A Pre-Socratic Fragment: Empedocles

David Myatt

A Pre-Socratic Fragment: Empedocles

Text

ἔστιν Ἀνάγκης χρῆμα, θεῶν ψήφισμα παλαιόν,
ἀίδιον, πλατέεσσι κατεσφρηγισμένον ὅρκοις·
εὖτέ τις ἀμπλακίηισι φόνωι φίλα γυῖα μιήνηι,
νείκεΐ θ’ ὅς κε ἐπίορκον ἁμαρτήσας ἐπομόσσηι,
δαίμονες οἵτε μακραίωνος λελάχασι βίοιο,
τρίς μιν μυρίας ὧρας ἀπὸ μακάρων ἀλάλησθαι,
φυομένους παντοῖα διὰ χρόνου εἴδεα θνητῶν
ἀργαλέας βιότοιο μεταλλάσσοντα κελεύθους.
αἰθέριον μὲν γάρ σφε μένος πόντονδε διώκει,
πόντος δ’ ἐς χθονὸς οὖδας ἀπέπτυσε, γαῖα δ’ ἐς αὐγὰς
ἠελίου φαέθοντος, ὁ δ’ αἰθέρος ἔμβαλε δίναις·
ἄλλος δ’ ἐξ ἄλλου δέχεται, στυγέουσι δὲ πάντες.
τῶν καὶ ἐγὼ νῦν εἰμι, φυγάς θεόθεν καὶ ἀλήτης,
Νείκεϊ μαινομένωι πίσυνος.

Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, Diels-Kranz, B115

Translation

There exists an insight by Ananke, an ancient resolution
Of the gods, immutable and sealed by vows,
Regarding when one of the daimons – those whose allotted portion of life is long –
Has their own hands stained from murder
Or who, once having sworn an oath, because of some feud breaks that oath.
For they shall for ten thousand tripled seasons wander away from the beautified,
Begotten during that period in all manner of mortal form
And exchanging during that voyage one vexation for another:

The fierce Ætherials chase them to the Sea,
The Sea spits them out onto dusty ground,
Gaia hurls them to the burning light of the Sun
Who flings them back to those swirling Ætherials.
Moved from one to the other, all detest them.

I am one of those, a vagabond in exile from the gods
Who has to rely on strongful Disagreement.

Notes

Ananke (Ἀνάγκης) is the primordial goddess of incumbency; that is, of wyrd – of that which is beyond, and the origin of, what we often describe as our Fate as a mortal being.

The usual translation of “necessity” – as for example by Copenhaver in section 1 of tractate III of the Corpus Hermeticum [1] obscures both the subtle esotericism evident in that ἱερός λόγος and what Empedocles wrote centuries earlier about Ἀνάγκης. [2]

Disagreement (νεῖκος) is – according to what we can adduce of the philosophy of Empedocles from the fragments of his writings that we possess – a fundamental principle, and one understood in relation to another fundamental principle, Φιλότης, expressive as they both are of the logos (λόγος) by which we can possibly apprehend the workings of the cosmic order (κόσμος). However, the common translations – of ‘strife’ and ‘love’ respectively – do not in my view express what Empedocles seems to be trying to convey, which is ‘disagreement’ and ‘fellowship’ (a communal or kindred working-together in pursuit of a common interest or goal). For while disagreement sometimes disrupts fellowship, it is often necessary as the genesis of productive change.

Thus, just as Odysseus had to rely on the support of Athena, who disagreed with how Poseidon treated Odysseus, so does the ‘vagabond in exile from the deities/the gods’ have to rely on disagreements among the immortals to end their own exile.

Which expression of how the immortal deities (θεοὶ) often differ and of how the Fate of mortals depend on those deities and, quite often on disagreements between them, exemplifies the ethos of Ancient Greece.

David Myatt
2017

This is a slightly revised version of a comment published in my 2015 translation of and commentary on the ἱερός λόγος tractate of the Corpus Hermeticum.

