Self-Definition via Abstraction and the Nature of Mundanes (Discourse)

Participants: V. K. Jehannum, A. A. Morain, Some Nobody Who Hates the ONA, Acephalic Mysticism, Wiccan Friend, Satanist Friend, G. A. Rosenberg, Acausality, Another Critic

In the Sinister Tradition, the common man is called a “mundane.” The esoteric signification of this pejorative [insulting title] is someone who is BOUND by abstractions and DEFINES THEMSELVES BY THEM. “I’m an Anarchist.” “I’m a Nihilist.” “I’m an emo.” Blah blah fucking blah. This people are innocuous and we do not need them.

 The mundanes not only serve their ego, they also serve a superego to which they are devoted. Of course, it is always an Interesting discussion where nihilism starts and ends. To be aware of the fact that one’s way of living serves an ideological purpose, or recognizing that you are lived by a system denotes that you can see through it. Not an easy one. The Sinister dialectic works when one ‘serves’ a system in order to question the hegemonic one. Being a Marxist or NS to question and undermine liberal capitalism for instance but one should always be aware of the contingency of the opposing systems. There simply is no true ideology or system. Stepping out of it, if only momentarily, for instance the Numinous Way or Zazen, makes one realize the shortcomings of our human constructs. To be mundane is to serve them without questioning and either acting rigorously ideological or just like the average consumer. Overthrowing both and ending up in nihilism is certainly not the answer. One should try different path and never stop questioning your-self. I call this self-deconstruction and putting back the pieces with new insights. It is quite simply hard to put into words. The experience of Nature, a solid friendship, love, genuine contact, wandering through old churches, sensing the night, meditating at 5 am when the neighbourhood is still sleeping, enjoying the beauty of an art exhibition… this all goes beyond ideology, systems and so on. Zazen has taught
the contingency of ideas, political points of views while the sensation of what Myatt called the Numinous is exactly what a mundane person is not ready for, mostly because of lack of inituition. Experience without the head, the Acéphalic.
There are no “neutral energies” around, in my opinion at least, my friend…. Every damn shell out there is a carrier or a waver, so to speak… (if i hadn’t been clear, please tell me LOL). Even though I’m from a different current, Even though i am from a different current…. But the universal war dismantled every possible border everywhere, so objectives are more relevant than ever, i say.
It’s truly mind boggling. I hate labels. Example. I practice some Wicca but if I tell a Wiccan I don’t follow the “Rede” it’s like telling a Christian you don’t follow the Bible. I have to tell them, “Don’t judge me! I follow my own goddamn path!” The only thing that fits me is Eclectic.
I would argue that sticking rigidly to a tradition (or a label) can be very beneficial and encourages growth in one direction far quicker than someone who picks and chooses from different paths.
Nothing wrong with labels, so long as they are used LOOSELY and do not form the building blocks of self image.
For example, if you feel the need to correct someone by saying “I’m not a Satanist, I’m a Luciferian” you are definitely doing it wrong.
Perhaps but I’m not really a by the book type of girl. Seems every book I read has something somewhere that I just won’t practice so I find myself resorting to my own ideologies and beliefs to stay true to myself.
uh, how about “I’m Sinister,” or “I’m ONA,” or “I’m a facist,” or “I’m a Traditional Satanist?” Those are TOTALLY different, right?
That sentence was fucking gibberish.
It was about as coherent as the original post. “People who use labels are fools, cuz they define them, but NOT PEOPLE WHO USE ONA LABELS!”
No, because the ONA is simply a system designed to take someone to a point and thence beyond it.
The difference with mundanes is that they use labels to describe themselves and fulfil their egos. That someone uses the label of ONA because that is what they follow is different to someone who uses a term as a general marker of their character. Thus you’ll never find a genuine ONA initiate who talks about it endlessly. We have often said if you are ONA, nobody should even know.
Niners are only supposed to identify as Traditional Satanists when they are novices so no problem there. And Fascism is just a useful causal form which is useful in the long-term for aeonic progression and personal development so obviously the niner does not define themselves thereby.
And I’m sure the average “Niner” isn’t “bound” by their abstractions at all, right? Cuz we all know the Niners are the for-real hidden masters of all that surround them and the insistence on edgy “points” that mean nothing at all like the whole “forge not works of art, but swords of death” mumbo-jumbo is really just to ya know, prove how “unmundane” they really are and all that. Fuckin’ kings of the world over here.
Kings of the world? Nigga chill. I am just recapitulating the orthodox teachings of the old guard. If modern Niners neglect to or fail to personify these teachings that is their own weakness, innovation, or both.
Gotta love how the ONA people on one hand insists that the labels involved are meaningless tools to make someone a vaguely-defined badass at some obscure future point, but obviously haven’t “evolved” past the ‘Satanism” label. the ONA doesn’t believe in “Satanism” anymore than they do “fascism.” It’s the ultimate dress-up game for edge-lords. And of course, while they insist that the labels and “Satanic” terminology aren’t meaningful in themselves, yet they sure as hell flock to “Satanism” groups.
Form and Essence are different things. People use a collection of labels to signal to their peers. There’s a difference between that and simply *being* something. You don’t accuse a doctor of obsessing over his label, because that is what he does. He’s a doctor. If it’s just BS edgy drivel then don’t waste your time commenting. They’ll follow their path and influence Satanism. You follow yours and stop concerning yourself with what they are or are perceived to be. Why are you so upset about this?
That question was rhetorical. He and I can both discern why you are so upset about this.
And here’s another rhetorical question. If the ONA is so useless, why don’t you go ahead and outdo it?
“Outdo them?” To “outdo” them, someone would have to prove to me they’ve “done” anything worthwhile. And no, forming “nexions” doesn’t count. 
Well there are tests they set. Can you pass them tests? Physical trials, answering questions only accessible by genuine scholarly study. Forming a nexion is an achievement because it takes a lot to organise and direct a group of people, and guide them all to a point of proficiency. Can you do that? As well as mastering chant in a definite manner and performing difficult ordeals. Remember, Satanism is about self-development.
If it was just about “personal self development,” it would be taught in a much more general sense. John Allee and Anton LaVey taught better self development ideas than the ONA. If you’re obsessed with macho, physical power, sure have at it. But the ONA method is geared towards creating a certain type, not geared towards self development in general for all types of people. Not every person who is “great” and developed themselves that far has experience with survivalist shit. Albert Einstein was plenty great without shitting in the woods for a month.
Yes it is created toward a certain type. Just like any system. As for LaVey, I’ve met not a single laveyan who possesses the insight of an ONA initiate.  The Way exists for those to pursue it. It is a genuine and difficult path. That it does not resonate with you does not mean it’s invalid. One who has follows the 7FW will be more proficient and capable than the top 1% of humanity. Because there is more than physical trials. It seems those are the trials you have issue with. Why? Are you unhealthy?
Ahh see. There is that overwhelming difference. I don’t desire to be part of any group. I’m a solitary witch. I don’t follow sheep and claim to believe everything some book or group tells me is the correct way to travel my path. Life is my test. Not somebody else’s idea of how I should live. Not saying I’m better than anyone else. Just different.

