Police State?

odal3

°°°°°°°

As a supporter of the anarchist Occult movement – the sub-culture – known as the Order of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA) {1} and skeptical as I am about the draconian government measures in the UK that have led to an unprecedented disruption of society, {2} I was pleased to learn that the former Supreme Court judge Lord Sumption had criticized the enforcement of these measures by the police. {3}

Among other things, the police have been setting up roadblocks to check on what people traveling by road are doing and turning people back if they deemed their journey was “not essential”; they dyed the usually turquoise water of a lagoon black in a beauty spot to deter tourists from visiting {3} and they stopped and questioned people who were outdoors telling them that they could only exercise outdoors once a day for one hour only. The police even told a shop to stop selling Easter eggs as they were not “essential” supplies, and used a drone to spy on a couple walking with their dog in the countryside and then posted images of the couple on Twitter to warn people against undertaking “non-essential” travel.

Lord Sumption said that “this is what a police state is like, it is a state in which a government can issue orders or express preferences with no legal authority and the police will enforce ministers’ wishes,” that the measures taken by the government were based on hysteria; that “anyone who has studied history will recognise here the classic symptoms of collective hysteria,” and asked if the viral pandemic was serious enough to warrant putting most of our population into house imprisonment.

I and the minority like me who have studied both the data and human history have concluded it is not serious enough because most people who contract the virus will have mild symptoms and recover. Currently, the data shows that over 90% of people have recovered.

The criticism of Lord Sumption focused on the fact that the emergency laws introduced by the government do not give police the legal power to do what they have been doing.

Having studied history, I expect that the UK government will now give the police the legal power to tyrannically restrict the rights and freedoms of individuals and to enforce the policies which have created a society “in lockdown” based on the tyrannical Big Brother slogan that we the people should “stay at home”. Such legal power will deepen the rift between ordinary people, and the wealthy and the privileged political oligarchy. For instance, the wealthy and the politicos do not have to join long queues to buy “essential supplies” – they have assistants and flunkies to do that for them or they have the wealth and the privilege, the contacts, to make a deal with suppliers to supply them direct. They also have access to private medical care and assistance so that they, unlike ordinary folk, can always speedily contact a doctor and, if they become ill, they can go to a private clinic or have a private room in the private wing of a hospital.

           Maybe I’m wrong about the government now giving the police the legal power to enforce the restrictions that have created our current “lockdown” society. But history backs my judgment, especially as there is no sign by the people of active dissent, for, according to a spokesperson for the National Police Chiefs Council, the “vast majority of people are fully complying with the guidance and advice” and that “we will use enforcement” by issuing fines to those who do not obey and that those fines are “legally enforceable and non-payment will result in prosecution.” In other words, the police already have the power to arrest dissenters, prosecute them, and have them imprisoned for “non-payment of fines”.

D.L.
March 2020 ev

{1} For the anarchic nature of the O9A, see The Physis Of The O9A section of Insight Rôles, The Seven Fold Way, And The O9A, included in https://omega9alpha.files.wordpress.com/2019/10/o9a-trilogy-print.pdf
{2} https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2020/03/24/covid-19-update/
See also https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2020/03/19/covid-19-a-dissenting-and-pagan-view
{3} https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/30/covid-19-ex-supreme-court-judge-lambasts-disgraceful-policing

°°°°°°°

Editorial Note: As reported in our declaration titled About This Blog – https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/about/ – “given the rumors and allegations about Myatt and the occult group the order of nine angles we also publish some articles about the ONA/O9A, from a variety of sources.” The above, written by a self-declared supporter of the anarchist O9A movement, is one such article.

°°°°°°°


Covid-19 Update

odal3

°°°°°°°

Today, Monday 23 March 2020, the Prime Minister of Britain – grandson of a Russian Jew, and great-grandson of a Turkish Muslim – sits like a dictator in a plush room flanked by the national flag, and by means of a live televised broadcast announced to the nation that even more tyrannical measures will be introduced which will severely restrict the rights and liberties of ordinary citizens. All the name of “public safety” and “protecting life”.

For now – today – “public safety”, protecting life, and the fight – the war – against the new viral enemy has replaced slogans about the fight – the war – against terrorism and replaced even older slogans about the so-called “evil” of Nazi Germany and the need to fight a “total war” in order to protect and save democracy. The rhetoric is the same: only the name of the enemy, and the means to fight this new war, have changed.

Meanwhile, the social fabric of our British society – going to the pub, to bars, to restaurants, going to concerts and events, playing or spectating at outdoor sports, sending our children to school, and so on – slowly breaks down. There is no time-scale for when life will return to normal. If, after this, it can ever return to normal.

What is happening is dystopian. The powerful politicians, like the Prime Minister, the wealthy and the well-connected, continue with their lavish lifestyles in their mansions or in their large residences with their manicured gardens, while ordinary folk have to endure shortages of food and domestic essentials, lose their jobs because their places of work have been shut down, and are told to stay indoors or risk fines or risk being taken away and forcibly placed in isolation. Gatherings in public of more than two people who do not live together have been declared illegal.

That there is no vocal or organized dissent – in the media, from politicians, even from anarchists and nationalists – about the severe and unprecedented and tyrannical restrictions of the rights and liberties of ordinary citizens is extraordinary. It is as if the majority of people uncritically believe what the government and the media tell them. Which belief and lack of active dissent allows tyranny to survive and propser.

Yet the government policy of (i) isolating ourselves – for up to 12 weeks in the case of those considered to be most at risk in terms of health – and (ii) of “social distancing” and (iii) of “lockdown”, of closing pubs, bar, restaurants, and other aspects of our social society, is not based on fact but on speculation.

