The Coming Aeon: Sorath & Chavajoth (How Satanism Ate the ONA)

“Every Magick Symbol,
When inverted,
Reveals its secret power
Religions have concealed – perverted.”
-The Onyx Bible of Primitivist Theistic Satanism
By Nargargole Shlod

Aleister Crowley uttered the word Thelema, and in doing so, begot a new aeon. Thereafter, Anton LaVey uttered another word, Indulgence, and in doing so, sired the second overtly Adversarial aeon. The third Satanic aeon was initiated when Michael Aquino uttered the word Xeper, and now, the three most recent aeons have been heralded by emissaries of Satan.

The aeonic forces emanating from these utterings exhibit strange interactions with human spirituality. Thelema is considered to have been the driving force of the hippy movement– a movement which swayed with the Thelemic aeonic tide without truly understanding what they were following. Xeper appears to have manifested in the increasingly widespread uptake of psychic vampyrism in magickal practice. Xeper is to the modern vampyric community as Thelema was to the hippy movement.

The five-letter word Xeper means “I have come into being” and is symbolized by the scarab and the Sun. It’s pronounced Kepher, and it symbolizes the four-step process of Manifestation, Existence, Dismanifestation, and Remanifestation.

All three of the Luciferian word-aeons have occurred in the span of one aeon as aeon is defined by Anton Long. In Long’s mind, we are living in the Thorian aeon, which is symbolized by the swastika. The swastika has two primary manifestations, the rightward facing swastika called the fylfot, and the leftward facing swastika called the hakenkreuz. Theosophy attributes the fylfot to the Tetragrammation, leaving us to attribute the hakenkreuz to HVHI.

The world’s predominate religions venerate the Abrahamic deity, who is symbolized by the fylfot, but the act of aeonic progression (as defined by Aquino) is being carried out by black magickians.

As Christianity’s retarded cousins struggle for Sharia, Satanism’s retarded cousins struggle for National Socialism. The Order of the Nine Angles borrows countless aspects of its esotericism from the OTO, a group founded by Aleister Crowley, and promulgates a series of lies about the origins of their teachings to no avail whatsoever. The ONA intended to manipulate Satanism and then eventually discard it, but Satanism swallowed it whole. The Drecc and Rounwytha were relegated to obscurity and the term Traditional Satanism was totally co-opted. While the ONA aimed to purge the world of Kabbalah, it only helped to bring about a resurgence in Qliphothic magick by influencing Michael W. Ford, the 218 Current, Become a Living God, Frater Kafyrfos, and more. Multiple ONA subgroups have adopted Qliphothic sorcery because of this, including the Draugr Coven of Azanigin, Misanthropic Nexion, the Lilin Society, and Nexion 913, not to mention countless individual Niners dispersed throughout various nexions.

Michael W. Ford was allegedly and briefly a member of the Temple of Set, the group which created the first vampyric lodge. Michael W. Ford, alongside Emperor Norduk, brought psychic vampyrism to the Order of the Nine Angles, begetting the ONA subgroups known as Drakon Covenant and the Tempel ov Blood, which were strongly based on the teachings of the Temple of the Vampire, an offshoot of the Church of Satan. Magickal vampyrism was also adopted by various independent Niners and other nexions, such as the Draugr Coven of Azanigin, the Shugara Syndicate, the Lilin Society, the Temple of Atazoth, Misanthropic Nexion, and more.

The leading vampyric lodges outside of the ONA are also swaying in the waves of the aeon of Xeper. One of the most esteemed vampyric authors, Michelle Bellenger, calls her lodge House Kheperu, and her lodge is hardly the only one using a variation of that term.

The term Xeper has connotations which relate to both the Fylfot/Demiurge and Hakenkreuz/Hendekatheon. Xeper is pronounced in a way nearly identical to Kether, the most elevated realm of the Sephiroth. However, there is a dual-form of the word Xeper, which is Xeperi, signifying a synchronicity of dual manifestations, which thus relates to Thaumiel.

Aleister Crowley purported that 11 was the number of the coming aeon and the Great Work, with eleven being the number of all things infernal, demonic, and magickal. The word which is uttered after Xeper will be the eleventh, and will be the fourth and final step of aeonic transition. If the first three Luciferian words were the three nails of crucifixion, this one will be the spear.

There are eleven rulers of the Qliphoth and eleven A’s in the phrase used to open the gates to Hell: Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Zazas. The word Abrahadabra (a new styling of the old word Abrakala), signifying the Great Work, consists of eleven letters. The sum of every number between 1 and 11 is 66, the formula of entering the Qliphoth.

The number 221 is held to be related to the swastika. 2 + 2 + 1 = 5 & 2 x 2 x 1 = 4. The ONA symbolizes the connection of four and five as symbolic of a gateway from the causal to the acausal, and correctly so. The transition of Abrakala (four A’s) to Abrahadabra (five A’s) instantiates this, as does the transition from Havayoth or Chavajoth (spelled with four Hebrew letters) to Azerate and El Acher, which are both spelled with five Hebrew letters.

221 corresponds to the god and the two pairs of gods who are related to the Black Sun: the Thaumitan (Satan & Molock), Eisheth Zenunim & Lucifuge Rofocale (who take turns leading the Saturnian Qlipha), and Belphegor, who rules the Black-Solar Qlipha.

The number 2012 incorporates the same meanings with the same Saturnian connotations and the addition of the 0 for Da’ath. The 12 relates to the twelve rays of the Black Sun (and Vindex’s attribution to Atu XII), whereas 20 esoterically relates to Thaumiel, Belphegor, the Black Sun, and Saturn. Y2K before it relates to Ain Soph Aur (000), the component of the Black Light which enters the Qliphoth through the Saturnian sphere. While these numbers are portents of a coming transition, the populace fails to understand them.

Anton Long saw hidden but misinterpreted truths in Lovecraft’s work like Grant and Crowley before him, and the ONA carried on the OTO’s goals of returning to ancient goddess worship, apparently retaining the seven-pointed seal of Babalon and allegedly drawing inspiration from the Thoth tarot deck in order to create their own. After lying about his own identity, the origin of the ONA, the source of his esotericism, and more, he worked to undermine Crowley’s legacy. He purported that Crowley had not sired an aeon because his work didn’t influence the public at large, unaware of Crowley’s influence over the hippy movement and Gerald Gardner’s integration of Crowley’s magickal chants into his grimoires. To this day, small groups of elites including John Podesta practice Thelemic rituals like spirit cooking, and Aleister Crowley famously sired the V for Victory, a magickal counter to the Nazi swastika.

Azathoth/Atazoth is the cosmic force of aeonic progression. Kenneth Grant attributed Azathoth to the sphere of the sun, an attribution which Long borrowed along with the relationship of Azathoth and Aza. He also borrowed the attribution of the Antichrist to the planetary sphere of the sun from Kenneth Grant’s mentor, Aleister Crowley.

Grant describes Azathoth as the supreme reflex of Da’ath as AZA, with Aza here signifying Beginning-End-Beginning. This is likely the source for Anton Long’s conception of Atazoth as a force of aeonic progression.

The Temple of Set is under the impression that this “Set” they follow is the only non-manmade deity, and they identify it as the cosmic principle of isolate intelligence. Due to this perception, I am inclined to believe that the Satan I speak to is not the Satan they speak to. I’m under the impression that they’ve been following Azathoth.

Ain flows through the middle pillar of the Qliphoth as Tohu, moving through Thaumiel, Da’ath, the Black-Solar Qlipha, and then to the Qlipha of the Black Moon, where it is joined by Ain Soph and Ain Soph Aur, the former of which passes through the sphere of Venus Illegitima. These three components coalesce as the Black Light which descends into the Qlipha of the Black Earth, manifesting the dynamic shadow of this aeon’s spiritual impetus.