°°°

[1] B. Copenhaver. Hermetica. Cambridge University Press. 1992.

[2] The Greek text of tractate III:1 is

Δόξα πάντων ὁ θεὸς καὶ θεῖον καὶ φύσις θεία. ἀρχὴ τῶν ὄντων ὁ θεός, καὶ νοῦς καὶ φύσις καὶ ὕλη, σοφία εἰς δεῖξιν ἁπάντων ὤν· ἀρχὴ τὸ θεῖον καὶ φύσις καὶ ἐνέργεια καὶ ἀνάγκη καὶ τέλος καὶ ἀνανέωσις. ἧν γὰρ σκότος ἄπειρον ἐν ἀβύσσωι καὶ ὕδωρ καὶ πνεῦμα λεπτὸν νοερόν, δυνάμει θείαι ὄντα ἐν χάει. ἀνείθη δὴ φῶς ἅγιον καὶ ἐπάγη <ὑφ’ ἅμμωι> ἐξ ὑγρᾶς οὐσίας στοιχεῖα καὶ θεοὶ πάντες <καταδιερῶσι> φύσεως ἐνσπόρου.

A.D. Nock & A-J. Festugiere, Corpus Hermeticum, Paris, 1972

In my translation I have endeavoured to express something of the classical mysticism which this tractate, in particular, embodies:

“The numen of all beings is theos: numinal, and of numinal physis.
The origin of what exists is theos, who is Perceiveration and Physis and Substance:
The sapientia which is a revealing of all beings.
For the numinal is the origin: physis, vigour, incumbency, accomplishment, renewance.

In the Abyss, an unmeasurable darkness, and, by the influence of the numen,
Water and delicate apprehending Pnuema, there, in Kaos.
Then, a numinous phaos arose and, from beneath the sandy ground,
Parsements coagulated from fluidic essence.
And all of the deities <particularize> seedful physis.”

My commentary on the text – in Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates, 2017, ISBN 978-1976452369 – explains my interpretations of words such as δόξα, νοῦς, σοφία, ἐνέργεια, and δύναμις.


Source: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/empedocles/


Advertisements

Another Iconoclastic Translation

David Myatt

°°°°°°°°°

DW Myatt: The Beatitudes
(pdf)

The document contains David Myatt’s translation of and commentary on The Beatitudes, {1} which part of the New Testament – Matthew 5:1–10 – is an iconic part of the Christian religion.

As with his other iconoclastic translations – such as from the Corpus Hermeticum {2} and The Gospel Of John {3} – he provides a new and refreshingly different insight into an ancient text.

However, readers should be aware that Myatt’s commentary on the Greek text of The Beatitudes relies heavily on his commentary on the Greek text of the Gospel of John {3} and on his commentaries on the Greek texts of the Corpus Hermeticum which he has translated {2}.

RDM Crew
June 2018

°°°°°°°

{1} https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2018/03/30/the-beatitudes/

{2} https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/corpus-hermeticum/

{3} https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/gospel-according-to-john/


Azoth Sumor

Richard Moult, Azoth Sumor

There is an apocryphal story circulating among the O9A cognoscenti that when Richard Moult, decades ago, successfully emerged from the three month ordeal of The Rite of Internal Adept his then partner on meeting him exclaimed that in appearance and demeanour he had morphed into a certain ‘Anton Long’.

A story which Moult’s later painting Azoth Sumor might be taken to represent, for here is an older Adept – similar in appearance to both his aged self and his then paternal mentor – fishing (perhaps in some remote Scottish glen) by “the living water” (Azoth) and which flowing water is full of faces, of masks reminiscent of one part (Melpomene, the Muse of Tragedy) of the “comedy and tragedy theatrical masks” that have for decades been adopted by Western theatres and which, as Sock and Buskin, go back centuries to Greco-Roman times.