The speculation is that hundreds of thousands of people will die if government policy is not followed and enforced. That we would be selfish and irresponsible if we did not do what the government demanded. There is currently no data, no verifiable research, which supports such speculation.

What the latest data – March 21-23, 2020 – does reveal is that worldwide there have been 332,935 confirmed cases and have been 14,510 deaths. {1} In Britain there have been 5,683 confirmed cases and 281 deaths.

This means that the survival rate – even in the worst affected areas, such as Italy and Spain – is greater than 90%. In other words, Covid-19 is not a new Black Death; not a pandemic like the Spanish influenza of 1918. And thus does not require such draconian, such tyrannical, measures.

In addition, the policy of isolation, of social distancing and of “lockdown” does not allow for community – herd – immunity, which for millennia has been Nature’s way of protecting us, en masse, from pandemics. This is the immunity that develops in the general population because those who have been infected and survived pass on such immunity to others as a result of social contact. This is what occurred, for example, during the 1968-1969 Hong Kong influenza pandemic the death toll from which was reduced because a significant portion of people had some immunity to the virus as a result of community immunity.

What the government and their vocal supporters in the media and elsewhere also do not want to acknowledge is that it is a fact of life, part of our nature as mortal biological beings, that many of us die from disease, viral or otherwise; that elderly people are more prone to die from infections – viral or otherwise; that epidemics and pandemics and disease – from the Black Death to the Spanish 1918 pandemic to malaria – are a fact of Nature and a means whereby we have changed, evolved; that we can either accept the power of Nature, and who and what we are, or we can try to struggle against Nature and try to conquer Nature and believe we are fighting a war against epidemics and pandemics and disease.

The government and others have chosen to struggle against Nature since it seems that they want to be seen as “saviours” in a much hyped “new war” against Nature, and because they fear that the option of working with Nature – through community immunity, and allowing our societies to carry on almost as normal – may mean they will be somehow blamed for inaction when people die during the new pandemic.

In other words, they have taken the short-term, short-sighed, political option, disrupting society in an unprecedented way, rather than the option that ancestral wisdom, that an understanding of Nature reveals: of community immunity; of ourselves as biological beings prone to illness and accidents, and of how epidemics and pandemics can be a means whereby we as a species change and evolve. As The Black Death – which unlike Covid-19 was almost always fatal – brought about positive social, religious, and political changes and the European Renaissance itself; for as Nietzsche wrote, Was mich nicht umbringt, macht mich stärker.

That such ancestral wisdom is enshrined in the modern political philosophy of National Socialism {2} is, of course, one more reason why modern Western politicians and the media have chosen the short-term, short-sighed, political option of disrupting society in an unprecedented way. For they have so demonized National Socialism and the folk society of The Third Reich for so many decades – made it a modern heresy – that the majority of our folk have no conception of how that political philosophy enshrines our native, our European, ancestral wisdom.

Which ancestral wisdom does not mean the heartless way of being indifferent to suffering and letting people die, as politicians and many others mistakenly believe. Rather it means caring for the sick and the dying; letting society function almost as normal; allowing for the development of community immunity, and introducing measures which encourage the benefits of outdoor exercise. There is only one country in the world which, so far, has taken this route: Russia, where its leader Vladimir Putin has not imposed “lockdown” and who recently was out and about in Crimea, meeting crowds and shaking hands, and not socially-distancing himself. {3} This natural approach by President Putin – this ray of hope – may, however, change. If it does then we who are of European descent face a bleak future, our only hope – it seems to me – to carry within our hearts the truth about National Socialism and personally pass on this truth to others.

D.L.
March 2020 ev

{1} https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019
{2} Refer, for example, to Myatt’s 1990s essay The Meaning of National-Socialism, and his Esoteric Hitlerism: Idealism, the Third Reich and the Essence of National-Socialism which are included in https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/11/myatt-selected-ns-writings1.pdf
{3} https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51972974

°°°°°°°


Covid-19: A Dissenting And Pagan View

odal3

°°°°°°°

March 18, 2020. The new pandemic caused by a new virus – Covid-19, commonly called Coronavirus – has led politicians in Western societies to panic, to act on the basis of speculation rather than on the basis of verifiable data; to introduce radical restrictions on people – such as severely restricting foreign travel and closing schools, cancelling sporting events, shutting down theaters, restricting public gatherings, closing Underground Stations in London, and telling people to stay indoors on pain of arrest {1} – and to declare things such as “we are in a war against an invisible killer,” {2} and Nous sommes en guerre {3}.

The result has been the greatest disruption in Western societies since World War Two, with the attitude among politicians and many others amounting to declaring that “we are at war with Nature” amid the scramble to try and contain the spread of the virus.

The disruption and restrictions and draconian legislation are based on speculation that the new virus will have a severe mortality rate; a rate much greater than the 1% to 2% of influenza pandemics such as the one between 1968 and 1969. Hence the claim – unsupported by actual data – that there will be at least 250,000 deaths from Covid-19 in Britain alone.

Yet a study of the data currently available reveals a mortality rate of around 2% in places such as Italy and America and Britain, with many of those who died being elderly and having underlying and often serious health problems. In addition, many of those who have been infected – such as Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson, and David and Sally Abel, whose cases were widely reported in the media – suffered mild symptoms and recovered within a few weeks. Which recovery by so many is what a mortality rate of around 2% indicates. {4}{5}

The formulation and implementation of government policy on the basis of speculation and on the basis of a “worst case scenario”, the lack of dissent especially among politicians and journalists, and the scramble to try and contain the spread of the virus through restrictive and draconian measures, are indicative of the fact that we humans – even after a century of scientific and technological advances based on reason, scientific experimentation, and verifiable research – can still react in an irrational and fearful way and still uphold the hubriatic belief that “we are in a war” with – or should be at war with – a natural occurrence.

