The fundamental point of this essay is to analyse the veracity of the O9A’s origin story as presented, consisting of two aspects: the merging of the supposedly distinct Camlad/Rounwytha, Noctulian, and Temple of the Sun traditions; and the existence of some Grand Mistress, predating Anton long, who ushered in this merge.

Surprisingly, unlike most other elements of the O9A that have been subject to critical scrutiny, few seem to have critiqued the historical (and almost certainly ‘mythologised’) account of the O9A’s history that it provides, except by flagging the story as being of the O9A’s own report. That is, there seems to be no systemised attempt at analysing the truth of the claims, and certainly none using the O9A’s own manuscripts towards such an effort.

As such, this essay will explore certain contradictions and inconsistencies in the O9A’s own corpus, eventually reaching the conclusion that both aspects of the O9A’s origin story (both the merge and the Mistress) are part of the O9A’s Labyrinthos Mythologicus. That is, both are exaggerations and mythologisations to cover up the rather mundane reality of how the O9A came to exist, to afford the O9A a certain level of ‘mystique’.

The Noctulians and the Temple of the Sun

An integral part of the O9A’s own internal mythology, as presented, is that the O9A emerged from three distinct esoteric traditions, those being the Noctulians, the Temple of the Sun, and Camlad (the Rounwytha). The Temple of the Sun will be integrated shortly, and the Rounwytha elements will be dealt with in a later subsection.

For a second, let’s focus on the Noctulians specifically. In the entire O9A corpus, they are mentioned extremely scantily (around a dozen times at best), and the information about them is garbled to say the least. It is suggested originally, in Falcifer, that the “Noctulians” were a Satanist group operating out of Hull in Yorkshire, also going by the names “The Temple of Satan” and “Friends of Lucifer”, and that it had “Temples in various other cities” [1]. It was later suggested, seemingly by Julie Wright, that the Noctulians instead represented some “pagan” tradition, “old” and “indigenous” [2] as the Rounwytha are supposed to be.

There is a contradiction here, however. A core aspect of a pagan understanding to the O9A is the absence of names for acausal entities [3], and while in Falcifer there are gestures towards this, with its mention of “They who are never named” [2], the core issue is that elsewhere Baphomet and Satan are both named. This movement towards a pantheon of nameless gods seems far more in the vein of Lovecraft and not the ‘pagan’ roots Julie claims, especially given that the “Noctulians” in Falcifer are more than happy to participate in ceremonial sorcery, another trait that pagans supposedly did not do [4].

Lovecraft is mentioned in-text, and his mythos defended as being “a corruption of a secret tradition”, that “he made his Old Ones loathsome and repulsive”, but “these so-called ‘Dark Gods’ (...) might be shape changers” [1]. Even this apparent shape-changing trait is not unique to the O9A, and can be seen in other Lovecraftian gods like Nyarlathotep, who happens (100% coincidentally) to be connected to Azathoth, or Atazoth in O9A diction.

But, in the Falcifer passage an active parallel is drawn between the Old Ones of Lovecraft, and the ‘Dark Gods’ of the Noctulians. Lovecraft’s themes of horrific forces beyond human control, and even beyond human comprehension, are very apparent in how the Dark Gods are explained elsewhere, with it being stated that “these darker forces (...) are beyond our conscious control (and even real understanding) until we become part of them.” [5]

All of this to say, Julie Wright is almost certainly incorrect in her assertion that the Noctulians were operating as some sinister pagan tradition in any way comparable to the Rounwytha. At least as they are described in Falcifer, they seem to have been an amalgamation of Lovecraftian and ‘Satanic’ ideas. This is especially likely as she is also incorrect about the Temple of the Sun, similarly calling them “pagan” [2]. But, there are some other eccentricities about the Noctulians that ought to be discussed.

It is very noteworthy that the Noctulians as a group are entirely absent in one of the O9A’s portrayals of its own history, and also conflicts with the presentation given elsewhere. In it, it’s stated that there was a secret tradition (note, singular) passed from individual to individual, and in the 1960s the supposed Mistress of said tradition desired a new name, choosing “the Order of Nine Angles”. But, noticeably, “the autonomous groups also adopted their own names, as sub-Temples within the order. One of these was ‘Camlad’, another was ‘The Temple of the Sun’” [6]. The Noctulians are not mentioned at all in this history, not as one of the “autonomous groups” within, even though the Black Order is mentioned, which should be comparatively non-important to the O9A’s history.

Similarly, there is no mention of meeting another Satanic group in Bealuwes Gast, aside from The Orthodox Temple of The Prince, who do not seem to fit the character of the Noctulians, given their leader is described as a “charlatan”, and more pertinently their location in Manchester and not Hull. The Temple of the Sun is mentioned outright in the text, detailed rather in-length, and a supposed “Rounwytha” figure also makes an appearance. Much like the other history of the O9A that failed to mention the Noctulians, their omission from Bealuwes Gast is very telling indeed.