Overseeing the Azoth Sumor scene is a smiling “man in the moon” perhaps in intimation of how feeble we mere mortals are in believing in our mortal endeavours and quests.

Yet whatever interpretation we may impose on the image it remains something of a mystery: an archetypal (and a sinisterly-numinous) presencing which words almost invariably fail to describe but which one of our own dreamscapes may, one day, remind us of.

As such, the image is a powerful archetypal presencing and an example of the superb sinisterly-numinous artistry of Mr Richard Moult, an artistry exemplified in his book of Tarot archetypes titled Non Est Secundus Quia Unus Est. {1}

R.S.
2018 ev

{1} See https://starred-desert.com/non-est-secundus-quia-unus-est/

°°°°°°°°°

Image credit: Azoth Sumor, by Richard Moult
A high resolution version is available at https://starred-desert.com/paintings/


Related:

Atu XX

Quod Superius Est Sicut Quod Inferius

7FW: A Modern Guide


Richard Moult: Atu XX

Atu XX

Richard Moult: Atu XX (Aeon) from Non Est Secundus Quia Unus Est,
a book of Tarot archetypes.

°°°°°°°

Source: https://starred-desert.com/2017/12/07/atu-xx-aeon/


Myatt, The Septenary Anados, And The Quest For Lapis Philosophicus

Order of Nine Angles

O9A

°°°°°°°

The life of David Myatt is discussed in relation to the occult group the Order of Nine Angles (O9A/ONA), with particular reference to (i) the O9A’s hermetic ‘seven fold way,’ which is a decades-long personal quest for wisdom, and (ii) the O9A concepts of ‘the sinisterly-numinous’ and ‘aeonics’. It will be argued that Myatt’s strange, varied, and documented life is consistent with someone following that ‘seven fold way’; that Myatt – under the nom-de-plume Anton Long – is one of the most innovative of modern occultists and one of the few to attain the grade of Magus; and that the O9A itself has been consistently mis-understood by outsiders.

Myatt, The Septenary Anados, And The Quest For Lapis Philosophicus
(pdf)


Related:
Myatt: A Matter of Honour
(pdf)

Related:
Myatt, Anton Long, And The O9A
(pdf)


On Native Egyptian Influence In The Corpus Hermeticum

For over a hundred years, from Reitzenstein’s Poimandres published in 1904, to Fowden’s The Egyptian Hermes published in 1986, the question of Egyptian influence on the fourteen Greek texts – tractates {1} – collectively known as the Corpus Hermeticum has been much debated. The opinions of scholars, and of translators, have ranged from little influence (Festugiere) to insignificant influence (Myatt), to much influence (Mahé), to the more recent one (Fowden) of hermeticism being syncretic, combining elements of Hellenic culture with elements of Egyptian culture in various and still disputable proportions.

What, however, is often not explicitly defined is what ‘Egyptian’, and Egyptian culture, mean in the context of where and when the Greek texts of the Corpus Hermeticum were written; which was, to give the widest parameters, sometime between the end of the first century CE and the end of the third century CE when Egypt was a province of the Roman Empire and where cities like Alexandria were places where Hellenic culture thrived and where people of Greek and of Roman descent lived in large numbers, some of whom no doubt had an interest in and knowledge of native Egyptian – ‘Pharaonic’ – culture and history. For centuries before that, most of Egypt had – following the conquests of Alexander the Great – been a Greek colony ruled by a succession of people of Greek origin such as the Macedonian Ptolemaios Soter who established what became known as the Ptolemaic dynasty (or Kingdom) whose last ruler was Cleopatra, herself of Greek origin, who desired that the native Egyptians of her time consider her as an embodiment of their native goddess Isis.

Thus for some three centuries before the texts of the Corpus Hermeticum were written Egypt was a thriving outpost of Greek culture; a place where the likes of Aristotle and Archimedes lived and flourished for many years.