The Antichrist, called Sorath, is the emissary of Belphegor, who rules the Qlipha of the Black Sun. If the fylfot is attributed to Thor’s hammer, the hakenkreuz relates to Fenris. The name Sorath has a value of 666, matching Hebrew phrase Ha-Satan Shab, or “the Adversary has returned.” The four A’s of that phrase correspond to the averse Tetragrammaton and the four wheels of the hakenkreuz which relates to the Black Sun, as well as to the four A’s in Abrakala [Abrahadabra] and Achad-Asar [Eleven]. Naturally, Etz ha-Da’ath [Tree of Da’ath] and Achad-Asar have equivalent values as well.

6 + 6 + 6 = 18, the number of the ToW pathway which Vindex is attributed to (this being the pathway between Saturn and the Sun). 1 + 8 = 9, the number of boxes in Saturn’s magick square.

The law of the aeon of Xeper is Xepera Xeper Xeperu, a phrase signifying the creation of the process of creation through the act of self-creation, and it consists of 17 letters. The swastika is composed of 17 squares, and is, like Xeper, a solar symbol. Atazoth is attributed to the 17th pathway on the Tree of Wyrd. As the swastika is composed of four legs, Xeper symbolizes a four-step process of rebirth. Sitra Achra consists of ten Qliphoth divided among seven hells. 10 + 7 = 17, with 17 being the foundation (1) of cyclic progression (7). 10 x 7 = 70, the number of Gog ve-Magog [the Antichrist and his Kingdom]. 70 is considered the material manifestation of 7, and 7 is the number of Nachash-Chioa as well as El Acher.

Anton LaVey’s genius was in his showmanship– he simplified complex Antinomian philosophies into an approachable text and promulgated them excellently, and in doing so, he became the aeonic catalyst which caused the developing Western magickal tradition to coalesce as a black magickal counterculture comprised of Satanism, Demonolatry, Ahrimanism, Khaos-Gnosticism, Setianism, the Draconian and Luciferian traditions, and of course, the Sevenfold Way.

The persons who tried to subvert Satanism for their own ill-considered ends were merely being carried along by the acausal tides of the Luciferian aeonic progression, and the founding members have renounced their involution. The remnants of the ONA are being dominated by the demonic tides of acausal energy, dedicating themselves to the products of the three Luciferian magi and remaining unaware of it– the few that haven’t pursue radical Vaishnavism, which is divorced from the ONA’s original goals. The nexion which essentially championed a renaissance of the ONA, the White Star Acception, named their group after Sirius, unaware that Crowley had named his first lodge after that same star. They went on to plagiarize one of Aquino’s rituals in their central text and focus on Lovecraftian magick (another product of the Luciferian magi).

-V.K. Jehannum

Advertisements

85 thoughts on “The Coming Aeon: Sorath & Chavajoth (How Satanism Ate the ONA)

  1. Could you expand on what you consider the ONA borrows or lifts from OTO and Crowely please. I would add this is not a hostile challange and is purely out of interest. At some point this year I will be republishing the first ONA ms ‘the Book of Wyrd, which makes certain presumptions about the origins of the ONA a lot clearer.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. -Crowley attributes the Great Beast to the sphere of the Sun, which Long echoes with Vindex.
      -Aza specifically appears for contrast and comparison to Azathoth in the Typhonian Trilogies, which is interesting: “[Azathoth] typifies the supreme reflex of Da’ath in the form of Aza.” Here, Aza is Beginning-End-Beginning, and thus we have the origin of Atazoth as a force of aeonic transition. Aza is also described as the source of “alien energies,” becoming the source for the relation of Azathoth to the increase of azoth.
      -The description of Azanigin as the “mother of demons who lie waiting in the Earth” is clearly lifted from Kenneth Grant’s description of Aza as the “mother of all demons.”
      -Grant attributes Azathoth to the sphere of Sol, which Long echoes.
      -The attribution of Azanigin to the sphere of Saturn is lifted from Crowley’s attribution of Babalon to the sphere of Saturn (remember that Azanigin is the beneficent aspect of Mother Earth).
      -The averse septagram seems to be borrowed from Crowley, who came up with the idea of representing Babalon with a point-down, seven-pointed star. If you Google the Mark of the Beast, you’ll find Crowley’s personal symbol which combines the symbol of the Great Beast with a version of the septagram of Babalon which is identical to the averse septagram used by the ONA.
      -The OTO’s long-term goal of restoring ancient goddess worship is carried on through the ONA.
      -The description of Azanigin as the light half of Mother Earth imitates the Zohar’s description of Aza as half of Azazel (especially when you read Hagur’s recording of Azanigin often appearing as a dark angel) {I know this doesn’t count as stealing from Crowley or Grant specifically, but come on, the Zohar?}.
      -Baphomet as the archetype of the Rounwytha mimics the signification of the Goat of Mendes as the adept.
      -Grant relates Chaos to Babalon, which Crowley describes as a personification of the sphere of Saturn. The word of power which the ONA attributes to the sphere of Saturn (related to Azanigin) is Chaos.
      -Crowley’s attribution of the Goat of Mendes to sperm is mimicked in the attribution of Baphomet to the Mother of Blood.
      -Crowley’s identification of Baphomet as the Father of the Temple is mocked in the decapitated head of a priest which the Blood Mistress holds aloft.
      -The attribution of Baphomet as the glyph of Satan relates to Baphomet as the bride & mother of Satan.
      -Compare the white-and-black crescents of the Dreccian Moons of Baphomet to the white and black crescents in Eliphas Levi’s drawing of the Goat of Mendes.
      -The conception of Baphomet being the mother of love and war is an echo of the Goat of Mendes as juxtaposed between the lunar force of mercy and the lunar force of wrath.
      -Baphomet of Albion lowkey represents the union of opposites.
      -Karu Samsu seems identical with Abrahadabra, another solar invocation (Higher Self = Sol).
      -Kenneth Grant describes Bast as “the type of the earliest cult which existed before the fatherhood was established,” and Long connects Baphomet of Albion to her.

      Liked by 2 people

          1. Make sure it is not the Black Orders Book of Wyrd which is not the same text, the original is hermetic and shows where Naos and BBofS developed from. The artwork is preMoult and I believe done by Myatts first wife at a guess, I would say Moult had a big influence on the later books as the change or development is quite pronounced.

            Like

            1. Some point this year, retyping is taking time and sadly the original artwork is unreproducible. I will try and see that you get a copy as you appear to be doing genuine study and research.

              Liked by 1 person

    2. The author of this apparently anti-O9A text yet again makes allegations about the ONA “borrowing” stuff from the Crowley et al yet provides no actual scholarly evidence. Indeed, the ONA has several times refuted his (and similar) allegations. As for example in respect of Atazoth in the recent ONA text “Esoteric Notes LXIII” (qv. the section Atazoth And Alchemical Sources). In that ONA text they provide references to actual medieval alchemical texts. Just as they did in other ONA texts in reference to Afsana (check out the ONA text The Rite of Afsana And Other Tales) and in respect of terms such as the ‘nine angles’ in texts such as “The Order of Nine Angles Rite of The Nine Angles: A Comparison with the Ceremony of Nine Angles by Aquino And A Brief Study of The Meaning of The Nine Angles.”

      It is just so indicative that the author of this apparently anti-O9A text also goes on and on about the Jewish qabala (which Crowley clearly reverenced) while the ONA has provided centuries earlier Greco-Roman (pagan) references for a septenary system. Check out ONA texts such as “The Esoteric Hermeticism Of The O9A”.

      It seems that every latter-day satanist repeats – year after year – allegations about the ONA and yet not one of them has provided any scholarly evidence for such allegations. Par for the course, because those making such allegations can’t read primary sources, such as the ancient Greek of hermetic texts or the Latin of medieval alchemical texts and thus have to rely on the opinions and interpretations of others.

      Why such repetitive anti-O9A propaganda and the constant propagation, by latter-day satanists, of disproved allegations about the ONA? Make up your own mind up. We have our own theories.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. It appears that I need to spell something out for you. When I neglect to address your arguments, it is not because I have conceded the point. It’s because I haven’t read it. When I don’t answer your questions despite having read them, it’s because of how incredibly tedious arguing with you is. The comments which go unaddressed usually go unread as well. Arguments with Niners are incredibly tedious and I do not consider most Niners to be capable of legitimately considering an opposing point of view when said point of view comes from someone (or adduces something) external to their ideology. It’s just like debating someone from the Joy of Satan Ministries—I’m talking to a wall (specifically, a Nazi wall that keeps plagiarizing shit). That’s why you, K. Scott, and YR so often get ignored.