Further, it’s worth focusing on the location mentioned for the Noctulians, Hull. It just so happens that elsewhere, the Temple of the Sun is mentioned as being “active in the north of England (around Manchester, Leeds, and Hull)” [7]. It would be fairly strange for two Satanic occult groups (“avowedly satanist Temple of the Sun” [8]) to be operating around the exact same area at the exact same time, especially one as comparatively small (a population no more than 350,000 in the 1970s) and unimportant to the occult milieu as Hull.

Perhaps then, it’s worth dwelling on who exactly this “Noctulius” is. As I have suggested elsewhere (q.v “The Dark Gods, Spheres, and the Star Game”), based on esoteric correspondences, this Noctulius figure seems to be Dionysus. However, such an esoteric-based argument is no longer needed (credit due to Azif Erebor) because Dionysus is known to have the Nyctelios epithet (Νυκτέλιος [9]). The O9A has used seemingly obscure epithets to refer to Greek gods before, for example “Sauroctonos”, similarly a dark god, is a known epithet of Apollo. The explanation for differences in etymology likely comes from Noctulius being a Latinized form of Nyctelios, with the Latin “Noct-” replacing the Greek “Nyct-”, both referring to night, and the Latin masculine “-ius” suffix replacing the Greek masculine “-ios” suffix.

It might be tempting to claim that the O9A’s Noctulius is derivative of the Lovecraftian Nyctelios (from the Expanded Cthulhu Mythos), but the first instance of Nyctelios seems to be in 1992, and thus Noctulius, being mentioned in the 1970s Falcifer novel via the ‘Noctulians’, appears to pre-date Nyctelios. However, what is worth mentioning with this Lovecraftian Nyctelios is that he is explicitly identified with Dionysus, “Humanity has given this entity many names throughout the ages: Dionysus, (...)” [10], once again strengthening the basis for identifying Noctulius with Dionysus.

What’s interesting then is that the Temple of the Sun seems to carry exactly this Dionysian element about them. Apparently, “Satan was personified in a somewhat Dionysian or Luciferian manner, and which invariably ended with the participants pairing off in a rather Bacchanalian way.” Given that another rite of this Temple of the Sun had a ceremony “concerning a personified Mars and Venus” [11], this may have been a very literal description, with Satan being conflated with both Lucifer and Dionysus.

Which brings up the main point. It seems very likely that the Noctulians and the Temple of the Sun were actually one group, not two separate groups. If they are indeed one group, and not two, it would go a long way in explaining the names used, with the “Noctulians” referring to Dionysus, “The Temple of the Sun” and “Friends of Lucifer” referring to Lucifer given his connections to the rising of dawn as the Morning Star, and “The Temple of Satan” referring, obviously, to Satan.

This would also go a long way to explain their comparative absence in the O9A. Whilst Camlad is featured the most through the Way of the Rounwytha, there are still extant materials from the Temple of the Sun, such as the Book of Wyrd. Aside from their existence in Falcifer (which is, allegedly, “entertaining sinister fiction” [12] of dubious entertainment capabilities), and the demonstrably false notions of Julie Wright, there is nothing really said about the Noctulians, and there certainly seem to be no surviving texts from the group. It has even been claimed by one R. Parker in 2012 (who really ought to know better) that the Noctulians were “Fenland/Cantabrigian” and “hermetic” [13], which he is keen to distinguish from the “pagan” Camlad tradition and the “satanic” Temple of the Sun, completely contradicting the 1970s established placement of the Noctulians in Yorkshire.

Unlike the Camlad/Rounwytha, which are consistently maintained to be located in Shropshire/the Western Marches; and the Temple of the Sun, which is consistently maintained to be located in the north (Manchester especially), there is exactly zero consistency about the Noctulians. It is supposedly pagan and ancient like the Rounwytha but simultaneously also Satanic and engaging in ceremonial sorcery; it is in Hull but also somehow simultaneously 150 miles away in Cambridge. The simplest and clearest answer to these contradictions and absences is just that the Noctulians did not exist as a separate group. At best, the name might be an attempt at identifying the Temple of the Sun prior to Myatt’s own involvement with the group, but realistically, it was bolted on post-hoc to mythologise the group’s origin story.

The Rounwytha and the False Mistress

Contrary to the O9A’s own telling of the Rounwytha being part of the three traditions to form the O9A, the Rounwytha are scarcely mentioned at all historically. Indeed, it is bizarrely difficult to find a non-revised text before yf121 (2009-2010) that even mentions the Rounwytha, let alone deals with them at-length. Indeed, the earliest explicit mention of the Rounwytha seems to date to 117yf, found in the Rite of the Abyss as given in Enantiodromia, which would place them as officially existing in 2005-2006.

