On Leaving The O9A
From the Introduction:
Given that someone else has – via the internet of course – recently announced that they are “leaving” the Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A) because they are upset about what some ONA persons have written and because they do not agree with “this” or with “that”, we reproduce below an apposite article from 2013 about such “leaving”.
Apropos of which, the common themes behind those who publicly announce their “leaving” – and then go to be critical of and/or make accusations about the ONA – are one or more or all of the following:
(i) they have failed to disentangle the exoteric (the outer) from the esoteric (the inner), and thus have become lost in or confused by our Labyrinthos Mythologicus 1 ;
(ii) they have failed to understand just what the ONA is, and thus why there is, esoterically, no “joining” and no “leaving” some “entity” designated by the term “Order of Nine Angles”;
(iii) their lack of scholarly esoteric knowledge evident in their inability to write a scholarly critique of items in a compilation such as The Esoteric Hermeticism Of The Order Of Nine Angles 2 .
Doubtless this recent announcement about “leaving” – and the critical comments and accusations made about the ONA – will be seized upon by latter-day satanists, and unscholarly others, as “proof” that the ONA is “dead” and/or as confirmation of their own shallow, exoteric, personal opinion about the ONA.
But, as the article below states, such a “leaving” – en-wrapped in critical comments – has happened many times over the past two decades. And it has made no difference, and it cannot make any difference, to the esoteric philosophy 3 and the praxises 4 that presence (which are) the Order of Nine Angles. That they – and others – do not seem to understand this is most amusing, and of course indicative.