some races are superior to others.” {5}

Myatt expanded upon this in his seminal text Esoteric Hitlerism: Idealism, the Third Reich and the Essence of National-Socialism,

“An affirmation of race without an affirmation honour is not National-Socialism, just as an affirmation of honour without an affirmation of race is not National-Socialism.

It is this living, organic, dialectic of honour and race which defines National-Socialism itself, and a National-Socialist is an individual who strives to do their honourable duty to both their own race and Nature herself, of which other human races are a part.

That is, a National-Socialist must always be honourable, whatever the consequences, or the perceived consequences. Quite often, this means a National-Socialist is faced with what seems to be difficult choices and difficult decisions, although in reality if National-Socialism itself is properly understood, there is no conflict, no moral dilemma and no difficulty in doing the right, the honourable, thing.

Thus if something, some act or deed, seems to affirm race – or be beneficial to one’s race – but is dishonourable, then that something is not something a National-Socialist should do. What honour does is define our duty to our race and other races – it prevents us from committing hubris.” {5}

In addition, in Myatt’s revisionist version of National-Socialism there is no misogyny, for the NS Code of Honour applies equally to both men and women,

“A man or woman of honour treats others courteously, regardless of their culture, religion, status, and race, and is only disdainful and contemptuous of those who, by their attitude, actions and behaviour, treat they themselves with disrespect or try to personally harm them, or who treat with disrespect or try to harm those whom the individual man or woman of honour have personally sworn loyalty to or whom they champion.” {6}

Our National-Socialism

The National-Socialism of Reichsfolk is Myatt’s revisionist, non-racist, ethical, version of National-Socialism.

This is the National-Socialism where

“a true National-Socialist knows or feels that some things are honourable, and other things are dishonourable. It is dishonourable, for instance – cowardly and unfair and uncivilized – for several people to attack and try to injure or kill a single individual.

Thus, if several Caucasians attack one Negro, they are acting dishonourably – they are being uncivilized and cowardly. A true National-Socialist would never do such a thing. They would always want to see, or take part in, a “fair fight”.

Furthermore, I myself – a life-long National-Socialist – would go to the aid of a Negro if I saw him being attacked by several Caucasians, for that would be the just, the fair, the honourable, the civilized and the National-Socialist thing to do. That so many people today who adhere to ‘political National Socialist’ organizations do not agree with this just shows how far these so-called ‘National Socialists’ are from genuine National-Socialism. Which, incidently, is why I always write ‘National-Socialism’ rather than National Socialism.”

This is also the National-Socialism where there is respect for the Muslim way of life and Muslim culture, with honourable co-operation between National-Socialists and Muslims regarded as desirable {8}.

That this revisionist, non-racist, ethical, version of National-Socialism is not appreciated – and certainly not understood – in the societies of the modern West is regarded by our kind as just one more indication of just how successful the Magian, the hubriati, and the neo-nazi hordes of Homo Hubris, have been in propagating the Magian latter-day (mis)interpretation of National Socialism as something “racist”, homophobic, misogynist, anti-Muslim, and uncivilized.

R.S.
Reichsfolk
December 129yf
v.1.07

°°°

{1} Waffen SS General Leon Degrelle was awarded numerous medals for war-time bravery including the Knight’s Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves, a German military award similar to the British Military Cross. His writings include:
° The Eastern Front: Memoirs of a Waffen SS volunteer, 1941-1945. Institute for Historical Review. 2014. ISBN 9780939484768.
° Hitler, né à Versailles. 1–3. Paris: Art et histoire d’Europe. 1986. ISBN 2906026085.
° Ich war Gefangener. Nürnberg: Hesperos Verlag. 1944.
° Hitler pour 1000 ans. Paris: La Table Ronde. 1969.
{2} qv. https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/intro-reichsfolk.pdf
{3} qv. Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings (pdf).
{4} Myatt, Why National-Socialism is Not Racist, 111yf. The essay is included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{5} The essay is included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{6} The Code is given in the third edition of Myatt’s The Meaning Of National-Socialism, included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{7} Myatt, The Spirituality of National-Socialism: A Reply to Criticism, included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{8} See, for instance, the essay Islam and National-Socialism in https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/ns-islam.pdf

°°°°°°°

Related:

David Myatt And Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°°°


Article source:
https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/12/26/a-new-interpretation-of-national-socialism/