Unlike the concrete existence of the Satanic elements of the O9A dating back well into the 1960s, via the Temple of the Sun, the very earliest the Rounwytha can be placed seems to be 1990 [14], and this is very generously assuming the vaguely pagan and explicitly Arthurian tradition which the Mistress is supposedly heir to, with no mentions of acausal empathy or the ‘Rounwytha’ at all, is identical to the Rounwytha as described in the early 2000s.

This late entry into the O9A sphere was actually noted by Anton Long himself, in an interview. Yet, rather than any real credible explanation, all that is found are excuses and mythologisations, “hitherto withhold esoteric traditions”, withheld “because the aural traditions were not explicit” [15], and thus readers are supposed to just believe that it took over 30 years since Long’s ‘ascension’ to the position of Grand Master (more on this soon) for him to be able to write down such “wordless” insights. It is also conveniently unfalsifiable.

Or, even more pathetically, that he had “the (...) somewhat naïve hope that someone else might fit all the published pieces together”, with one of the pieces of evidence being used for this being a “late nineteen seventies (...) particularly vulgar causal calender [sic]” [15] seemingly referring to the Wheel of Life, present in Naos, attributed to 1979.

Yet this wheel and its descriptions do not mention dark empathy at all, nor alchemical seasons, nor even a far vaguer sensitivity to nature. What is emphasised in its description is its supposed belonging to the “genuine Western tradition”, the supposed failure of using the external shape of a constellation to determine its esoteric qualities, and the importance of direct, practical experience in occult matters [16]. That is, practically, there is exactly nothing to ascertain, nothing to “fit (...) together” [15], because the Wheel of Life as presented in Naos has no connections at all to ‘feminine’ or empathic themes that one could amalgamate to arrive at the existence of the Rounwytha. It is a post-hoc rationalisation.

The specific nature of this ‘tradition’ also seems to be highly variable. It is stated that the Way of the Rounwytha has “no ritual or Occult or ‘wiccan’ or ‘satanist’ elements at all” [17], and that the Rounwytha “needs (...) no esoteric ceremonies, rituals, chants, or whatever” [18]. Yet, oopsie, “there are only three rites of this tradition” [18], the Internal Adept rite, the Rite of the Abyss, and the Giving. Indeed, the text that claims that the Rounwytha “needs (...) no esoteric ceremonies, rituals, chants, or whatever” is the same exact one that claims that the Way of the Rounwytha has three rites, yet it bizarrely does not seem to catch its own contradiction.

Perhaps these ritualistic elements might be explained through the divisions the O9A creates itself, of external magick/ceremonial sorcery, intended for impact on the physical world, and internal magick, aimed at altering the mind. Yet, oopsie, because the Grimoire of Baphomet, which contains one of the answers to the questions of an Internal Adept, just so happens to have a rather lurid ceremonial rite, the Rite of Acausal Existence, “performed alone by a single Rounwytha, or by two” [19] that claims to grant those that undergo the ceremony with an immortal, acausal existence.

Indeed, what a Rounwytha is even supposed to be is inconsistent. It is claimed that the term Rounwytha refers to those “naturally possessed the gift of Dark-Empathy”, that the “rare individuals (...) naturally gifted with Dark-Empathy” are “traditionally called by the name Rounwytha”, [20]. Yet later, in another manuscript, it was claimed that the basis of the Rounwytha tradition is “the cultivation and use of (...) empathy”, with there being “training” for the Rounwytha (traditionally’ consisting of an extended Internal Adept rite and a Rite of the Abyss), but in another case of Myatt’s own fetishism leaking through, has supposedly expanded to include martial arts [17]. Naturally, a sixty year old hedge witch needs to be able to throw down with any rude lad who befalls upon her most sinister abode.

While some might take this ‘training’ to be about refining Dark-Empathy, and thus not being naturally at odds with the claims that the Dark-Empathy of the Rounwytha is inborn, there is the claim that “esoteric empathy” is “learned” through the Rite of Internal Adept (two or three alchemical seasons), followed by the Rite of the Abyss. Dark-Empathy is itself “a refinement of (...) natural empathy” [20].

Hence the clarification that while the term Rounwytha “traditionally only applied to those naturally gifted with acausal-empathy and acausal thinking” (with acausal-empathy being synonymous with “Dark Empathy”), the term “is now generally used to describe a sorcerer (...) who has acquired and who has developed skill in - or who has a natural ability and a natural skill in - both acausal empathy and acausal thinking”. What a Rounwytha was categorically did indeed slide, given the prior inconsistency about rituals, and the time-frame between the texts of about 3 years or so, it’s hard to see how such a supposedly ancient tradition managed to change so rapidly.