Which arrogant, hubriatic, belief – based on the assumptions that we are, could be, should be, masters of Earth, of Nature, and can solve all problems, environmental, political, social while remaining as we are – has led to us causing the climate change which our planet is now undergoing. It has also led to us forgetting a fundamental principle of biological life: which is that all biological beings die, and that there are natural causes over which we have no control despite what we in our hubris and egoism like to believe.

In effect, our politicians and many others have neglected or forgotten or never known certain truths, a certain wisdom. Truths, a wisdom, known for example by those with long-experience of the oceans, of the Sea: of its raw power, its unpredictability, and of how we humans can be and often are powerless when confronted with that power, that unpredictability.

Truths, a wisdom, known when some new or old disease afflicts us, and when we – or our relatives or our friends or loved ones – die from such a disease or from natural causes or from some accident of life.

That prideful, hubriatic, attitude – which overestimates our abilities and our power as biological beings who are doomed sometime, somewhere, somehow, to die – is enshrined in such slogans as “Cancer: we’re coming to get you” since we are in effect saying “Death: we’re coming to get you,” as if we can, should, somehow forestall the inevitable.

What, thus, has been and is being neglected or forgotten or never known is a simple truth known to most if not all ancestral traditions and which truth formed one of the foundations of ancient Western paganism. A truth which a modern pagan mystic expressed by quoting an expression originally in Ancient Greek: “Our ending arrives whenever wherever the Moirai [the Fates] decide.” {6}

In practical terms this truth means a rather laissez-faire – stoical – attitude to life, an attitude exemplified by the reality behind the now much maligned British phrase “stiff upper lip” and the now much satirized slogan “Keep Calm And Carry On”.

For myself, and in respect of this manufactured Covid-19 crisis, I intend to live as normal; ignoring the panic and the waffle and the fear-mongering of politicians and others.

As a pagan I am content to die when and how the Fates – the gods, the Kosmos, Nature herself – decree. Until that moment there is life, living, to be savoured and enjoyed in a life-affirming pagan way.

Richard Stirling
March 2020

{1} In France people have to have an official permit which permits them to go outside, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/world/europe/paris-coronavirus-lockdown.html

In Britain, the government has introduced legislation allowing the Police and immigration officials to arrest and place people in “appropriate isolation facilities”, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51938879

{2} British Health Secretary Matt Hancock, https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51917562

{3} President Macron of France, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-16/france-to-put-all-reforms-on-hold-to-focus-on-virus-macron-says

{4} Update: according to a report – March 18, 2020, 8:56 AM EDT – 99% of Those Who Died From Virus Had Other Illness: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-18/99-of-those-who-died-from-virus-had-other-illness-italy-says

{5} Regarding the 2% mortality rare, see also Radiological findings from 81 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, in the medical journal The Lancet, https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30086-4/fulltext

{6} θάνατος δὲ τότ ̓ ἔσσεται ὁππότε κεν δὴ Μοῖραι ἐπικλώσωσ ̓. Attributed to Καλλίνου, as recorded by Ἰωάννης Στοβαῖος in Ἀνθολόγιον, c. 5th century CE.

The mystic in question is David Myatt who quotes the expression in several of his post-2011 writings, and whose philosophy of pathei-mathos, and his monographs Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos and Tu Es Diaboli Ianua, express the essence of ancient Western paganism. See also Western Paganism And Hermeticism: Myatt And The Renaissance of Western Culture

Myatt’s mystical philosophy is outlined in https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/myatt-mystic-philosophy-second-edition.pdf

°°°°°°°


Concerning The Term Numinous

David Myatt

°°°°°°°

Two essays about the ‘numinous’, a term used by David Myatt in his philosophy of pathei-mathos and also by the occult group the Order of Nine Angles in expressions such as ‘the sinister-numinous’ and ‘the sinister-numinous aesthetic’.

The essays place the term into the correct historical, philosophical, and occult perspective.

Part II- A Note Regarding The Term Numinous
Part II – A Note On The Muliebral Numinous

The Muliebral Numinous
(pdf)

°°°°°°°


Appreciating The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos

David Myatt

David Myatt

°°°°°°°

Appreciating The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos

Abstract

We ask why David Myatt’s mystical philosophy of pathei-mathos is unappreciated and why are old allegations and rumours about him still made and still propagated today.

We suggest it may in part be because in Myatt’s philosophy empathy and personal honour lead us away from the Judeo-Christian illusion of causal abstractions (a naming) and a dialectic of opposites based on such naming with the inevitable apocalyptic eschatology; and partly because his philosophy presents a modern and rational paganism based on Greco-Roman values and is therefore seen as belonging to a new and emerging “right-wing” milieu in which ancestral (native and pagan) European culture and a tradition of personal honour are central.

°°°°°°°°°

That David Myatt’s mystical philosophy of pathei-mathos {1} is unappreciated today except by a few sagacious individuals is understandable given two things. First, Myatt’s extremist past – three decades (1968-1998) as a neo-nazi activist and ideologue, and almost a decade (1998-2008) as a supporter and ideologue of Muslim Jihad – and, second, given the unproven allegations, and the rumours spread, about him over the decades by politically motivated individuals and organizations with an agenda who profess to be “fighting extremism”.

Allegations and rumours that are still made and still propagated today despite Myatt’s voluminous post-2011 writings about his rejection of extremism. Writings such as his 2013 book Understanding and Rejecting Extremism: A Very Strange Peregrination {2} and collections of essays such as his Religion, Empathy, and Pathei-Mathos: Essays and Letters Regarding Spirituality, Humility, and A Learning From Grief {3}.