It is therefore necessary to make a distinction between the ruling, Greek, elite – and the Greek aristocracy of people such as Aristotle and Archimedes – and native Egyptians; a cultural and an ancestral distinction. A relevant comparison is the British Raj in India who were British by heritage and culture and who, even if they were born and spent most of their life in India, could not – should not – be described as ‘Indian’.

Considered thus the relevant context of the Greek texts of the Corpus Hermeticum was the centuries-long Greek culture of such an aristocracy combined with the relatively recent culture of Rome from the time of Caesar to praefectus Statilius Aemilianus (270 CE). What is not particularly relevant is the culture of the natives, the ancestors of the fellaheen, some or many of whom no doubt continued to revere or at least remember the divinities of ancient Egypt such as the goddess Isis and most of whom would not have been able to read let alone write Greek.

Given the centuries-long Greek and Roman heritage of the ruling elite and the aristocracy – who could speak and read Greek and who were probably acquainted with the writings of Plato and Aristotle – and given why rulers such as Cleopatra desired, for the benefit of her subjects, to be identified with an ancient Egyptian divinity such as Isis, it is most probable that the authors of the Greek texts of the Corpus Hermeticum, resident as they were in the then Roman province of Egypt, sought to give their metaphysical speculations some local, Egyptian, colour by – among other things – naming the son (or the pupil) of the Greek Hermes after the Egyptian god Thoth.

As Myatt noted in the introduction to his translation of tractate IV of the Corpus Hermeticum:

“In respect of Τάτ, while there is no disputing that Thoth is meant, what may or may not be implied by the name Thoth is whether or not there is a primarily Egyptian genesis for the metaphysics and the cosmogony of this particular tractate. For what does ‘Egyptian’ mean in the context of the Corpus Hermeticum, written when Egypt was a post-Ptolemaic Roman province where Hellenism still thrived? That is, is the text propounding a metaphysics and a cosmogony primarily redolent of indigenous, pre-Alexandrian, times, with Hermes Trismegistus simply a Hellenic name for the ancient Dynastic deity Thoth, and thus with the Greek Hermes possibly being a son of that ancient Egyptian deity? Or is the text redolent of a classical metaphysics and a cosmogony; or of a Hellenic metaphysics and cosmogony; or of some syncretism of Egyptian (pre-Alexandrian) weltanschauungen with Hellenic mysticism? Or has the author (or authors) of Ἑρμοῦ πρὸς Τάτ ὁ κρατῆρ ἡ μονάς simply used the name of an ancient deity – Thoth – in order to appeal to an audience of Hellenized Egyptians, or Greeks/Romans dwelling in Egypt, or because it seemed to add some esoteric gravitas to the text? Or, as the title might be taken to imply – of Hermes to Thoth – is it a text intended to inform Egyptians (Hellenized or expatriate Greeks/Romans, or otherwise) about Greek/Hellenic metaphysics and cosmogony, with Thoth thus regarded, symbolically, esoterically, or otherwise, as the son of the Greek divinity Hermes?

In this matter, I incline toward the view – based on some forty years of study of the Corpus Hermeticum and similar mystical and esoteric texts, classical, Hellenic, medieval, Arabic and otherwise – that what is imparted in this tractate, as with the Poemandres and Ιερός Λόγος, is primarily a mystical, and – for centuries – aural, Greek tradition, albeit one possibly influenced, over time and in some degree, by the metaphysical speculations of later philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle.”

I therefore find myself in agreement with Myatt regarding the question of native Egyptian influence on those texts. That the texts present us with a Greek/Hellenic metaphysics and cosmogony, not with some Greek and Egyptian syncretion, and certainly not with a native Egyptian metaphysics and cosmogony slightly influenced by Hellenism.

For it is essentially a question of terminology: of what ‘Egyptian’ means in cultural and in ancestral terms. Of a perhaps an inhibition on the part of some modern scholars to differentiate between the ancestry and the culture of ‘the natives’ and the ancestry and culture of a ruling elite and aristocracy.