ONA is a system offered to those who want wisdom and is built on experience of past initiates, not books written. It is a solitary path if you wish it to be. Thus we return to people being comfortable with the labels they have.

Everything Julie says I would say. The ONA is just my system until I can say I have surpassed it. Which will be very difficult to do. / Following someone does not make you a sheep. It means you recognise some people have gotten further and thus can be learnt from. There’s nothing ignoble about using a map.

Just want to point out that I don’t think it’s an invalid path for everyone. It certainly is valid for some people. But what annoys me about the ONA is the posturing as the guardians of some sort of “genuinely Satanic” tradition, and their attitude that they are “more Satanic” than others, even though their “tradition” was fabricated in the 70s as a bizarre response to the Satanism of the 60s. I don’t care if people want to do stuff like the ONA. What bothers me are ONA people acting like there’s something more “Satanic” about their shit.
Good point here, no one owns Satanism and to call someone a nicer Black Magickian a “pseudo-Satanist” is basically mocking the Devil by saying he’s too dumb to know who his adherents are.

The elitism you have an issue with is not something we impose upon Satanism. We simply say oir way is a particular way and that to follow it requires certain standards. “Manners among our own kind are a part of the kulture and the ethos that make us ONA, that make us a kollective, a sinister kindred, and therefore make us who or what we are, or who or what we desire to be […] The ONA, the kollective, does have standards, guidelines, and that relying on one’s own judgement doesn’t mean you can dump our ethos, our standards, our kulture, and still call yourself ONA. No, it means that you’re at liberty to do such things, but you won’t any longer be ONA.”

As far as outdoing the ONA goes, why don’t we set a deliberate goalpost or two? Upload a picture of yourself shirtless which is as impressive as my profile pic and then tape yourself using a punching bag. If it is better than the video of me boxing that I posted on my profile when I was still out of practice, we”ll call it even. Fair?
Sorry, I’m not a meathead who somehow equates physical prowess with spiritual insight or accomplishments. Lou Farigno must be one of the most Sinister, accomplished men of the past century by these definitions.
There is something to be said for balanced multi-level development, physical, intellectual, spiritual tho. Indeed I would say that while it may be possible to expand in one area without the other two, the imbalance will eventually cause problems.
That is probably why most ancient traditions emphasized all three.
Precisely. A Satanist should pursue self-excellence and surpass her limits in many ways. Physical aptitude is a desirable manifestation of such a lifestyle, regardless of whether one chooses to be exeatic. For example, the Black Order never proscribes criminality, but it does emphasize climbing and other such nature-oriented physical challenges. Physical achievement compliments and further empowers magickal aptitude. But perhaps it would suit your cozy and sedentary lifestyle to hire a therapist instead. You could confess all your pent up rage about the ONA and deep-seeded feelings of personal inadequacy to him or her. I imagine that you would find a discussion with such a professional to be far less emotionally abrasive than you clearly found this discussion with us to be.
So your point is that all people including yourself are mundanes? Your point of reference is already an abstraction. Hypocritical….unless your posturing has obscured what you are really trying to say? Who gives a good god damn anyway…
Many people give a damn, clearly.
Trying to see through abstractions is a way of developing yourself. If you want to say that that observation is in itself an abstraction, you just don’t want to comprehend it and you are simply entering in a semantic loop that will not get you anywhere.
As aforementioned, there is a difference between defining one’s self, limiting said self and thus using these titles purely as ego signals, and having a title because it denotes your purpose. For instance, a doctor isn’t bound by the image and title and form of being a doctor… It’s a marker as to who and what they are.
The issue with VK’s assessment however is that he does not go far enough and point out causal abstractions are more than just labels, but indeed are manufactured beliefs and systems put in place in lieu of a worldview built upon genuine life experience. They are, to use Heidegger’s words, an Apophantic appropriation. Thus, they rob life and the human experience of the ability to experience the Numinous, nature ‘as it is’. The ONA therefore is simply a system designed to return Man to this active participation in the Numen of nature (In-der-Welt-sein).
Heidegger wrote about this and thus it’s not coincidence that an essay based on his work appears in Naos. Whilst I feel you probably understand all this, hopefully this clarifies things better. Google “Heideggerian Terminology” and you’ll see what this means.