Why therefore are such allegations and rumours still made and still propagated today?

All his vociferous politically orientated critics say and write are either prejudiced statements such as “it’s hard to take anything Myatt says at face value, so successfully has he enshrouded himself in self-contradictory disinformation”, or make propagandistic claims such as that he has a “history of deception”, none of which statements or claims his critics support with probative evidence based on primary sources.

That is, such critics are merely presenting their personal opinions as well as revealing either their lack of knowledge of Myatt’s voluminous post-2011 writings about extremism and about his philosophy of pathei-mathos, or their prejudiced dismissal of those writings as “disinformation and deceptive”, and writings which they obviously have never read or have not bothered to study in detail.

Good, Evil, Honour, and God

Where, for example, are their reasoned, or their scholarly, critiques of Myatt’s Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God, his 29 page monograph included in his book Religion, Empathy, and Pathei-Mathos.

Which monograph is a relevant example of his writings about his philosophy of pathei-mathos, and in which he compares the ontologies of Christianity, Islam, and the modern nation-state with the ontology he proposes for his own philosophy.

For example, after discussing the ontologies of Christianity, Islam, and the modern nation-state, he presents in Parts Four and Five his argument in favour of a personal ontology deriving from pathei mathos, as well as presenting his conclusions regarding the need to lead a tolerant, compassionate, honourable, way of life.

Thus in Part Four he writes:

“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 […]

No need for dogma or too many words; no need for comparisons; no ‘just cause’ to excuse our behaviour. No mechanisms and no techniques to enable us to progress toward some-thing because there is no need or requirement to progress toward what is not there to be attained. There is only a personal living in such a way that we try to be compassionate, empathic, loving, honourable, kind, tolerant, gentle, and humble. And this is essentially the wisdom, the insight, the way of living – sans denotatum – that thousands upon thousands of people over millennia have contributed to the culture of pathei-mathos, as well as the essence of the message which many if not all spiritual ways and religions, in their genesis, perhaps saught to reveal: the message of the health of love and of our need, as fallible beings often inclined toward the unbalance of hubris, for humility.”

In Part Five he explains the origins of his philosophy:

“Twenty years ago, someone whom I loved who loved me died, too young and having harmed no one. Died, leaving me bereft, if only for a while. For too soon my return to those hubriatic, selfish, suffering-causing, and extremist, ways of my pasts. As if, despite the grief, the pain of loss, I personally had learned nothing, except in such moments of such remembering that did not, unfortunately, impact too much upon my practicalities of life; at least until another bereavement, thirteen years later, came to shock, shake, betake me far from my arrogant presumptions about myself, about life, to thus lead, to so slowly lead, to me on a clear cold day yet again interiorly dwelling on what, if anything, is our human purpose of being here and why such bereavements, such early deaths, just seem so unjust, unfair.”

Another relevant example is his In Reply To Some Questions (2012) in which he explains in greater detail the intent of his writings about extremism and about his philosophy of πάθει μάθος – the ‘numinous way’ – and that those writings

“have been written as expressions of my own feelings, experiences, and philosophical reflexions, with no particular audience in mind, save in many instance for a few personal friends. In effect, they document my interior struggles, my attempts to find solutions to certain philosophical problems, and my desire to understand the how and the why of my hubris, of my extremist decades, and thus to understand and acknowledge the mistakes of my past – to understand and acknowledge the suffering I caused – and understand the error of extremism itself […]

What I hope to achieve by such writings is to communicate – or to attempt to communicate – some of my insights, some of my experiences, some of my solutions, and some of my conclusions, such as they are, and as personal and as fallible as they are, and dealing as they do with extremism, with an extremist life, and with the personal life of the hubriatic man I was […]

My concern – and therefore that of the philosophy of πάθει μάθος – is with spiritual (numinous) and personal matters. With our own individual interior change and reformation; with the perspective and insight that empathy and pathei-mathos provide: which is of personal virtues such as compassion, love, humility, empathy, πάθει μάθος, honour, and wu-wei, and thus with treating human beings as individuals […]

My writings over the past few years have been personal, ‘mystical’, and philosophical, with the latter documenting the development and refinement of my ‘numinous way’ culminating in my moral philosophy of pathei-mathos which is concerned with individuals and how individuals might discover and learn to appreciate ἁρμονίη and δίκη and so move toward wisdom. So, what I wanted – rather, what I felt compelled to do following a personal tragedy – was to try and understand myself, my suffering-causing past; to try and discover what undermined ἁρμονίη and δίκη, and what ὕβρις was and what it caused and why.”

Is this as his politically orientated critics claim “disinformation and deceptive”, or is it – like his Understanding and Rejecting Extremism, his Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God, and other such writings including his autobiography Myngath – a genuine expression of Enantiodromia, of the reformation of an individual? {4}

That Myatt’s politically orientated critics have not penned reasoned, or scholarly, critiques of such Myattian works should be sufficient to answer that question.

A Modern Pagan Philosophy

One other reason why Myatt’s mystical philosophy of pathei-mathos may be unappreciated today, and another possible reason why his politically motivated critics have not penned reasoned, or scholarly, critiques of that philosophy, is that his philosophy is, for many of those who have studied it, a modern pagan philosophy in the tradition of Greco-Roman philosophy.

In his recent (2019) autobiographical essay An Indebtedness To Ancient Greek And Greco-Roman Culture he explained that he uses some non-English terms mostly from Ancient Greek but occasionally from Latin,

“in the hope that such terms would not only be able to convey my meaning better than some easily mis-understood English term but also might be assimilated into the English language as philosophical terms either in their transliterated English form or in their Greek and Latin form.