        I do not need a “scholarly analysis” to make my point, nor do I need “tangible proof” to have legitimate credibility. The ONA is always thumping its chest about their “personal judgment”, but I’ve never seen any of you use it with any accuracy—Niners are the worst judges of character I know, it’s uncanny.

        Read the following five postulations and THINK. Use your LOGIC and REASONING to figure this out.
        One: Grant’s delineation of Azathoth in the Typhonian Trilogies predates Long’s delineation of Atazoth.
        Two: Long’s delineation of Atazoth is identical to Grant’s delineation of Azathoth in four major ways: Aeonic progression, the attribution to Shams [the sphere of the Sun], affiliation with Da’ath (the abyssic/primordial plane), and the effect of saturating the Cosmos with “alien” (ONA terms: acausal) energy.
        Three: The same book which delineates Azathoth adduces another entity who is nearly identical to another member of the ONA’s pantheon (Aza or Azanigin).
        Four: Core ONA texts demonstrate strong familiarity with another book in the Typhonian Trilogies: Temple of Satan critiques The Nightside of Eden through the allegorical character of Ezra Pead.
        Five: Long is rumored to have been a member of the OTO (source: ABG Lodge).

        It is pellucid that I am right about this. The fact that you still doubt it only substantiates your incompetence. You’re very well read, but as I’ve said before, you lack the ability to analyze what you read.
        I simply do not give a fuck about tarot attributions, sigils, hymns, the etymology of “at”, or any other such meaningless distractions. These things simply are not relevant to the matter at hand. You adduced them as nothing more than a puerile excuse not to contemplate what I have explained, just like you bitched about my (more than sufficient) explanation not being a “scholarly analysis” and lacking physical evidence.

        Atazoth is quite possibly the single most important concept in the ONA, and the ONA has (A) stolen it and (B) lied about its origin. Take another look at that large list of connections between the OTO and ONA I provided above with this in mind.

        Points A and B should be remembered the next time that the ONA claims not to have been influenced by Aquino. After all, WSA352 ripped off Aquino in one of their rituals. The Tempel ov Blood ripped off Ford, who was previously in the Temple of Set, in their book. Misanthropic Nexion posted an excerpt of one of Ford’s books on their WordPress. Drakon Covenant ripped off the Temple of the Vampire, another offshoot of the Church of Satan, in their teachings.

        And Myatt claims to have been taught a bunch of shit by an unidentified “Lady Master.” He says that the Satanic literature arose from some individual named Anton Long who apparently vanished from existence after saying what Myatt wanted said. He claims that the ONA originated as a combination of three temples whose existence has not been proven. All of these claims are dubious in and of themselves, and they were all made by a documented propagandist.

        After I wrote the first public refutation of the Myatt death hoax, K. Scott told me that I needed to provide “proof” that Myatt was still alive, and said my refutation was illegitimate due to the absence of it. Of course, I was one of the small few (according to Scott) Niners who had the perspicacity to see the truth of the matter. The ONA is always talking about how great their “Dark Empathy” and “personal judgment” is—funny that a college student who had only been a Satanist for five years and a Niner for less than two publicly put most of the ONA to shame.

        Since you have left about 40 of these long-ass, super pretentious comments on my blog, and you are the most long-winded and pretentious Niner I’ve debated. You Niners want to argue for DAYS. This will probably be the last comment I address you in. You’re free to continue leaving comments—I don’t believe in censoring criticism, and besides, you won’t convince anyone who isn’t already towing the party line.

        Liked by 1 person

    3. The original Book of Wyrd was compiled at the suggestion of Chris Bray around 1986 who initially agreed to print and publish it. It was designed to intrigue, test, and recruit a few individuals given that at the time the ONA was recruiting via a PO Box (first in Church Stretton then in Shrewsbury) as mentioned in “The Sinister Game” text on the omega9alpha blog.

      Anton Long mentioned the Book of Wyrd in a 1992 letter to David Austen, a facsimile of which letter is in the Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown. In that letter, AL describes the book as essentially a fable, and mentions that some of its contents belonged to the pre-ONA group The Temple of the Sun.

      According to our info, Bray – or on his associates – typed out the draft copy and sent it to AL for editing. Bray then for some reason decided not to publish the book. Someone ONA then photocopied this uncorrected draft version, added some marginal notes and a few additions to some of the copies and then mailed the copies to people interested in the ONA. A facsimile of this draft version was added to the microfilm that the ONA made of some of its – and The Temple of the Sun – MSS and texts, with around ten copies of this microfilm sent to various people, including Professor Kaplan who mentions it in his 1998 book Nation and Race: The Developing Euro-American Racist Subculture.

      Also the Book of Wyrd was not the first ONA MS to be openly published. The Black Book of Satan was, in 1983; reprinted in 1984 (a copy is in the British Library). In addition, both the Lamp of Thoth and Nox zines published ONA MSS in the mid-1980s.

      Like

      1. I wonder why you are so desperately trying to educate people about the ONA and sort out the so-called labyrinthos mythologicus for them. I find that peculiar as I’m sure everyone with even the most basic knowledge of the nature of the occult. Unless you are the light at the end of the tunnel… I mean an oncoming train.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Perhaps you never wonder why so many people – especially self-described satanists – for so many decades have tried and continue to try to discredit the ONA. They have produced vastly more anti-O9A material than “we” have produced material in defence of the ONA. Even you – over the years – have moaned more about the ONA than “we” – put together – have defended the ONA.

          That self-described satanists continue to regurgitate decades-old allegations about the ONA – all of which has been disproved – does not seem to interest you at all. I gave one example re Azathoth and Atazoth, yet no one – in decades – has produced any scholarly evidence whatsoever in support of their allegation that Atazoth=Azathoth. Ditto re their allegations about the term ‘nine angles’. Ditto re the allegation of Myatt being Anton Long. And so on.

          Even if for the sake of argument “we” hypothetically accept that they ONA may have borrowed some stuff from extant and older LHP groups and traditions, so what? Does that invalidate their original contributions? As in Insight Roles, Esoteric Chant, the Star Game, the ontology of causal/acausal, the code of kindred honor, etc. etc. No it doesn’t, especially as Crowley, Levey, and Aquino and others, all borrowed stuff from extant and older LHP groups and traditions. Yet you don’t find a multitude of self-described satanists moaning decade after decade about their borrowing. Why is that?

          Liked by 1 person

          1. I’m only saying that the seekers of the occult knowledge should be left to their own devices. There is no need for teachers, especially bogus ones. My cousin had a shitty teacher who during the exam “helped” the students by telling them to cross out the right answers they chose previously and circle the incorrect ones.

            Remember kids. F*** school and never trust your teachers.

            Like

            1. May I respectfully suggest you read – or re-read – primary ONA sources such as the 1990s “Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown” and “Hostia” where it is stated, many times, that the ONA teaches nothing, has no dogma, has no authority, and that what matters is individuals learning from their own practical (exoteric, esoteric) experience. The ONA – and Anton Long, whoever he is or they are – has repeatedly said that even Anton Long possesses no authority and that it is pathei mathos, individual judgement born of practical experience, which matters.

              Like

          2. In reality, earlier ONA literature not only overtly identifies Atazoth with Azathoth, but also completely regurgitates the descriptions of Azathoth provided throughout thy Typhonian Trilogies by Kenneth Grant, the central texts of the OTO.

            An earlier treatise on the subject entitled H.P. Lovecraft and the Dark Gods states “Lovecraft, aware of parts of the ancient tradition of the Dark Gods’ dramatized and mis-represented the tradition as a whole… To [this tradition], he added inventions of his own… which he wove into the Cthulhu mythos… The details that Lovecraft gives regarding ‘calls’ and rites are mostly fanciful and only in a few places does he advertently reveal the truth – for example, in his mention of the trapezohedron and ‘Azathoth’ as described by Lovecraft, is a symbolic and distorted re-presentation of the intersection, in acausal space-time, of these astral star passages: a kind of galactic vortex or node. Those who journey there will never return the same. Along the star passages the shells of long dead civilizations lie strewn.”