R. Parker
2017

{1} Tractate is derived from the classical Latin tractatus meaning a discussion, ‘concerning’, a treatise; and was used by writers such as Cicero and Pliny. It was later assimilated into ecclesiastical Latin – qv. Augustine – where it denoted a homily or sermon. It is the basis of the modern English word tract.

°°°°°°°

List of works cited

A-J. Festugiere. La Révélation d’Hermès Trismégiste. 4 volumes. Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1946-1954.

G. Fowden. The Egyptian Hermes. Princeton University Press, 1993

J-P. Mahé. Hermes En Haute Egypte. Tome I, 1978. Tome II, 1982. Presses de l’Université Laval.

D. Myatt. Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates. CreateSpace. 2017.

R. A. Reitzenstein. Poimandres: Studien zur griechisch-ägyptischen und frühchristlichen Literatu. Teubner, Leipzig, 1904

R. A. Reitzenstein & H. H. Schaeder. Studien zum antiken Synkretismus aus Iran und Griechenland. (Studien der Bibliothek Warburg), Teubner, Leipzig, 1926


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.


It Can Sometimes Be Informative To Chastise

Order of Nine Angles

O9A

It Can Sometimes Be Informative To Chastise

It can sometimes – in a dialectical sort of way {1} – be informative for our readers, as well as mildly amusing for us, to polemically {2} chastise when someone publicly makes statements about the O9A, and about themselves, which reveal (a) just how silly and ill-informed that ‘someone’ is, and (b) just how they, in their silliness and ignorance, contribute albeit unwittingly to the O9A mythos and thus to its Labyrinthos Mythologicus {3).

Exhibit 1.

In the case under consideration, a silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ wrote: “I am proud of my religion, the Left Hand Path celebrates liberty, life and responsibility.”

In that one short sentence, there are two falsities, indicative of ignorance. First falsity is that the Left Hand Path (LHP) – more correctly, the Western, Occult, Left Hand Path – is a religion; second, that it celebrates some causal (some supra-personal, and social and/or political) abstraction denoted by the term ‘liberty’.

Correctly understood, through a scholarly perusal of Western esotericism, the LHP means: (a) antinomianism, that is (i) the rejection of the morality, and the zeitgeist, of contemporaneous society or societies, and (ii) a rejection of the laws established and enforced by others and in particular by supra-personal entities such as governments; and (b) rejection of religion and of the religious attitude, with the essential attributes of both religion and of the religious attitude being “belief in and (often uncritical) obedience to” what someone or some entity has codified, and “acceptance of being part of” some hierarchical group, community, or organization.

This understanding leads and has led to various modern LHP practices, from those redolent of anarchy and nihilism to those ‘extreme practices’ such as exemplified by the Order of Nine Angles who have defined ‘their’ LHP as a personal Occult way where:

“there is nothing that is not permitted; nothing that is forbidden or restricted. That is, the LHP means the individual takes sole responsibility for their actions and their quest. This makes the LHP both difficult and dangerous – its methods can be used as an excuse for anti-social behaviour as they can be used to aid the fetishes and weaknesses of some individuals as well as lead some into forbidden and illegal acts. However, the genuine Initiate of the LHP is undertaking a quest, and as such is seeking something: that is, there is a dynamic, an imperative about their actions as well as the conscious understanding and appreciation that all such actions are only part of that quest; they are not the quest itself. This arises because the LHP Initiate is seeking mastery and self-knowledge – these being implicit in such an Initiation. Accordingly, the LHP Initiate sees methods as merely methods; experience as merely experience. Both are used, and then discarded.

Because of this the LHP is by its nature ruthless – the strong of character win through, the weak go under. There are no ‘safety nets’ of any kind on the LHP […] The LHP breeds self-achievement and self-excellence, or it destroys.” {4}

In other words, the essence of the O9A LHP is practical, esoteric and exoteric, pathei-mathos {5}.