Such terms might also reveal my indebtedness to Ancient Greek and Greco-Roman culture and how and why the philosophy of pathei-mathos is both a “transition from mythoi and anthropomorphic deities (theos and theoi) to an appreciation of the numinous sans denotatum and sans religion” and thus a return to individual insight and understanding over impersonal abstractions/ideations, over denotatum, and over religious and political dogma, with the Latin denotatum – used as an Anglicized term and which thus can be used to describe both singular and plural instances of denoting and naming – a useful example of my somewhat idiosyncratic methodology.

Thus and for example I used and use σοφόν instead of σοφός when the sense implied is not the usual “skilled”, or “learned” or “wise” but rather what lies beyond and what was/is the genesis of what is presenced in a person as skill, or learning, or wisdom. I used and use σωφρονεῖν in preference to σωφροσύνη (sophrosyne) to suggest a fair and balanced personal judgement rather than the fairly modern English interpretation of sophrosyne as soundness of mind, moderation.” {5}

In that essay he asks then answers a rhetorical question about using such Greek and Anglicized terms:

“Does my idiosyncratic use of Ancient Greek and Latin terms make this philosophy confusing, difficult to understand and difficult to appreciate? Perhaps. But since philosophia – ϕιλοσοϕία – is, at least according to my fallible understanding, becoming a friend of σοφόν, and since such a personal friendship involves seeking to understand Being, beings, and Time, and since part of the ethos of the culture of the West – heir to Ancient Greek and Greco-Roman culture – is or at least was a personal and rational quest for understanding and knowledge, then perhaps some effort, as befits those of noble physis who appreciate and who may seek to presence καλὸς κἀγαθός, is only to be expected.”

In his recent monograph Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos he explains the context and meaning of the term καλὸς κἀγαθός, writing that

“we are, ontologically, emanations of and presence Being, and are a connexion to the cosmos – to other presencings of Being – through, in terms of epistemology, not only reason (λόγος), perceiverance (νοῦς) and wordless-awareness (συμπάθεια, empathy) but also through τὸ ἀγαθὸν, τὸ καλὸν, and ἀρετὴ, through the beautiful and the well-balanced, the valourous and honourable, and those who possess arête, all of which are combined in one Greek phrase: καλὸς κἀγαθός, which 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. Which Greek phrase expresses the ethics, the high personal standards, of the ancient paganus weltanschauung we have been discussing.”

In his monographs Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos and Tu Es Diaboli Ianua – both published in 2017 {6} – he writes of the difference between classical paganism and revealed religions such as Christianity. That there is, in his view, a

“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, based as it is on an individual, and an intuitive, empathic and thus wordless, apprehension of the numinous.” {7}

This “empathic apprehension of the numinous” is at the core of Myatt’s philosophy of pathei-mathos. In his Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos he writes that empathy is a means by which we can

“understand both φύσις and Πόλεμος, and thus apprehend Being as Being, and the nature of beings – and in particular the nature of our being, as mortals. For empathy reveals to us the acausality of Being and thus how the process of abstraction, involving as it does an imposition of causality and separation upon beings (and the ideation) implicit on opposites and dialectic), is a covering-up of Being.”

In Tu Es Diaboli Ianua, he writes that

“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.”

Which why his translations of eight tractates of the Corpus Hermeticum, and of other Greek texts,

“when studied together enable us to appreciate and understand the classical, pagan, ethos and thence the ethos of the West itself […]

What Myatt does in his translations [of the Corpus Hermeticum] is paint a picture of classical – and of Hellenic – culture and especially of Hellenic mysticism; a culture and a mysticism which is pagan and based on individuals, on tangible things such as honesty, and not on moralistic and religious and impersonal abstractions. That is, he reveals the Greco-Roman ethos – the pagan ethos – underlying the hermetic texts and which is in contrast to that of Christianity with its later, medieval and Puritanical, impersonal moralizing.” {8}

Which understanding of the ethos of the West, sans Christianity, the politically orientated individuals and organizations who are vociferous critics of Myatt most probably view as heresy, as evidence that Myatt’s philosophy of pathei-mathos undermines the Judeo-Christian culture and tradition that still forms the basis of many Western nation-states, and evidence also of how Myatt’s philosophy may aid those who champion a particular and pagan interpretation of Western culture.

As one commentator noted, Western culture is

“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,” and which nobility of character is manifest in “the virtues of personal honour and manners” 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.” {8}

This interpretation of Western culture, as Myatt expresses it in his Tu Es Diaboli Ianua, is also

(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.

Which “new civitas” – new communities, a new understanding of what being part of (a citizen of) such communities means; a new definition of freedom based on honour – strikes at the very foundations of the modern nation-state with its impersonal laws and in which modern nation-states where the ‘law of personal honour’ – one of the foundations of Myatt’s philosophy {9} – if not outlawed is subject to often severe state-sanctioned restrictions.

As Myatt noted in his Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God,

“My own and only fallible answer to the question of how to deal with the suffering that blights this world therefore seems to be 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. My personal answer to personal questions, perplexion, and to grief and doubt. The answer which is to live in hope – even need – of a personal loyal love; to live with empathy, gentleness, humility, compassion, and yet with strength enough to do what should be done when, within the purvue of our personal space, we meet with one or many causing suffering and harm, no thought then for the fragility of our own mortal life or even for personal consequences beyond the ἁρμονίη we, in such honourable moments, are.”

In an essay written in September 2014 he explained that

“personal honour – which presences the virtues of fairness, tolerance, compassion, humility, and εὐταξία – [is] (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.