            Compare this with Kenneth Grant’s statement in The Magickal Revival: “Lovecraft was unacquainted with both the name and work of Crowley, yet some of his fantasies reflect, however, distortedly, the salient themes of Crowley’s cult.”

            The Magickal Revival provides a table of correspondences which identifies various entities in the Cthulhu Mythos with concepts presented in Crowley’s literature. The tenth numbered entry in this table is “Azathoth (the blind and idiot chaos at the centre of infinity)”, which Grant attributes to “Azoth, the alchemical solvent.”

            The “intersection, in acausal space-time, of these astral star passages: a kind of galactic vortex or node” which ONA describes seems comparable to “the spiral black vortices of that ultimate void of Chaos where reigns the mindless demon-sultan Azathoth” which Lovecraft describes in Dreams in the Witch House.

            Moult’s identification of Atazoth as part of the Abyss parallels Lovecraft’s delineation of the entity. In an analysis of Lovecraft’s literature entitled Awakening the Great Old Ones by Stephen Dziklewicz, we find the following statement. “Lovecraft describes Azathoth as the Ultimate Chaos – similar to a jewelled Mandlebrot set in an all-enveloping crown.”

            The idea that Atazoth and Azathoh are one was also presented by Richard Moult (aka Christos Beest) entitled Archetypes and Illusions, which states: “A further illustration is the use of the entity known as Atazoth (or, as it is more inaccurately known, Azathoth – Atazoth means an increasing of Azoth, Azathoth is simply a jumble of letters accessed from the inept experiments of H.P. Lovecraft. Whilst purporting to work with and understand ‘chaos’ the structure and practices of the rites of Chaosism are based on moralistic/dualistic/abstract (etc) perceptions as such, Atazoth cannot be used since it is part of the Abyss itself.”

            In the Chthulhu Mythos Encyclopedia, we find the following definition: “AZATHOTH (also AZAZOTH or AZAG-THOTH). Outer God also known as the Primal Chaos and the Daemon Sultan. Azathoth normally is a shapeless chaotic mass, but has been known to take on other forms when he has been summoned.”

            Compare the description given to Atazoth in Part Two of Codex Saerus (also called The Black Book of Satan), which includes a physical description of the entity’s “primal form.” “Atazoth may be visualized as a dark nebulous chaos – a rend in the fabric of star-studded space which changes into a Dagon like/dragon entity.”

            Liked by 1 person

      2. Those who are interested will be able to see for themselves and be able to tmake up their own mind soon. A possibilty that the contents of the microfilm will be made avalible on disc this year as well.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Yes indeed, many latter-day satanists assuredly will make up their own mind and no doubt the majority will make pejorative assumptions about the ONA based on that Book of Wyrd text but I doubt that anyone so making such assumptions will actually undertake, using primary sources, scholarly research into O9A esotericism. The Book of Wyrd is not a primary ONA source, for it is just – as the ONA has made clear for decades – propaganda designed for a specific (1980s) recruiting purpose including as it did MSS from non-O9A sources. As for the microfilm, if ever its contents are published in whatever format no doubt those making pejorative assumptions about the ONA from it will never ever bother to consider those contents in context, as for example in relation to the MSS of the Deofel Quartet included therein, given the chequered history of those MSS as mentioned in ONA texts such as “Esoteric Aural Tradition In The Deofel Quartet” and which mangled texts Anton Long corrected in 2008.

          All such pejorative assumptions about the ONA are expected and indeed necessary. For they serve a useful dialectic purpose. As in filtering out mundanes who lack the sagacity, the empathy, the occult skills, to perceive beyond the exoteric and who in their majority become trapped in either the O9A’s Labyrinthos Mythologicus or in their own anti-O9A prejudice.

          So even if hundreds – thousands – of latter-day satanists and self-described followers of some Western LHP make pejorative assumptions about, and pen anti-O9A propaganda about, the ONA – based on whatever – it will not aeonically matter. For a few individuals, per decade, (which few is all we need, as has been mentioned many times) will possess the sagacity, the empathy, the occult skills, to perceive beyond the exoteric and understand all the anti-O9A propaganda for what it really is. For what such anti-O9A propaganda is, is a desire – conscious or otherwise – to preserve, to defend, the Magian (masculous) status quo so evident, in respect of occultism, in the so-called ‘satanism’ (the Ayn Rand with trappings satanism) of Levey and in the Jewish qabalah that so infuses the occultism of Crowley, Aquino, their devotees, and the modern Western LHP in general.

          Like

  2. One of your best!

    Fun Fact: Start with any proposition regarding cosmology and chances are you can work backwards and find a pedigree or precedent for it. IE Start with OTO, church of satan / set and traditional satanism– remove all the ‘icky’ Judaic elements and crib from the best ( Kenneth grant et al) together with personal gnosis ( which tends to take the shape of its container) mix well and shake and come up with the ONA system and be able to find precedents for it.

    If you go by the number of levels (rows) the qliphotic tree is a septernary system as is the tree of life… just saying

    Liked by 1 person

      1. To avoid cluttering up this blog with “walls of text” I’ll concentrate on just one point which you so far have failed to reply. Criticism of the identification of Azathoth with the ONA Atazoth.

        You offered no proof, you just made assumptions. How is “an increasing of azoth” – which is what the name Atazoth means – connected to Lovecraft’s “hideous name” and to “the boundless Daemon-sultan” and to “the mindless entity,” and to the “the blind idiot god,” which is how Lovecraft described Azathoth?

        Where in Lovecraft is the association of Azathoth with Atu V of the Tarot? Or with the sigil of Atazoth in Naos which depicts a particular constellation, a tetrahedron and some alchemical symbols? In what language does “at” mean an increase of? In what work by Lovecraft will you find an actual chant of Azathoth similar to the ONA atazoth chant? In what Latin alchemical work or works will you find symbolism similar to the ONA description of Atu V where a young man and woman are inside a tetrahedron? And so on.

        While AE Waite wrote a whole book about ‘Azoth’, he cites no sources from extant alchemical texts, and just waffles on about Theosophy, occasionally mentioning some names – such as Plato and Iamblicus – and on a few occasions apparently quoting from some author, such as that Plato said “We may regard God through our soul”, but never giving the source. It’s probable that Waite cribbed the Plato quote, and other quotes, from the book The History of Magic by Joseph Ennemoser published in 1854. The Plato quote is actually from Timaeus where Plato writes about “the god”, about “the gods”, about the “demiurge”, but not about “God”. So it’s a wonky translation anyway. Plato also, by the way, and in line with Greek mythology, describes Gaia as the first and the eldest of the gods (Timaeus, 40b-40c), πρώτην καὶ πρεσβυτάτην θεῶν ὅσοι ἐντὸς οὐρανοῦ…

        We’re aware that some Lovecraft fan, in respect of a supposed connection between Azathoth and azoth, mentioned a book by AE Waite but which book about Azoth is worthless from a scholarly point of view, and so nothing is proved regarding the alleged connection between Azathoth and azoth. In addition that Lovecraft fan made the supposed connection around 1995, decades after the ONA first mentioned Atazoth. That some other Lovecraft fan, around 2003, wrote that “the name Azathoth is remarkably similar to Azoth”, also proves nothing because it’s just an opinion lacking scholarly evidence.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. “Satanism’s retarded cousins struggle for National Socialism.” These types of comments are to be expected from a dirty Jew like yourself. Go worship YaHWeH you POS Hebrew! You have zero authority to represent/discuss Satanism!

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Just in case I was misunderstood, this article does not represent an endorsement or prediction of the causation of the apocalypse, which I believe will never occur. The supposition that the Azerate want to obliterate the Cosmos was originated by RHP magickians who held spiteful preconceptions regarding the Azerate. They theorized that since Jehovah created the Cosmos (false), the Azerate must want to destroy it. The reasoning process for this postulation is identical to the reasoning process behind the RHP postulation that the Azerate must have a physical body (all 11 of them, apparently) because Jehovah does not.