Exhibit 2.

In the case under consideration, a silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ wrote: “I earned the hatred of the ONA…my lone LHP voice did significant damage to the ONA.”

In that one short sentence, there are two falsities, indicative – in this case – both of ignorance and self-aggrandizement.

a) First falsity. Since the Order of Nine Angles, correctly understood (by means of detailed study of the entire O9A corpus over many months) is an esoteric philosophy presenced in three Occult praxises – and thus rather akin to “a movement, a subculture or perhaps metaculture that its adherents choose to embody or identify with” {6} – then “it” cannot “hate” anybody, no more than Nietzsche’s philosophy can “hate” a person.

b) Second falsity. Since the Order of Nine Angles is an esoteric philosophy presenced in three Occult praxises, an internet-based “voice” or internet-based “voices” cannot do any damage to such a philosophy, significant or otherwise, especially given that such a “voice” or “voices” is or are unscholarly and has not, or have not, presented any formalized philosophical, and mainstream published, written rebuttal of that philosophy in terms of its ontology, epistemology, and theory of ethics.

It seems to have escaped the notice of this particular silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ – and others of that ilk – that (a) a rant or rants, via the internet, about the ONA, (b) making unsubstantiated allegations about the ONA, and (c) spreading rumours about the ONA, do not amount to a philosophical rebuttal of ONA ontology, epistemology, and ethics; and as such are only and will only ever be taken seriously by such silly and ill-informed persons and others of their (mostly internet-bound) ilk.

Which exposure of such falsities will, in all probability, not prevent this particular silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ – and others of that ilk – from continuing to propagate such falsities about the ONA in the future. For no doubt their, apparently necessary, self-belief that their “voices” can make a difference will motive them to continue making unsubstantiated allegations and continue spreading rumours, strengthened as that self-belief no doubt has been, is and will be by what is, for them, an apparently convincing delusion that they possess a detailed, esoteric, and philosophical, knowledge of the ONA.

Exhibit 3.

In the case under consideration, a silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ wrote: “fanatics such as David Myatt (Order of Nine Angles) promote murder in the name of religion.”

In that one short sentence, there are three falsities, indicative – in this case – of that someone giving voice to the zeitgeist of contemporaneous Western society. Or, in less abstruse terms, parroting Magian propaganda {7} about a particular person in some apparent attempt to discredit and demean him.

a) First falsity. Since Mr Myatt, over seven years ago now, (i) has publicly distanced himself (theoretically and practically) from all types of extremism, (ii) was and is engaged only in academic pursuits, such as translations, (iii) lives and has lived as a recluse, and (iv) has developed a personal philosophy of life based on virtues such as empathy, humility, and compassion, he is most certainly not a ‘fanatic’.

b) Second falsity. Since neither the silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ nor anyone else has provided probative evidence that Mr Myatt is or was connected to the Order of Nine Angles, associating him with the ONA amounts to using ‘weasel words’ in order to create a misleading, propagandistic, impression of Mr Myatt.

b) Third falsity. Since the silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ used the present tense (promote) and does not provide any details as to where and when this current promotion of murder – in the name of religion or otherwise – occurred, then the accusation is at best a misleading, propagandistic, one, and at worst is a malicious, libellous, allegation.

Given that the silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ is giving voice to the zeitgeist of contemporaneous Western society by simply parroting Magian propaganda about a particular person – disliked, even hated, as that person is by the savants of the Magian status quo – then the silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ is most certainly not, as they believe, “of the Left Hand Path.”

Conclusion

What this particular case illustrates, once again, is how the majority view by individuals – be they self-professed Occultists or ‘satanists’ – of both the Order of Nine Angles and of Mr Myatt is simply a parroting of Magian propaganda about a particular person and about a particular esoteric philosophy.