Of how 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.” {10}

By expressing a new civitas based on the concept of personal honour and on the noble virtues of καλὸς κἀγαθός, Myatt’s rather unique philosophy, evolved as it has been by his Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos and his Tu Es Diaboli Ianua monographs – might well be seen to be, according to the standards of the political status quo, as somewhat radical.

It might also become seen to be, or may already be seen to be, by some politically orientated individuals and organizations who profess to be “fighting extremism” – and who are still swayed by the Judeo-Christian illusion of causal abstractions and the dialectic of opposites – part of a new and emerging “right-wing” milieu in which ancestral (native and pagan) European culture and a tradition of personal honour are central. {11}

According to Myatt’s philosophy, empathy and personal honour lead us away from the Judeo-Christian illusion of causal abstractions (a naming) and a dialectic of opposites based on such naming with the inevitable apocalyptic eschatology which engenders a real-world struggle or a war between a posited and a supra-personal, abstract, ‘good’ and ‘evil’. An eschatology – struggle between a posited ‘good’ (us) and a posited ‘evil’ (our enemies) – which the modern nation-state has appropriated, as witness the propaganda against National Socialist Germany with its portrayal of The Third Reich as the ‘evil’ enemy who must be fought and defeated.

Myatt’s philosophy leads us away from such abstractions, back toward the pagan insight of Greeks such as Heraclitus:

“Although this naming and expression [which I explain] exists, human beings tend to ignore it, both before and after they have become aware of it. Yet even though, regarding such naming and expression, I have revealed details of how Physis has been cleaved asunder, some human beings are inexperienced concerning it, fumbling about with words and deeds, just as other human beings, be they interested or just forgetful, are unaware of what they have done.” {12}

In chapter three of his The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos Myatt provides not only the Greek text of two other fragments by or attributed to Heraclitus but also his own translations:

“Polemos our genesis, governing us all to bring forth some gods, some mortal beings with some unfettered yet others kept bound.” Fragment 53

“All by genesis is appropriately apportioned [separated into portions] with beings bound together again by enantiodromia.” Diogenes Laërtius, ix. 7.

In that chapter he writes that

“Empathy also reveals why the assumption that abstracted, ideated, opposites apply to or should apply to living beings – and that they thus can supply us with knowledge and understanding of living being – disrupts the natural balance, resulting in a loss of ἁρμονίη [harmony] and συμπάθεια and is therefore a manifestation of the error of ὕβρις.”

In place of such abstracted, ideated, Judeo-Christian conflicting opposites there is in both Greco-Roman paganism, and in Myatt’s philosophy, Summum Bonum. As Myatt notes in his <i Tu Es Diaboli Ianua, quoting the Roman philosopher Seneca,

“What is injurious to such a [pagan] harmonious balance is what is dishonourable, with τὸ ἀγαθὸν – Summum Bonum – thus understood as honestum, as what is honourable, noble:

summum bonum est quod honestum est; et quod magis admireris: unum bonum est, quod honestum est, cetera falsa et adulterina bona sunt. Seneca, Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales, LXXI, 4.

“the greatest good is that which is honourable. Also – and you may wonder at this – only that which is honourable is good, with all other ‘goods’ simply false and deceitful.”

For honestum is how hubris can be avoided and balance maintained, and is the essence of καλὸς κἀγαθός which presences the numinous, the divine, in and among mortals.”

This rational pagan understanding is worlds away from the abstractions of the modern nation-state and makes the unproven allegations, and the rumours spread, about Myatt now and over the decades by politically orientated individuals and organizations with an agenda who profess to be “fighting extremism” seem to belong to a medieval world of heretics, hateful preachers, and zealous fanatics inspired by the prevalent Judeo-Christian culture and who seek to track down, to publicly shame, and to accuse their enemies – “witches” and “wizards” – of heresy.

Three Wyrd Sisters
Oxonia
June 2019
v.1.05

{1} For an overview of Myatt’s philosophy refer to The Mystic Philosophy Of David Myatt. The second edition is available from https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/a-modern-mystic/

{2} ISBN 978-1484854266. A gratis open access pdf version is available at https://davidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/dwm-rejecting-extremism-v3.pdf

{3} ISBN 978-1484097984. A gratis open access pdf version is available at https://davidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/religion-and-empathy.pdf

{4} Myatt explains what he means by Enantiodromia in the Enantiodromia and The Reformation of The Individual and The Change of Enantiodromia chapters of his book The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos (ISBN 978-1484096642) which is also available in a gratis open access pdf version at https://davidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/numinous-way-v5c-print.pdf

His autobiography Myngath is also available both as a printed book, ISBN 978-1484110744, and in a gratis open access pdf version at https://davidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/david-myatt-myngath.pdf{5}

{5} https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2019/04/23/an-indebtedness-to-ancient-greek-and-greco-roman-culture/

{6} (i) Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos, ISBN 978-1979599023. A gratis open access pdf version is available at https://davidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/classical-paganism-v2-print.pdf and (ii) Tu Es Diaboli Ianua, ISBN 978-1982010935. A gratis open access pdf version is available at https://davidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/tua-es-diaboli-ianua.pdf

{7} Tu Es Diaboli Ianua.

{8} Western Paganism And Hermeticism: Myatt And The Renaissance of Western Culture. Available from https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2019/06/03/western-paganism-and-hermeticism/

{9} See, for example the chapter Honour In The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos in The Mystic Philosophy Of David Myatt.

{10} The Way Of Pathei-Mathos – A Précis. The essay is included in One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings.