    Like

  5. The Devil just wants to destroy the world as you know it.

    The ONA postulates that the Vindexian upheaval will occur in America. Since I can easily name more than ten Niners that live in America, I can reassure you all that they’re buried nose-deep in Qliphothic magick. Even the ones that aren’t are dedicated to Krishna, not Myatt (and the long term goals held by those two really are mutually exclusive).

    Not to get off topic, but damn, I really hate Krishna.

    The ONA really does represent an attempt to predetermine the nature of the coming aeon. Well, the coming aeon has, as I demonstrated, swallowed it whole.

    And the Azerate are not destroying the Cosmos. That’s autism. In the words of an archdemon I consulted on the matter, “Why would you want to destroy something so perfectly fucked up?”

    Satanism is about empowerment– if you don’t like the world, change it. Fill it with demonic energy through your ritual efforts and leave the energy unbanished. The energy will spread to encompass more territory and will infernally transmute nature spirits or ghosts fixed to the area (fun fact: one of such nature spirits asked me kindly not to summon Budsturga in his vicinity ever again after my second evocation of her. He referred to my evocation of her as “cursing the area,” so I did not know which ritual he was referring to until he elaborated). Saturating the Cosmos will black magickal energy will make it incrementally more conducive to baleful entities and witchcraft– and that’s important in a technological age such as ours.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. V.K. Jehannum wrote: {quote} The ONA postulates that the Vindexian upheaval will occur in America {/quote}

      In fact, some individuals who have associated themselves with the ONA have also postulated that Vindex may appear in Russia or even in some non-White country, with Vindex possibly being “of non-Aryan descent.”

      Yet again you apparently commit the fallacy of illicit distribution for there is no ONA to postulate anything, only individuals and nexions who have associated themselves with the ONA and who have their own personal opinions.

      V.K. Jehannum wrote: {quote} The ONA really does represent an attempt to predetermine the nature of the coming aeon {/quote}

      There is no attempt to predetermine anything. There is only the Star Game (advanced version) which may suggest some future (aeonic) possibilities. Yet again there is no ONA to postulate anything, only individuals who may play that advanced (aeonic) version of The Star Game.

      Like

      1. Niners keep spewing this (pretentious) bullshit about how the ONA is composed of the esotericism, not the group, and about how no one can speak on behalf of it every time the ONA gets called on its bullshit. It’s damage control and it doesn’t convince anyone.

        Oh, and Russian is one of the few languages that Liber Azerate was published in.

        Referring to the massive amount of rightful criticism that the ONA receives as “propaganda” is pathetic. Huge amounts of ONA literature are nothing more than propaganda, and the ONA was founded by a documented propagandist.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. I would add I am in no way anti-ONA, the original MSS and further writing of Mr Myatt are sound. Though the last decade or so has seen its total loss of credability due to the constant drivel being peddled and regurgitated by those who feel they represent and expand upon its aims and ideals. I don’t see any point in being anti-ONA, though I understand the fallout of leaving something one has put emotional investment into and of course recognise historical revisionism has its place.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I’m less anti-ONA than I may seem, evidenced by my continued hosting of rare ONA-related manuscripts on my blog (Cache section). But SOMEONE has to make the observations I’m making, and no one else is. To me, the ONA is just one of the many Satanisms that influences my Satanism.

      Like

      1. K. Jehannum wrote: {quote} SOMEONE has to make the observations I’m making, and no one else is.{quote}

        Well, you made various assumptions about the ONA and, for example, the OTO.

        It should be obvious to anyone perusing the ONA corpus that what the ONA – i.e. Anton Long – means by Atazoth is totally different to what Lovecraft meant by Azathoth. Primary alchemical texts seem to support Anton Long: the link to ‘the living water, azoth’ and the three alchemical substances, salt, sulphur, mercury.

        It should also be obvious to anyone perusing the ONA corpus that what the ONA – i.e. Anton Long – means by the term nine angles (nine emanations manifesting the conjunction of causal and acausal, symbolized by the nine combinations of the three fundamental alchemical principles) is totally different to what Aquino meant by the nine angles.

        In respect of the OTO, where in the OTO do you find anything akin to Insight Roles? Where in the OTO do you find anything akin to Esoteric Chant? Where in the OTO do you find anything akin to the Rounwytha? Where in the OTO do you find anything akin to the Star Game? Where in the OTO do you find anything akin to the O9A Code of Kindred Honor? Where in the OTO do you find anything akin to the O9A ontology is causal and acausal being? And so on

        It’s up to you to provide solid, scholarly, evidence for your assumptions using primary sources. So far neither you nor anyone else has provided any such evidence for any of your assumptions, or even for your allegation that Myatt is Anton Long. Until you provide such evidence they’ll remain assumptions and allegations. Propaganda seems an apt term to describe such assumptions and allegations and the repeating of them.

        But given the physis of mundanes no doubt if you and others repeat such allegations and assumptions for long enough some mundanes (including most of those self-describing themselves as modern satanists) will believe them. Which is actually a very good thing for “us”.

        Liked by 1 person

    2. You raise an interesting point about the drivel/polemics some people associating themselves with the ONA have produced in, say, the last six or seven years. But as has been explained, they’re only ever giving their personal views, as “we” are on our blog.

      One mistake seems to be that of the fallacy of distribution: assuming such personal views by some individuals represent the ONA. They do not and never can, given the ONA principles of individual authority and pathei mathos.

      The other mistake is in assuming there is something called the ONA. There isn’t (well that’s my view anyway) for two reasons. First, because like V.K. Jehannum said on this blog in another comment to another post – and like Monette has also said – the ONA could and perhaps should be considered a movement, not a group, and a movement that people identify with or are inspired by. Like all movements, disputes among adherents – and factions and different interpretations – naturally develop. Second (and this is my view) the ONA is only the esoteric philosophy developed by Anton Long together with certain practical occult methods, such as the Seven Fold Way.

      In both cases, the drivel/polemics some people associating themselves with the ONA indulge in cannot affect the ONA because there is no real-world group or Order to affect, only individuals associating themselves with the ONA, and only nexions inspired by ‘the movement’ or by the esoteric philosophy and praxises developed by Anton Long.

      Like

        1. Our personal conclusions and opinions about the nature of the ONA are irrelevant in respect of pointing out that people make assumptions about the ONA and Anton Long without providing any actual evidence from primary sources.

          We also find it of interest that people generally do not castigate Crowley and Thelema because some of his followers or fans write drivel or engage in silly polemics. People also do not castigate Aquino and the Temple of Set because some of his followers or fans write drivel or engage in silly polemics.

          Yet people always seem to castigate Anton Long and the ONA because some ONA followers or fans write drivel or engage in silly polemics. Why the double standard?

          Like

      1. It’s not exactly true that there is no real world group or order since some people claim to know you personally and you were recruiting a few candidates some time ago. Of course it’s still possible to read the MSS and be inspired by it.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Like we’ve said, what we express are our personal views and opinions. We may be wrong because there may be some original (Anton Long founded) ONA nexion or satellite ONA nexions (founded by people who knew Anton Long) personally recruiting people. We just haven’t come across any evidence, in the real world, that such a nexion or nexions exist. All we’ve seen is some ONA supporters making claims that such nexions exist.

          Like

          1. And like I’ve said before, only specific people have an access to o9a.org website and a couple of o9a blogs, like regardingmyatt WordPress, omega9alpha WordPress, lapis philosophicus WordPress etc. In spite of you using various nicknames, it’s easy to recognize you. You are the same people who only a year before claimed to be Old Guards and only two years ago castigated RA and were showing off with your ” inside knowledge.”

            As for Crowley and Aquino, hardly anyone bashes Crowley because he’s a long time dead. It’s not true that everyone hypes or even respects Aquino. He’s been called out many times and it’s enough to check the 600 Club archives. Also Gilmore is often criticized in various places online.