In the matter of the Order of Nine Angles, it is disliked – even loathed – because of its opposition to the “Ayn Rand with trappings” Magian ‘satanism’ of Howard Stanton Levey, its opposition to the foreign influenced (the non-Western) cult of Aquino’s ‘Setianism’, and of course because of the O9A’s antinomian, ‘heretical’, support of National Socialism, holocaust revisionism, and of Muslim Jihad.

In the matter of of Mr Myatt, he is disliked – even hated – by the savants of the Magian status quo (which savants include followers of the ‘satanism’ of Howard Stanton Levey as well as anti-fascists) not only because of his alleged links to, and his alleged founding of, the Order of Nine Angles, but also because his experiential life is one of practical opposition to everything Magian, from his thirty years as a neo-nazi activist and as a “principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution,” {8} to his decade as an active supporter of Muslim Jihad {9}{10}, to his Western, ineluctably pagan, philosophy of pathei-mathos {11}, and his recent translations of Western texts about hermeticism {12} which restore them to the Western, pagan, mystical tradition.

Our silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ is therefore simply following what has become something of an established Magian tradition of demeaning and trying to discredit both the O9A and Mr Myatt.

T.W.S.
2017 ev

°°°°°°°

{1} Being pedants by inclination and occupation, we shall explain what we mean by various terms. Dialectical/dialectic:

(i) Having premises which are merely probable as opposed to demonstrably true; based on probable opinions rather than on demonstrable fact. (ii) Characterized by the existence or operation of opposing forces, tendencies, opinions, etcetera; the tension and disputes produced by the clash of such forces, opinions, etcetera; and the revealing of truth (the insight) that can result from such tension, disputes, and clashes. (iii) A disputant who disputes to be transgressive and/or to engender a dialectical response.

(ii) Polemic/polemical:

“Of the nature of, exhibiting, given to, or relating to dispute or controversy; contentious, disputatious, combative. a diatribe. A controversial argument; a strong verbal or written attack on a person, opinion, or doctrine. An aggressive debate or controversy; the practice of engaging in such debate. A person who argues or writes in opposition to another, or who takes up a controversial position; a controversialist.”

{3} The Labyrinthos Mythologicus of the O9A is explained here: https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/labyrinthos-mythologicus/

{4} The LHP – An Analysis. 1991. Published in Hostia, volume III.

{5} Refer to Notes On The Esoteric Learning Presenced Through Pathei-Mathos, available at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/pathei-mathos/

{6}Monette, Connell. Mysticism in the 21st Century. Sirius Academic Press. 2013. p. 89.

{7} The O9A use the term Magian to refer to the hybrid ethos of Yahoud and of Western hubriati, and to those individuals who are Magian by either breeding or nature. The essence of the paternalistic Magian ethos is inherent in Judaism, in Nasrany, and in Islam.

Two of the most prominent manifestations of the Magian ethos, in the modern world and in Western societies in particular, are (i) the State sponsored religion of holocaustianity (with the attendant demonizing of Hitler, the Third Reich, National Socialism, and the demonizing of ‘White’ – but not of non-White – ethnic awareness) and (ii) causal abstractions deriving from materialism, with the attendant cults of (a) usury and capitalism, and of (b) hubris and egoism such as the “Ayn Rand with trappings” so-called ‘satanism’ of Howard Stanton Levey.

Hubriati: The O9A use the term hubriati to refer to that class of individuals, in the West, who have been and who are subsumed by the Magian ethos and the delusion of (causal) abstractions, and who occupy positions of influence and/or of power. Hubriati include politicians, Media magnates and their savants, military commanders, government officials, industrialists, bankers, many academics and teachers, and so on. The oligarchy (elected and unelected) that forms the controllers of Western governments are almost excursively hubriati.

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

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

{10} 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.

{11}Refer to The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos .

{12} David Myatt. Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates. Translations and commentaries. 2017. ISBN-13: 978-1976452369


Source: https://wyrdsister.wordpress.com/2017/09/18/it-can-sometimes-be-informative-to-chastise/