{11} In regard to the European – the Western – tradition of personal honour see, for example, William Segar, Booke of Honor & Armes, published in 1590. The book is currently – June 2019 – available at https://books.google.com/books?id=LlI_AQAAMAAJ

{12} The translation of fragment 1 is by Myatt who in his Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God provides the Greek text.

°°°°°°°

A pdf version of this article is available here:
https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/appreciating-myatt-philosophy-v3.pdf

°°°°°°°


Western Paganism And Hermeticism

David Myatt

David Myatt

°°°°°°°

Western Paganism And Hermeticism:
Myatt And The Renaissance of Western Culture

Contents
° Preface
° Re-discovering Western Paganism
° An Insight Into Pagan Mysticism
° Regarding Myatt’s Hermetica
° The Divine Pymander
° Myatt’s Monas – A New Translation of Corpus Hermeticum IV
° On Native Egyptian Influence In The Corpus Hermeticum
° Suffering, Honour, And The Culture Of The West
° A New Pagan Metaphysics
° A Review Of Myatt’s ‘Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos’
° A Review Of Myatt’s Tu Es Diaboli Ianua
° Appendix I – From Mythoi To Empathy
° Appendix II – Towards Understanding Ancestral Culture
° Appendix III – An Indebtedness To Ancient Greek And Greco-Roman Culture
° Appendix IV – Concerning ἀγαθός and νοῦς in the Corpus Hermeticum

°°°°°°°

David Myatt And The Renaissance of Western Culture
(pdf)

This is the fourth edition of the book titled Western Paganism And Hermeticism and which edition includes the article, A Review Of Myatt’s Tu Es Diaboli Ianu, and as appendixes three relatively recent (2018-2019) articles by Myatt: From Mythoi To Empathy, in which he describes his use of the term ‘numinous’, Towards Understanding Ancestral Culture, and his autobiographical An Indebtedness To Ancient Greek And Greco-Roman Culture in which he describes his idiosyncratic use of Greek terms such as σωφρονεῖν.

°°°°°

The following extract from the Preface describes the purpose of the book:

{quote}

We present here a selection of recent articles about Western paganism and hermeticism, indebted as those articles are to Myatt’s translations of texts from the ancient Corpus Hermeticism and his post-2013 writings such as his book Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos, for Myatt’s thesis in that book 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.

As mentioned in one of the articles included here, the ethos of the West:
             “is the ethos, the pragmatic spirituality, and the notion of balance, harmony, elegance, and of beauty, which infuses the culture and the civilization of Ancient Greece and Rome, and which culture so enthused those Europeans – artists, scholars, educators, potentates, and others – who from the 14th century on brought about the Renaissance and which Renaissance, which re-discovery of the culture of ancient Greece and Rome, gave birth to and infused our Western ‘Faustian’ civilization.”

However,
              “In respect of rediscovering the pagan spirituality of the West a fundamental problem has been a lack of knowledge among those interested in what, exactly, that spirituality is. A problem exacerbated by pre-existing translations of some of the ancient works knowledge of which is necessary in order to understand that spirituality. Works such as the Oedipus Tyrannus and the Antigone by Sophocles, the Agamemnon by Aeschylus, and the mystical texts of the Corpus Hermeticism.”

Which is why the authors of the articles included in this compilation have studied Myatt’s translations of classical and hermetic texts, for his translations:
             “when studied together enable us to appreciate and understand the classical, pagan, ethos and thence the ethos of the West itself.”

{/quote}

°°°°°°°


Being Human: A Learning from Aliens

Blue Marble Earth Mosaic

°°°°°°°

Editorial Note: As with Myatt’s article An Alien View of Planet Earth {1} this almost two decades old article by Myatt may have some relevance in regard to his more recent philosophy of pathei mathos. We have corrected a few obvious typos in the original article.

RDM Crew
May 2019

{1} qv. https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2019/05/29/an-alien-view-of-planet-earth/

°°°°°°°

Being Human: A Learning from Aliens

A Cosmic Ethics

Considering the vastness of the Cosmos – millions upon millions of galaxies containing billions upon billions of stars – it is highly likely that intelligent life exists on other planets orbiting other stars. It is also possible that in our own galaxy there are living beings who are more evolved, more intelligent, more powerful, than we are.

Thus, to consider our own human species as the most intelligent, the most advanced, the most powerful, species in the cosmos is not only extremely arrogant, it is also highly irrational, given this vastness of the cosmos and the fact that we have only very recently – in cosmic terms – evolved from more primitive life here on this planet we call Earth.

The time has come for us to use the cosmos – its vastness, the possibility of it being teeming with other, alien, life – as the measure of our own human ethics. That is, to base our ethics upon what actually exists, and not on what we believe, or would like to believe, exists or has happened, and certainly not on our limited, inward, Earth-only, view of life.

Hitherto, our ethics, our morality, have for the most part (the last few thousand years at least) been based upon the concept of God and on revelation. For instance, upon the belief that we humans have been created by an all-powerful deity who either considers us special (He gave His son to redeem us: Christianity), or who has created us and placed us on this planet to test us, so that we can enter Paradise (Islam).

The ethics based on these theocentric concepts is fundamentally homocentric: that is, based on the belief or assumption that the Earth is some kind of gift from God, with us as special, as masters of this world, and thus entitled to use the resources of this planet, including its other life, to aid us. That is, such religious morality affirms it is acceptable for us to breed and kill animals, and other living beings, for food, even though to survive it is often not necessary for us to kill and eat these living things. Such morality also affirms that it often is acceptable for us to kill other human beings, or imprison them, if they have transgressed some “law” and been found “guilty” in some Court of Law according to some “evidence” which has been produced in that Court.