Further, where one would probably expect the Rounwytha to show up pre-2000s, such as around opfer selection given its supposed inheritance from the Rounwytha tradition [23], they are simply absent. Instead, there is talk of needing “the advice of a Master/Lady Master”, and even that the acts are a “reasoned, non-emotional, judgement”, a kind of “‘Satanic’ Court of Judgement’” [24]. This is despite the nature of the Rounwytha’s empathy as affective (and thus emotional) [25], thus suggesting that the Rounwytha justification was later bolted on, and was not native to the original Satanic, Darwinian, rationalistic justification present prior.

Note also the chronological order of the Deofel Quintet novels here, too. The overtly satanic Falcifer is the first by quite a fair bit, first published around 1976, whereas most of the other Quartet novels are authored in the mid 1980s. The Giving, whose revised version focuses on the Rounwytha, was first published in 1990, decidedly later than Falcifer, and oddly late in the series, placing itself right at the 1990s mark earlier mentioned as being the first potential mention of the Way of the Rounwytha whatsoever.

The Mistress, supposedly heir to the Rounwytha tradition [8] [26] is not of much use in verifying the Rounwytha either, for her own details are contradictory, and she seems to be the product of her own mythologisation. It is also claimed that the same Mistress is the originator of the O9A’s Esoteric Chant [6], despite, as mentioned before, chants being categorically excluded from what the Rounwytha are supposed to do. Further, she is elsewhere described as belonging to a kind of “primal Satanism”, not a form of paganism, which would place her very close to the Satanist Temple of the Sun.

What little details exist of the Mistress largely come from Bealuwes Gast, and slip into the same boring and faux-spiritual register as Myatt’s supposed encounter with the Rounwytha. Lacking in any real verifiable autobiographical details, indeed explained away as being “so brief, far too brief”, despite the precision found elsewhere in the text, her section is conveniently also unfalsifiable. The only real information available is that the Mistress apparently had a daughter, Myatt managed to have a daughter of his own with the Mistress’ daughter, and they moved to Australia, for super secret sinister strategic reasons of course.

Naturally the Mistress’ daughter, much like the Rounwytha and the supposedly distinct female head of the Temple of the Sun, are all so eager to gift the young Myatt with their bodies. Perhaps it was his diminutive, nay, average height that made them swoon; perhaps it was the characteristic red beard, which was not at all large and paired well with his green eyes. Regardless, these details of the trysts of Myatt are extremely integral to the book, and do not serve to inflate his ego whatsoever.

The real nail in the coffin here is that the O9A is described in Bealuwes Gast as being “his own occult group” [20]. While some may see this as simply being about his succession to the position of Grand Master, in an interview, perhaps forgetting his own mythologisations or not caring, Anton Long outright states that this lady Mistress “inspired (him) to form the ONA, based as the ONA was on her rather vague traditions and on my own practical sinister experience” [27].

The Reconstructed Tale

The most likely story here is that Myatt joined the Temple of the Sun in the late 1960s., pushing it away from its originally more pagan-satanic syncretism and artistic nature, and instead towards more overt satanism and ceremonial sorcery. He also tries to use the Temple as a neonazi honeytrap [28], perhaps later on, after he is given more control and his own Temple in Leeds. He eventually develops the Order of Nine Angles to focus on the satanic and neonazi elements, and tries to funnel members from The Temple of the Sun, and the Orthodox Temple of the Prince, into his own Order of Nine Angles. Regardless, at some point he leaves the Temple of the Sun, either of his own volition or after being removed, and the Temple of the Sun seemingly collapses sometime after his departure [11].

The combined membership of the Temple of the Sun’s various Temples seems to have been somewhere between 13 and 29 members based on various sources [2] [6]. The conflicting reports on membership usually settle between being below two dozen and below thirty, perhaps suggesting that the membership was around the threshold of 24 (and hence the alternation between no more than two dozen/below thirty), suggesting a membership instead in the low to mid twenties. Either way, a range of membership count in the low twenties seems reasonable, perhaps even conservative.

While it’s claimed “nearly all members of [the Temple of the Sun] joined the ONA” [6], given that the 1970s Order of Nine Angles membership was reported to be “a dozen or so” [29], and that at least a few of those recruited into the Order of Nine Angles came from the Orthodox Temple of the Prince as per Bealuwes Gast, this seems blatantly false. Even to go against the implied membership count in the 20s and suggest it was instead somehow far lower in the mid to high teens, this would put the people involved with the Temple of the Sun at well over “a dozen or so”. The description that the numbers “never exceeded thirty” [6] really necessitates a hard floor above twenty anyway, as if it was below twenty, that would be the descriptor used.