            It’s also obvious that if VK Jehannum criticizes the ONA, he means a group of people and not a bunch of PDF files

            Like

            1. Anna, you wrote: {quote} You are the same people who only a year before claimed to be Old Guards {/quote}

              Your proof for this is what, exactly? Even if, for the sake of argument, “we” are OG, so what? Individuals can change their opinions, especially if evidence and experience somehow disprove their former beliefs or opinions.

              You wrote: {quote} As for Crowley and Aquino, hardly anyone bashes Crowley {/quote}

              My dear, you miss (or seem to miss) the point. Which is not that people don’t bash Crowley or Aquino, but that they don’t use some drivel/polemics written by their fans to bash them, although people bash Anton Long and the ONA on the basis of some drivel/polemics written by their fans. The crucial part is “on the basis of some drivel/polemics written by their fans.”

              You have many times over several years castigated “the ONA” on the basis of some drivel/polemics written by ONA fans and/or by ONA supporters. Have you also castigated Aquino and the Temple of Set on the basis of some drivel/polemics written by his contemporary fans and supporters?

              Like

            2. My dear, I don’t criticise the Temple of Set because I’m clueless about their teachings. I read only one of Aquino’s books, that is “The Church of Satan.” In order to do the criticism, I would have to read more and I’m not interested. However, there are others who have been calling out his beliefs.

              Since I read most of the ONA MSS, I have some basis for the discussion. You repeat the mantra that I keep castigating the ONA while I only address criticism to the people who call themselves Inner ONA.

              The only thing known about you are your pedantic, silly and immature “polemics.” There is nothing else that you keep showing online. So why are you surprised that you are not being seen in a favourable light?
              Sure, there is more to the ONA than your drivel. The older MSS are quite good but there is no evidence they were written by you and not someone else.

              Perhaps, you are only trolling or there has been the change of guards from the smart ones to stupid ones. I don’t want to speculate but of one thing I’m certain. I didn’t have a chance to see even one piece of wisdom from you.

              Like

  7. Despite the ONA’s desperate and failed attempts to convince the Satanic community that its version of Satanism is the legitimate one, the ONA influenced Satanism less with years of effort and multiple authors than Crowley did, without trying, in death. Even when you factor in Crowley’s strong influence of both Wicca and the Sevenfold Way, your picture of Crowley’s incredible aeonic significance is still incomplete.

    David Myatt has renounced all of his aeonic goals and espoused “non-interference.” Compare that to Crowley, who, in his last days before dying via overdose on his prescription meds, was refusing to spend his money on medical care because he wanted to put them towards the promulgation of his Thelemic literature. Some of his best Thelemic works were completed near the end of his life.

    Like

  8. hello bro this page is gread I support your opinion; In the search for the great path there are several ways to get there, but some have deviated much from the primordial idea, in my opinion; I do not criticize other temples because I have respect for the different opinions, even so I believe that this type of teaching should be unified as in the beginning for the ancient

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Anna C wrote: {quote} The only thing known about you are your pedantic, silly and immature polemics. There is nothing else that you keep showing online. {/quote}

    Once again you fail to answer the questions asked of you and resort instead to argumentum ad hominem. You also ignore the documented fact that people don’t bash Crowley or Aquino based on some drivel/polemics written by their fans, yet people (including you) bash and continue to bash Anton Long and the ONA on the basis of some drivel/polemics written by their fans.

    Yet again you’ve proved my point re double standards.

    As for you, I could say that your use of the English language, and you use of English idioms, is so good that you must be either English or American and not Polish as you claim. But that is just an assumption, an intuition of mine, for which I admit I have no proof.

    You assume you know who “we” are, yet provide no proof, and also refuse to admit that it’s just an assumption on your part for which you have proof.

    Why can’t you – and why can’t latter-day self-described satanists – just admit you and they don’t know when it’s so very obvious that you and they don’t really know? Why can’t you – and why can’t latter-day self-described satanists – just admit you and they may be wrong about some things connected with the ONA?

    The pride, the egoism, the arrogance, the hubris, of masculous types, obviously. As for you – who claims to be a Catholic – refusing to be humble, refusing to say Mea Culpa when you are manifestly in error, is not very Catholic at all.

    Anna C wrote: {quote} I didn’t have a chance to see even one piece of wisdom from you.{/quote}

    Perhaps you missed posts such as the one about “Atazoth and Alchemical Sources” in which various alchemical texts (most in Latin, one in English) were referenced, and which post refuted the assumption made here that Atazoth=Azathoth. What’s interesting and most indicative is that neither you nor anyone else, nor even the person making that assumption, has anything rational or scholarly to say about such posts by “us”. Instead, you resort to argumentum ad hominem. Par for the course.

    Like

    1. Damn phone, this is the rest of my post. Please tell me when and where I bashed the ONA. I addressed my criticism to you and you alone. I don’t exclude the possibility that you are just pretending but the problem is that I have nothing except your silliness. I simply find the recent ONA MSS as being of poor quality and also boring. This is my personal opinion that the older texts are better. You want me to admit I’m wrong but in what? You make no effort to prove I’m wrong. You claimed to be Inner ONA yourselves, I repeat here your claims made not so long ago.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Anna C wrote: {quote} Please tell me when and where I bashed the ONA{/quote}

        Well, for a start you keep going on about some drivel/polemics written by some (note, “some”) ONA fans/supporters as if they and their drivel/polemics were representative of the ONA and thus have “ruined” or “discredited” the ONA. You’ve done that on various other blogs, including you own, and on forums such as that 600 thingy. I seem to recall you had several post on your blogs devoted to some drivel/polemics written by some ONA fans/supporters.

        That said, I’ll agree that in the past – like on that ‘religiousforum’ which has since banned discussions about the ONA and on that 600 thingy forum – you’ve made some good points re the ONA in reply to some nonsense posted about the ONA. So maybe it balances out?!

        Anna C wrote: {quote} I have nothing except your silliness{/quote}

        Just what is silly and polemical about asking people to provide actual evidence for their assumptions about Anton Long and the ONA? Just what is silly and polemical about texts such as “Atazoth and Alchemical Sources”? Just what is silly and polemical about asking you and others about double standards in respect of the fallacy of illicit distribution re Anton Long and the ONA?

        Opponents of the ONA continue to moan about some drivel/polemics written by some (note, “some”) ONA fans/supporters while ignoring the fact that those ONA opponents have, over many years, written far more drivel/polemics about the ONA than all those ONA fans/supporters put together.

        Opponents of the ONA use the drivel/polemics recently written by some ONA fans/supporters in an attempt to discredit the ONA (the fallacy of illicit distribution) yet never criticize the far greater amount of drivel/polemics written by opponents of the ONA, and also never provide a scholarly response to reasoned ONA texts such as “The Esoteric Hermeticism Of The Order Of Nine Angles” and “O9A Esoteric Notes LXIII” and the recently published “Over Of The O9A”. In some of those texts “we” have an input. So, are such texts just silliness?

        Like

        1. To echo Anna’s words: “Dam phone”. The document mentioned at the end of my last post should read “Overview Of The O9A” and not “Over Of The O9A.” Virtual keyboards really suck.

          Like

        2. Now point out the exact places where I stated that the drivel and polemics represent the ONA or they ruin the ONA. I even recall the thread on 600 Club where I commented on Chloe’s ezine saying that people’s internet antics can’t harm the ONA. I’m not responsible for other people’s comments.

          You always try to give an impression that all your actions are planned but it is becoming obvious that your troll campaign got out of hand and you are now doing the damage control; correcting your own bullshit posted years ago.

          Like

          1. Anna C wrote: {quote} your troll campaign got out of hand {/quote}

            Really, is such a comment the best you can do? We asked you questions such as: Just what is silly and polemical about asking people to provide actual evidence for their assumptions about Anton Long and the ONA? Just what is silly and polemical about texts such as Atazoth and Alchemical Sources? Just where are your scholarly comments on ONA texts such as The Esoteric Hermeticism Of The Order Of Nine Angles?