But this is all very inhuman and inhumane; all very uncivilized. That is, it is unfair, illogical, and irrational, when viewed in the greater Cosmic Perspective.

It is these things because we have hitherto viewed them in limited terms, often in very limited, unfair, Earth-only, terms. We must evolve our ethics away from this small, arrogant, unfair, homocentric view toward a view based upon the reality of the cosmos: upon its vastness, with our own species occupying a planet which orbits an ordinary star somewhere on the edge of an ordinary galaxy surrounded by millions upon millions of other star-bearing galaxies.

The Alien Analogy

The best analogy to explain the fundamental difference between the new, cosmic, ethics which we must now accept, and the old, homocentric, ethics, is that of a race of aliens visiting then invading this planet of ours. These aliens – we shall call them Phurads – have superior weapons and technology which make it easy for them to conquer the Earth.

In this analogy, the Phurads have a religion which makes it acceptable for them to herd together “lesser beings” and keep them for food. Thus, we humans find ourselves being hunted by these Phurads for food, as many human beings are captured, and held captive in huge buildings, for the purpose of producing offspring which are then fattened to be eaten.

Further, some humans are taken away, to other planets inhabited by the Phurad, and kept in cages: to be displayed like we humans once displayed wild animals in cages for “entertainment”. In addition, some humans are taken to laboratories where they are kept sedated, and studied by Phurad scientists. Occasionally, it is judged acceptable for a few of these human specimens to be used in “scientific experiments”. Some of these experiments seem quite harmless, to these scientists (such as tagging a few human beings and releasing them back “into the wild” so that their behaviour can be studied) while other experiments are deemed necessary “to further the scientific understanding of the Phurad”. Thus, some humans are used in medical trials, because their blood, or organs, may hold cures for diseases which harm or kill the Phurad, and the suffering and death of several hundred humans (or several thousands over years) is considered morally justified since it may lead to medical breakthroughs, and save the lives of many Phurads.

We humans, of course, take a rather dim view of all these things. What gives the Phurad the right to kill us, eat us, hold us in degrading captivity, experiment on us?

The fact that the morality of the Phurads, based on their religion and philosophy, allows them to do such inhuman things to us is irrelevant to us.

What are we to do? Suffer, and die, in silence? Accept our inferior status? Or do we strive for our freedom and to be treated as equals? But what could we do if the power of the Phurads is such that we have no hope of freedom? Would we still rebel, and rather be killed than suffer the indignity of being kept confined for food? Would we bite the hand that feeds us? Or would we just fall down on our knees and pray for God – or some race of aliens more powerful than the Phurad – to liberate us?

The Human Analogy

We are treating the life on this planet of ours as the Phurads in the above analogy treated humans.

What gives us the right to do this? What gives us the right to breed animals for food? What gives us the right to inflict pain on animals in the name of “science”?

What gives us the right to inflict pain and suffering and death on our fellow human beings?

Are the animals that we breed and hold captive to slaughter for food silently praying to some god? Hoping for liberation from the human monsters who have such power over them? Such an idea, of course, is anthropomorphism, and the fact – known or assumed from our science – that such animals, on our planet at least, do not think, does not make this particular analogy any less valid, in cosmic terms.

That is, the fact that such an animal as a lamb does not and cannot think, in human terms, and so cannot “pray to or even believe in a god”, does not mean that we should not treat that animal in a fair, a just, a rational, and civilized way. Is it entitled to live out its life in freedom? Do we really need to fatten it and then kill and eat it?

Would it be right to sedate it, and then experiment on it because such an experiment might lead to some cure for some human disease?

What is right? What is just? What criteria are we to use to judge such things?

The Cosmic Answer

To live – or strive to live – in a civilized way, in a human way, we have to have ethics: a morality of some kind. That is, we have to have some criteria of judgement, for otherwise there is barbarism, repression, injustice, and a savage, irrational, way of living.

What is the cosmic criteria: what is the ethical standard which the greater, the higher, perspective of the cosmos gives us?

It is the criteria of reason, of fairness, of tolerance: the standard of the honourable thinking being. It is the standard of the living being who is aware, in a rational way, of their own place in the vastness of the cosmos: who is aware of the other life on the planet which is their origin and their home; who is aware of how they themselves have evolved from Nature, how they depend upon Nature.

In brief, it is the criteria of the nexus: of ourselves as living, organic, links between the past and the future of the living being which is this planet. It is the criteria of respect for other living beings, both on this Earth, and in the cosmos.

It is the belief that there should not be any such thing as “ownership” or mastery of any piece of this planet, or other planets, by any one individual or grouping of individuals, since what matters is not ownership, but the well-being of the planet, or planets, the well-being of the living beings which depend upon this planet, and which depend on other planets in the cosmos.

Above all, the cosmic ethic is the belief that every living thing has a “soul”, an essence, a life-energy, which is important for the well-being of the whole, with no one being, or one species of being, of lessor worth than others, and that if it is truely necessary for us to kill another living being, however small, to survive – or even if we kill such a being by accident – then we should respect that being, and indeed lament its death. The way of the cosmos, the cosmic belief, is the belief that we should strive to find ways of living, of surviving, that do not involve killing or harming other living beings.

The Cosmic Challenge

The challenge now is to accept this higher, more civilized, cosmic ethics as the foundation for our personal lives, and strive to create new societies, new ways of living, based upon these ethics.

David Myatt
JD 2451872.315
(23rd November 2000, 1933 UT)

°°°°°°°

Article source:
https://web.archive.org/web/20040419194953/http://www.geocities.com/dwmyatt/human1.html

°°°°°°°

Image credit:
NASA, Blue Marble Earth Mosaic

°°°°°°°