But to continue with this mid to high teens example, if nearly all joined the ONA, and additional recruits were found in the Orthodox Temple of the Prince, that member count should have been maintained or even expanded. Indeed, given that the Temple of Set suspects the Order of Nine Angles to be the work of David Myatt alone, and that Myatt only claims Christos Beest/Richard Moult as proof that there are others involved beyond him [30], it’s hard to see the Order of Nine Angles as even being anywhere near the double digits during its time in Shropshire.

The identity of the Mistress is harder to pin down, but the mythologised encounter described in Bealuwes Gast is most certainly false. Swelling with purple lesions, black bile spilling from its lips, it is perhaps the epitome of Myatt’s pretentious and pseudo-mystical tendencies to cover falsity. Rather, as the woman is identified as being a satanist [27], the simplest answer seems to be that she was instead the female leader of the Temple of the Sun. Her non-monogamous and sexually liberated relationship with her husband (“her husband was occupied elsewhere, sometimes with a younger man” [11]) indeed may have been the basis for the same dynamic that is seen in Falcifer. It’s also worth noting here that the encounter with said Mistress is chronologically very close to his initiation into the Temple of the Sun.

Regardless, Myatt pushes this emergent Order of the Nine Angles in a more overtly Lovecraftian and satanic direction. Inspired by the Ceremony of the Nine Angles, authored by Michael Aquino and which absolutely coincidentally happens to be in the Lovecraftian section of the Church of Satan’s book The Satanic Rituals, Myatt takes whatever satanism was present in the Temple of the Sun and begins introducing Lovecraftian themes over time.

Unfortunately for Myatt, this neonazi occult orgy doesn’t fare very well in the occult scene at large, with their Fenrir magazine, even under Richard Moult’s editorial watch in the 1990s, selling “around 10-20 copies (...) per issue (“indeed, I recall selling the magical number of 7 of one issue”) [31]. Such a low selling only reinforces the earlier assertion that the O9A in Shropshire was nowhere near a dozen members, and likely had little (if any) real footprint at the time. This is within Moult’s self-described “idiot’s tale with a number of fables and exaggerations” autobiography Myndsquilver, which should naturally seek to exaggerate and inflate the importance of the O9A, yet all it can muster is details of the O9A as “shadowy, obscure”, perhaps only being notable due to its “rumours of sacrifice”.

It was only in the late 1980s to the early 2000s, seemingly thanks to the influence of Richard Moult and his editions of Fenrir over the Order, that the O9A began introducing non-satanic pagan elements relating to the Arthurian tradition. The Way of the Rounwytha emerged around this time, with “Camlad” being first mentioned referring to this Arthurian tradition in 1990 [14], and the Rounwytha developing into a full ‘way’ sometime in the early 2000s. Myatt, for whatever reason (presumably disliking Moult’s own tendencies away from the dark/sinister) attempts to expel him, but Moult seemingly leaves of his own volition in the 2000s [31].

Eventually, as Chloe Ortega and her allies (Kayla et al) come across the O9A, and eventually come to the fore, the O9A becomes increasingly digitalised and digital-native. This is what leads to the true propagation of the O9A across the internet, and is perhaps why Chloe Ortega was eventually named Outer Representative, despite her own admitted lack of knowledge about the O9A [32]. This is the extent to which the history of the O9A will be hypothesised in this essay, as in the mid to late 2010s things become considerably messier and more difficult to track.

Vonixa Tiresia

ZLD, C.2364

References

[1] Falcifer - Lord of Darkness

[2] The Order of Nine Angles in Historical, and Esoteric, Context

[3] Denotatum - The Esoteric Problem with Names

[4] Some Notes on the Rounwytha Way

[5] An Introduction to Traditional Satanism

[6] Concerning the Traditions of the ONA

[7] Appendix: A Note Concerning The Book of Wyrd

[8] Myths, Legends, Dark Gods, and Occult Mystique

[9] AP9.524.14, Plu.2.389a, Paus.1.40.6.