There are a few problematics and contradictions when it comes to mundanity, hence why I never bothered too much with it. Let us look at the two-fold definition for a moment:

“Exoterically, mundanes are defined as those who are not of our sinister kind – that is, as those who do not live by The Law of the Sinister-Numen (qv). Esoterically, mundane-ness is defined as being under the influence of, or being in thrall to, or being addicted to, and/or believing in, and/or using as a means of understanding, causal abstractions (qv).”

Exoterically would most definitively be discarded by Myatt in the light of his current (in my eyes more sensible actual philosophy) since it basically creates an elitist distinction between niners and the rest of the world. Myatt in his latest writings, talks about how the Ἀρετή of an individual and thus, his propencity for honor can only be distinguished by a personal intimation that arise in the ‘immediacy of the moment’. To argue that only Niners have honor and Ἀρετή is beyond hubriatic, which (for I that is), exclude this definition entirely.

Esoterically is more sensible but still problematic since it states that even the ones “under the influence or using as a means of understanding, causal abstractions” are mundanes. According to this, even Myatt admits to mundanity (considering here that Myatt is Anton Long) since he said more than once how his entire life was in part, an addiction to causal abstractions from start to finish. I would also like to add that from a Goodmanian perspective, human beings are natural world makers. They enjoy creating, assembling, structuring new philosophies, new concepts and new ‘Ism’. We all know the aim is a wordless, empathetical life with nature, comparable to the Rounwytha way where ‘Ism’ are no longer necessary but I have yet to meet such a mystic, detached in such a way and bearing the achievements of the Seven-Fold-Way.

There is finally the possibilty that the (in my eyes) futile denotation of ‘mundane’ is a trap, part of labyrinthos mythologicus. Perhaps meant as Anna Czereda once stated to make us realise how we are all mundane until we no longer need such base comparative that creates distinctions between a ‘us’ and a ‘them’. This would make sense and was hinted at by Moult in an interview. It was also hinted at by various MSS concerning alchemy where it is stated that, in the end, knowledge is the same for all of us, whatever the path that was initially taken.

As for I, I came to the conlusion that such a title can indeed only be given in the immediacy of the moment, when the ψυχή of the individual is scented or apprehended. Most individuals, even the one addicted to a causal abstractions can ultimately free themselves from their conceptual prison and ‘evolve’ toward something more broad. Thus, I use the word mundane advisedly. Mainly for pedophiles, serial killers and rapist for they are individuals that have obviously no propensity for honor or loyalty and are enslaved by their base pulsions and trample the numinosity of someone else for their own pleasure.

This is, as always, my humble opinion and nothing more. I believe this is one of the segment of the O9A that has to be challenged and reformed. David Myatt, with his post 2012 writings, gave room for a more sensible conclusion concerning this matter.

Re Sinister honor, I meet a few who try their very best to convince everyone they are ONA then show none of the etiquette of Sinister honor or empathy. And then wonder why I have little time for them.
It is my opinion that they failed when they tryed to convince.
Quite true. I seem to be a cause for their scorn often, going so far as to receive anonymous threats with zero substance as well as attempts to sabotage my life. Clearly the Sinister draws mentally unbalanced types types to the fold and they react negatively to those with more limelight than them. My answer has always been thus to outdo me, simply. Yet they never bother to. The 7FW is of secondary importance to those types. I can think of a few even now. Let us hope they progress.

I believe this quote from Mahavatar to be most appropriate:

“If you cannot praise someone. Let them pass out of your life.”

Advertisements

One thought on “Self-Definition via Abstraction and the Nature of Mundanes (Discourse)

  1. I knew a guy like the fellow that hated the ONA. He was insecure. He was very interested in it but appeared to doubt whether or not he could meet the standards it set. Once he realized that CO had been falsifying her influence and involution he flipped and decided the thing was a fraud.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s