            Since all you seem to have in reply is propagandistic slogans such as “your troll campaign got out of hand” then I guess it’s QED re your intent. Not that, of course, most of those who frequent blogs such as this will intuit what “we” mean.

            Like

            1. He thoroughly explained and provided arguments for his points. VK Jehannum is quite erudite. He can be right or wrong. Not sure because I’m unfamiliar with the texts he cited. However, I see he read a lot of the occult literature and is well versed in the ONA MSS.

              If you can read the ancient Greek and Latin, then kudos to you. Why do you feel the need to constantly brag about it on the internet? Do you feel underestimated in the real world? Why do you need random strangers online to humble themselves before you?

              Come on little manipulator, when was the last time you publicly admitted you fucked up. When was the last time you were honest? When was the last time you showed humility?

              Liked by 1 person

            2. One more thing. Learning from Pathei Mathos takes decades. If we look at Myatt’s life and assume he is honest in his writings, then we will see that for the large part of his life he was proud, arrogant and convinced he was right. Only later on he learned humility. There is time for everything and that first part of his life, the time of youthful enthusiasm and arrogance was necessary for him to learn from it and progress further.

              Like

  10. This cancerous fucking thread instantiates all of the failings of modern day Satanists. The fact that (((Anna Czereda))) only criticizes the groups who want to sacrifice her is completely hypocritical, and it is incredibly unfair of V.K. Jehannum to criticize the Order of Asinine Angles on the basis of people who are currently in it.

    What Satanists like V.K. consistently fail to understand is that the only people who have any right to call themselves Satanists are Nazis who have no respect for Satanism. Just like Anton Long says, people who want to see Satanism live on past this current aeon are the complete and total opposite of Satanists.

    The fact that ONA member David Myatt attempted to infiltrate and pervert Islam as well as modern National Socialism does not prove that he is the same ONA member who attempted to infiltrate and pervert Satanism. The fact that no one has ever suggested an alternative identity for Anton Long does not support the identification of him with David Myatt. Just because David Myatt’s handwritten signature appeared on the original editions of core ONA texts which are currently attributed to Anton Long does not mean that he wrote them.

    Now, I know some of you so-called Satanists may be getting suspcious about this Wyrd Goddess girl. I know that her refusing to admit that Atazoth and Azathoth are identical and that Myatt is most likely Long might make it seem as if she is only here to be as contrarian as possible at all times in order to muddy the waters for damage control, but this is certainly not the case. And I know that her desperate attempts to present Anton Long as some ineffable and faceless mystery seems like a mere smoke screen to conceal Myatt’s total lack of integrity. You have to remember that Niners have Sinister honor which means you can trust them, unlike fake Satanists like V.K. Jehannum.

    Lastly, we must address V.K.’s so-called “membership” in the Order of the Nine Angles. As WyrdGoddess wrote in 2017 Error Whorrificus, “You [VK] just decided one day that you were ONA and then announced it to the world. So all you did was agree with the esoteric philosophy developed by Anton Long (or some of it anyway) and then decided (or not) to follow one of the three occult ONA ways. You cannot ‘join’ and then ‘leave’ an idea and a methodology derived from that idea. Now had you personally joined say an established nexion after having met people in that nexion in the real world then you would have joined that nexion, not the ONA, because nexions are totally independent and inspired by or follow ONA esoteric philosophy or some methodology derived from that philosophy.”

    Both V.K. Jehannum’s documented membership in the Lilin Society’s leading council and his position as a handler or apprentice instructor in Drakon Covenant are nothing but filthy lies spread by Jewish slime like (((Anna Czererda))). Being a respected member of two established ONA nexions for over a year does not make him ONA.

    Anton Dietrich
    127 Year of Saiyan

    Liked by 4 people

          1. I get that I’m speaking out of turn and all, but if you don’t lube up your ninth angle and smash her tetradhedron, you’re gonna be dealing with this bullshit forever.

            Liked by 2 people

  11. There is in your post no scholarly rebuttal, because you have provided no evidence from primary sources for your thesis that Atazoth=Azathoth. All you have are some quotes from Mr Moult which are at best tertiary sources, like those from Mr Grant and those in something called the “Chthulhu Mythos Encyclopedia”.

    Furthermore, you have totally ignored primary sources regarding Azoth (e.g. De Alchimia Opuscula Complura Veterum Philosophorum, and the Ordinall of Alchimy) and have not answered questions such as in what ancient language does “at” mean “an increase of”, which question is relevant to how the ONA define At-azoth.

    Like

  12. V.K. Jehannum wrote: {quote} Maybe I SHOULD crash my plane into her twin towers. That could be the solution to all of this! {/quote}

    That comment of yours – and those by your ‘alter ego’ the so-called The Black Pope of Antifa – really do summarize matters.

    For, if we are being brutally honest, the bottom line is that for all your verbal bluster and your repetitive allegations about the ONA you still do not understand the difference between you and your kind and “us”. At best you and your ilk are plebs; at worst, you and your ilk are pretentious pseudo-intellectuals. You, for example, cannot read ancient Greek or Latin and thus have no knowledge of primary sources in relation to Western esotericism and alchemy. So you rely on translations and on the likes of Crowley and Levey and Aquino and on “popular occult culture” (exemplified by the likes of Mr Grant) despite the fact that like you they cannot read Egyptian hieroglyphics and cannot read primary magickal and occult sources in their original ancient languages. Whereas we can. It’s quite laughable that, for instance, Aquino built his occult reputation on Set even though he cannot read Egyptian hieroglyphics or Coptic.

    Now, it’s obvious that you have the attention – and indeed the praise – of those of your own kind. Which so does make our point. For unless and until you pen a scholarly critique of the ONA using primary sources, your allegations and your assumptions about the ONA will continue to disregarded not only by “the likes of us” but also by sagacious occultists and by academics who also know your physis, your pretensions, and your intellectual limitations. That we may on occasion dialectically engage with you is only because you are an example of what “we” are not and thus provide an opportunity for us to differentiate our kind from yours. A differentiation so evident in your apparent addiction to the Kabbalah and in your continued desire to propagate the Magian ethos.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hold on a minute, when VK said DM was AL, you demanded forensic evidence and what not. When (((Anna Czereda))) implied that you were the same person as some other given well-known Niner(s), you demanded legally admissable evidence from her as well. And now you want to claim that’s I’m just an alter-ego for VK based on nothing?

      You better hope I’m not VK, because if I am, you may have just fallen for the most obvious trap in ONA history.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. We simply asked for verifiable evidence, from primary sources, that DM=AL. No one, academic or otherwise, has ever provided any such evidence.

        You wrote: {quote} and now you want to claim that’s I’m… {/quote}

        …the alter ego of VKJ? Perhaps, perhaps not. After all, you and VKJ are (apparently) anonymous and since VKJ seems to claim that DM=AL why should we (anonymous we) not also counter-claim that you are VKJ?

        You can’t have it both ways, can you? Tit for tat, as they say in England.

        Like

        1. The truth of the matter is that if you do not abide by the standards that you hold your opinions to, you show said standards to be disingenuous. In doing so, you’ve proven beyond all reasonable doubt that you’re nothing more than a propagandist troll.

          Like

  13. Anna C wrote: {quote} VK Jehannum is quite erudite {/quote}

    Obviously your definition of erudite is different from ours. To us, being erudite means having knowledge of primary sources in their original language and not having to rely on translations and on secondary and tertiary sources. VK Jehannum seems to rely exclusively on secondary and tertiary sources and so is just presenting their personal opinion of the interpretations of others. That’s not being erudite, it’s just quoting the opinions of others.

    Which bring us to:

    Anna C wrote: {quote} If you can read the ancient Greek and Latin, then kudos to you. Why do you feel the need to constantly brag about it on the internet… blah blah blah {/quote}

    There you go again, missing the point (intentionally, or otherwise) and using argumentum ad hominem.

    The point being having knowledge and understanding of primary sources in their original language. In respect of Western occultism and especially alchemy this means being able to read important texts such as the Corpus Hermeticum and the Greek Magical Papyri (in Greek, obviously) and Latin Renaissance alchemical texts. Of course it helps if one is also able to read Arabic MSs such as Shams al-Ma’arif.