[10] https://www.tentacules.net/toc/toc/tocyclo_fiche.php?id=353&type=crea

[11] Bealuwes Gast

[12] A Complete Guide To The Seven-Fold Sinister Way

[13] Some Advice For Neophytes Regarding The Order of Nine Angles

[14] The Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown - Volume II

[15] Baeldraca - From Causal to Acausal Terror

[16] Naos - A Practical Guide to Modern Magick

[17] The Rounwytha Way in History and Context

[18] The Rounwytha Way - Our Sinister Feminine Archetype

[19] The Grimoire of Baphomet

[20] A Glossary of Order of Nine Angles Terms (118yf, revised 123yf)

[22] Praxis and Theory of The Order of Nine Angles

[23] The Dark Goddess as Archetype

[24] Fenrir - Volume IV, Number I

[25] Questions From A Rounwytha Initiate

[26] The Rounwytha Tradition

[27] Some Questions About Satanism (submitted by one “Hannah L.” circa 2011)

[28] The Ethos of Extremism - Some Reflexions on Politics and A Fanatical Life

[29] A Note Concerning The Book of Wyrd

[30] The Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown - Volume I

[31] Richard Moult - Statements On Art & The Occult

[32] Notes on Outer Representative (authored by Chloe352)

Therefore, the purpose of this essay will be to analyse themes of homosexuality within the O9A corpus, firstly female homosexuality, and then male homosexuality. There will also be a brief analysis of transgender and transsexual themes, but as these themes are almost entirely absent from the corpus, this section will be brief, analysing a peripheral text that seems to be endorsed.

It must be stressed that the O9A’s views on homosexuality do not make the group somehow more tolerable. The group not being homophobic doesn’t erase the greater concerns with extremism, terrorism, and criminal behaviours present within many adherents. Rather, the point is that if the O9A is to be properly understood, this includes an understanding of how the O9A defines its own views around sexuality, rather than assumptions due to its associations with far-right milieus.

This essay will not be the blanket praise that other authors have offered with regards to LGBT depictions within O9A literature. Both the female and male homosexuality present within the O9A are deeply problematic in their own ways, and are wholly deserving of a closer critical analysis rather than mindless affirmation.

For the purposes of this essay, the obvious examples of homosexuality evident in Naos and in the Code of Kindred Honour will be ignored. If the point is merely demonstrating that these themes are present, irrefutably so, then they are the best sources; the spiral-bound 1989 edition of Naos has Sapphic and Uranian sections [2]. and the quote given above concerning kindred honour. However, to show that homosexuality is pervasive even beyond the obvious examples, I will not be using them, unless as supporting evidence for a tangentially related point.

Female Homosexuality

Female homosexuality, within the O9A, is referred to by the word “Sapphic”. Sapphic as a word is increasingly used in modern LGBT spaces to speak of women-loving-women (WLW) without regard to individual identity as gay or bisexual, and also sometimes to include non-binary lesbians who identify as something other than men (non-man loving non-man, NMLNM). Both “Sapphic” and “Lesbian” are ultimately derived from Sappho of Lesbos, an ancient Greek poet whose poems are often viewed as containing female homoerotic content, though there is debate about to what extent modern labels like “Lesbian” or “Sapphic” can be used to describe her work.

Female homosexuality is by far the most evident kind of homosexuality within the O9A corpus, rivalling heterosexuality in how frequently it is portrayed. Within the Deofel Quartet, Melanie (one of the two female protagonists) is bisexual, and female homosexuality is a recurring theme, with it also stated that Miranda from Falcifer is bisexual, and heavily suggested that Denise (also from Falcifer) is/was similarly bisexual.

Indeed, in Breaking the Silence Down, the focus is predominantly on a love-triangle between Diane, Leonie, and Rachael. Whilst the stated author is David Myatt and not ‘Anton Long’, it is often referred to in company with the other O9A novels (the Deofel Quartet), turning that Quartet into a Quintet [3], and thus the novel should be viewed as similarly reflective of the O9A’s views and esotericism.

There is an entire text dedicated to praising Sapphic relationships [4], it is stated that “Many, although not all, ONA Rounwytha nexions are Sapphic” [5], that one aspect of the Rounwytha tradition is “the acceptance of Sapphism as natural and indeed as necessary” and thus this acceptance “influences the larger ONA and our kindred beyond” and is why the O9A “have and always have had many Sapphic nexions and groups” [6], and even further that Sapphism is “to an extent, esoterically important” [7].

The material is just so blatant and extensive as to be pointless to analyse. Compared to male homosexuality, which requires more inference and analysis to properly decode, the female homosexuality is comparatively very obvious.

There is, however, something to be noted with regard to how sapphism is portrayed in the O9A; it is fetishistic. Sapphism within the O9A is far less of an inhabited worldview than it is an eroticised object of devotion. The O9A is almost obsessed with ensuring that all women involved in lesbian encounters are soft and feminine, so much so that it often ignores the lived reality of a lesbian relationship, of the people involved, and of the masculine (‘butch’) lesbians often in these spaces.

Principle in this is the text Sapphic Sorcery - In Praise of the Feminine. Whilst the author seemingly was aware of lesbian literature, with the “well of loneliness” mentioned being a historical novel by John Radclyffe Hall, there is little engagement with the themes of the novel, focused as it is on the idea of sexual inversion, for a female this being “the masculine soul, heaving in the female bosom” [8]. The novel essentially centres on a butch lesbian experience, and the irony between the very butch-focused Well of Loneliness, and total butch erasure of Sapphic Sorcery, is telling.

This is even more glaring given John as the author, formerly Marguerite, changed her name to a more masculine version based on a noted resemblance to a male ancestor of hers by Mabel Batten, another WLW. Sapphic Sorcery never takes the time to critique, or ‘invert’, the themes of sexual inversion, instead obsessively and ad nauseam cataloguing the same plain descriptions of women being soft and delicate. It suggests a mere surface level understanding of the Well of Loneliness as ‘lesbian literature’, as a deliberate move against the themes in the novel would require more engagement and intellectual criticism.

Note also, the text’s obsession with categories and words rather than genuine passion. Apparently the main reason the author finds to love women is “they are not men”. Not for their personalities, not because of anything supposedly unique about women, but just because they do not have a penis. The verbal rhetoric of a “delicate, soft” woman is repeated ad nauseam, with no real explanation of exactly how said woman is soft and delicate, no texture that would suggest any real-world experience of a Sapphic relationship.

For a piece supposedly about women who love women, there is also an incessant focus on men, There are eight textual references to excluding men in the piece, all within the span of a page and a half. The relation of lesbians to men seems to occupy the author’s mind as much as lesbians relate to other lesbians, it is almost as though it was written by a heterosexual male author with a male audience in mind. The similarities to a piece written by Anton Long (‘The Difference Between Us’) is striking, with both ranting and raving incessantly about a supposed distinction either between Sapphics and non-Sapphics, or the Drecc and the mundanes, spewing forth a wall of rhetoric with evidently zero lived reality behind it.

Perhaps this helps to explain the obsession with love between feminine, ‘soft’ women, as the heterosexual male gaze is primed only to see women as beautiful when they are sufficiently feminine; and will only view these women as recipients of desire, not as active (‘masculine’) givers of it. Hence also then, the need to define lesbianism through its exclusion of men rather than through its embrace of women. To some male authors, lesbianism can become an object of fetishistic desire exactly because it excludes men, for some there is a strong allure to what is forbidden.

A feminine lesbian might very well prefer other feminine women, a particularly radical lesbian might even seek to exclude masculine lesbians the same way that some masculine gay men exclude feminine gay men, but what indicates the author being male is the very vapidness in the position. It focuses almost exclusively on the surfaces of a relationship, such as through sex, the exclusion of men, and a supposed ‘softness’, but without any emotional complexity that would indicate real world lesbian experience. It is not even Decadent in its fixation on surfaces, as it repeatedly attempts to inject faux-spiritual deepness into itself via its purple prose phrases like “naked body to naked body as moonclad under the stars of night”.

Absent from the piece is any real blood. There is little sense of pain, of a lover gone, of yearning from afar. This is a repeated theme across O9A literature with regards to lesbian love, it is often mentioned and praised, but never truly inhabited. Whilst it is true that lesbian and bisexual women exist in the O9A novellas, these women are almost always the same femme fatale mommy trope that evidently got Myatt aroused, given the repetition of this trope in how the Dark Goddesses of the O9A are described, especially Baphomet. The women are rarely allowed to be women, complex humans with deep emotional backstories, vulnerable in their own ways, they must always be delicate, strong, ruthless, and empathic, perfect and ideal embodiments of some supposed sinister feminine essence. Not once in the O9A novellas are these sinister feminine types allowed to be incorrect.

It’s also worth noting here that femininity becomes a cage for women in the O9A in a way that masculinity is never a comparable cage for men. Women are encouraged to be “tough, skilled, and of inner strength, but still feminine” [7], whereas it is stated that “one of the secrets of the male adept (...) is their unification within themselves (for example (...) the archetypes re-presented by Satan and Baphomet”, a mythologisation of combining femininity and masculinity within one’s self, and that one of the traits of the “new type of male” is “Dark Empathy” [9], which dark empathy is stated elsewhere to be feminine [1]. In other words, men are encouraged, even expected, to develop their feminine sides whereas women are forbidden from doing just this.

Male Homosexuality

Similarly to lesbianism, male homosexuality is referenced to by a unique word in the O9A corpus, “Uranian”. Uranian is a historical word referring to both adult male-male sexuality, and also to refer to pederasty, both drawn from the distinctions made in Plato’s Symposium by the speaker Pausanias. He claims that Aphrodite Pandemos, the ‘earthly’ Aphrodite, is characterised by attraction to women and boys, whereas Aphrodite Urania, the ‘celestial’ Aphrodite, is characterised by attraction to young men.