    You et al always seem to want to reduce everything down to the personal level. Which is par for the course in respect of internet discussions about occultism in general and especially about the O9A. You et al seem unable to engage in a serious intellectual discussion based on knowledge of primary sources and certainly never ever admit you don’t have enough (or any) knowledge of such primary sources to participate in such an intellectual discussion. All you have is argumentum ad hominem and argumentum ad nauseam.

    As for your quip about “us” never admitting we’re wrong, we have stated many times that our conclusions are based on our still limited knowledge and may be in error and subject to revision. But at least “we” do have knowledge of important primary sources. Do you?

    Like

    1. I don’t have to admit to not being able to read stuff in ancient Greek or Latin or Arabic because I’ve never claimed the knowledge of these languages in the first place. I also don’t recall VK Jehannum making such claims. I keep wondering why you are making such a big fuss about other people giving their personal interpretations of the ONA mythos based on the stuff they discovered and read or based on their own interests and experience? Why are you making such a fuss about people coming to their own conclusions and trying to figure out things for themselves even if those conclusions might be wrong? Why are you constantly preaching ex cathedra?

      Like

      1. Anna C wrote: {quote} I keep wondering why you are making such a big fuss about other people giving their personal interpretations {/quote}

        VJK – et al – are not making “interpretations”, they are claiming certain things about the ONA, such as that the O9A Atazoth is derived from, or is the same as Azathoth. That’s a particular claim which requires evidence to support it.

        All we are doing is asking for evidence of such claims, evidence from primary sources.

        In respect of At-azoth, “we” quote primary texts such as De Alchimia Opuscula Complura Veterum Philosophorum {1}, Theatrum Chemicum Britannicum {2}, the Viatorium of Maieri {3}, and Rosarium Philosophorum {4}. Heck, we have even provided images from some of those texts. We provided a reference to a Latin Renaissance source which seems to contradict the O9A statement about Azoth not being mercurius {5}. We even provided links to where those interested can read all those books.

        In respect of Azothoth being At-azoth, VKJ simply quotes tertiary sources such as Grant and Moult.

        That you don’t seem to know the difference between an “interpretation” and a “claim” is interesting, although methinks you really do know the difference and are just trolling.

        Yet again, no self-described satanist seems interested in pursuing, let alone intellectually discussing, our sources. Instead, they resort (as usual) to argumentum ad hominem and argumentum ad nauseam, and also seem (again as usual) unable to admit that their occult knowledge, based on primary sources, is limited.

        {1} https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=SQ9Non4XspUC
        {2} https://archive.org/details/theatrumchemicum00ashm
        {3} https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=jIxmAAAAcAAJ
        {4} MS Ferguson 210, University of Glasgow Library.
        {5} https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Lvm1pP4MFIwC

        Like

  14. Anna C wrote: {quote} Learning from Pathei Mathos takes decades. If we look at Myatt’s life and assume he is honest in his writings, then we will see that for the large part of his life he was proud, arrogant and convinced he was right. Only later on he learned humility {/quote}

    I agree. ONA writings have always stressed that it takes decades for an initiate to progress along the Seven Fold Way into and beyond The Abyss. Several ONA writings (1980s on) emphasize the need to cultivate empathy and an honest self-knowing (via the internal adept rite for example). Such self-knowing implies a certain humility which the O9A rite of the abyss cultivates still further. There is then a balance between the ‘sinister’ (might is right, egoism, etc) and the ‘numinous’ (empathy, self-knowing, humility, etc). All this makes the ONA very different from Levey-type satanism, with some saying that it makes the ONA not a satanist ‘movement’ at all, but a distinct modern occult tradition.

    Like

  15. I enjoyed this essay. Like all of your essays here, its full of very interesting information. This is one thing lacking in Niners you see online. They lack the ability to writing anything of substance. They also lack the ability to objectively and critically research the actual origins and inspiring or influencing sources of the ONA.

    Instead they simply accept the narrative given to them by the one-man inner circle. And yeah, most of us all know Wyrdsister is one man.

    What’s indicative is how such Niners react and behave when presented with objective data such as what you have presented.

    Regarding the brief mention of who has access to the o9a.org website, that website is owned by Prozack who owns this site (among many others): http://www.anus.com/

    The o9a.org site is actually hosted on Prozack’s private webhost. The webhost is in the city of Brea, Orange County California; which is the same city Chloe Ortega is from. o9a.org was given to Chloe Ortega of the White Star Acception many years ago. She gave two other individuals login passwords to access that site. One person was known as Saturnyan, who once maintained a wordpress called Project Polaris. The other person is Dark Lianna, so-called “Old Guard.” The individual Saturnyan was disliked by many Niners for his overt association with child pornography.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. As an added note, Prozack, real name Brett Stevens, has recently published a book by Manticore, titled ‘Nihilism, a philosophy based on nothingness and eternity’ which is available on Amazon. Brett, in private, was working to merge Myatt’s Numinous Way concepts with concepts from his ANUS. I have a lot of respect for individuals like Brett. Unlike these internet Niners, he doesn’t worship Myatt/Long, doesn’t get involved in this internet o9a shit. He just keeps his inspiration and influence derived from Myatt/Long and uses such inspiration and influence under the radar, in his own ways.

    It’s the countless unknown and unnamed individuals like this – who have been in some way inspired and/or influenced by Myatt/Long – who take what they get from studying Myatt/Long and use it privately in their own lives, under the radar, in their own ways, that will in time keep o9a alive… not these internet nexions.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Well said, and I agree. Myatt/Long has influenced many people, world-wide, the vast majority of whom do not rant and rave via the internet.

      I look forward to reading Brett’s Nihilism book. What seems to have been overlooked by many is that the O9A is anarchic in both theory and praxis. Anton Long wrote that “we uphold anarchism”, in a letter to Aquino dated September 1990ev.

      Like

      1. @Wyrdsister: It is a good book, consisting of many essays. Nothing occultish. Back in the old days, Brett had the idea of subtly putting Myatt’s ideas and concepts into philosophical essays which would be marketed to a completely different market other than the ignorant and childish internet-occult/satanic market. Interesting to note that over these past few years, while internet nexions and internet Niners come and go, fight and argue over nonsense, a person like Brett just kept to himself, unnoticed by the internet o9a crowd, and stuck with his idea.

        There is the internet… and then there is real life. I think the labyrinth of BS found on the internet – the sinister games, the trolling, the japes, plus the silly squabbles – are just that, internet activities; which are in essence, inevitably transient in nature. I question anyone who gets lost in this ephemeral medium, and believes its content of o9a village gossip to be more than such.

        Asking who was behind the o9a.org site and who has access to it was a good and telling question. As it can show some few intelligent people with a critical mind, the actually quality or character, or intent of certain individuals regarding o9a beneath the internet pageantries or propaganda and mythos and reputation building in the public mind. Prozack, Chloe Ortega, Saturnyan, the OG… they are all very different types of people beneath the internet roles and troll they may play. They all work in their own way – no matter how controversial and unconventional – to promote the body of philosophy developed by Myatt/Long.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Henry Tremendous wrote: {quote} There is the internet… and then there is real life […] a person like Brett just kept to himself, unnoticed by the internet o9a crowd, and stuck with his idea. {/quote}

          Yes, indeed, that’s what real. “We” sometimes get caught in ‘the internet trap’, no one to blame but ourselves. Kudos to those who do not get so caught.

          Liked by 1 person

  17. Big news, everyone! I stumbled across conclusive evidence that AC was right about WyrdSister, and for that reason, I will be awarding her the EXCLUSIVE honor of being the first and only person banned from commenting on my blog!

    I doubted AC’s postulation at first, and I’ll admit I was mistaken. While I will leave all but one of her comments up (idk how to ban a bitch without removing at least one comment so I’ll pick a short one), she will not be allowed to weigh in any further.

    She has raised a fuss about me removing comments of hers in the past and she likely will again, but since she does not permit comments on her blog, you can all rest assured that such fussing is entirely disingenuous. Toodles!

    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