While there is some academic suggestion that Pausanias was being critiqued by Plato in the Symposium, this association of Aphrodite Urania with homosexual love was nevertheless later utilised by Karl Ulrichs to create one of the first modern gay identities in the Urning (‘Uranian’ in English), entangled as it was with emergent theories about sexual inversion. It was later adopted by other gay rights activists such as John Addington Symonds (a pederast in his own right) and Edward Carpenter, and would also be applied to a pederastic group of English poets, this group interestingly being composed mostly of Christian clergy, called the Uranians. All four used the classical heritage and spiritual framing of Aphrodite Urania as a way to defend and justify their homosexual and/or pederastic impulses.

It is because of these pederastic undertones that “Uranian”, unlike “Sapphic”, has largely been abandoned in modern LGBT discourse, in favour of terms like Achillean. Given the classical inclinations of both Anton Long and the O9A itself, it is hard to believe that the pederastic undertones were not understood when the word was being used, given that Plato’s Symposium is a cornerstone of classical philosophy. Whether or not there is an endorsement of pederasty latent in this usage is a different question that will be analysed later, given that the word was used to refer to both adult male homosexuality and pederasty simultaneously.

With regard to adult male-male homosexuality, there are a few texts of note here, the first being The Greyling Owl, and especially the character Fenton. From his introduction, he is described as wearing a badge that “proclaimed him as a supporter of the ‘Gay Liberation Front’”, and later as being an “avowed homosexual”. There is somewhat of a caricature streak here, of Fenton being the token gay, as he is almost entirely defined by his sexuality. The framing of his sexuality is more important than critique of an individual character for this analysis however, because the O9A presents the Deofel Quartet (which The Greyling Owl is part of) as detailing elements of its esotericism [3].

The text goes out of its way to critique a more narratively central character, Colin, for thinking that Fenton’s attraction towards Colin “explain(s) all of Fenton’s behaviour”, and that through said attraction “he had found the key to unravel Fenton’s character”. That is, there is a critique of reducing someone’s character to just their sexual attractions, as Fenton himself more bluntly states, “Just because I’m gay doesn’t mean I’ve no moral standards”. Though there is a chance that the call is coming from inside the house, Colin himself might have some latent desires he can’t handle; he has an erotic dream of Fenton, and lacks the psychological awareness to properly process it, instead being evidently disturbed by the homoeroticism.

Unlike Colin, who is fairly blatantly manipulated by Fiona because of his inability to control his sexuality, displays an utter lack of empathy in his treatment of Andrea, and is often pleased with himself (as is typical of male characters being critiqued in the Quartet), Fenton only seems to display characteristics that the O9A views as beneficial. He is able to defend himself, as he fights earlier in the novel; he is obviously intellectually capable, being a University student and studying philosophy; his empathy and gentleness towards Andrea is especially emphasised, as within the novel he is the one who saves her life after her suicide attempt. In this sense, he is fairly akin to Thurstan from the Giving, both potentially being redolent of the “artistic/sensitive” character that is supposed to distinguish the rare male Rounwytha [10], though neither seem to be Rounwytha per se.

Further, if we are to take Christos Beest’s word, then there was an active O9A Uranian group for twenty years, alongside a Sapphic one [11]. The real world possibility of this is suspect at best, given the difficulty in not only recruiting sufficient numbers of Sapphic women and Uranian men, but also due to the convenient symmetry of the pairing. Regardless of the feasibility however, the framing of this, the lack of hostility or incredulity towards the existence of a Uranian group, and indeed the lack of further comment at all about said Uranian group, suggests that Beest did not view the Uranian orientation of the group as needing any justification nor comment, only requiring a mention of its existence. Said more plainly, a Uranian orientation was not viewed as contentious or contested by Beest.

This should not be a surprising observation, however. For the more well read, the Gay Black Mass stands out here, from the Black Book of Satan III (BBS III). The Mass not only describes a Uranian sexual ritual with a great degree of detail, it also goes out of its way to provide a framework for the creation of a Uranian Temple, including alternate title names for the Mistress (Deacon) and High Priestess (Acolyte) roles, as well as a suggestion of a sub-dedication of the Temple to Sapanur.

It’s important to note that there is somewhat of a complication here. For most online editions of BBS III, the Gay Black Mass will be missing as it was removed from later versions, but this should not be inherently conflated with the idea that the O9A’s stance on male homosexuality somehow changed. This is because another ritual was removed, the Mass of Heresy, a ritual of overt National Socialist tendencies. Obviously the O9A is not somehow against neonazism, thus the removal of the Gay Black Mass from the BBS III could be for a multitude of reasons that have nothing to do with a shift in stance towards male homosexuality.

Another text of note here is Breaking the Silence Down. As mentioned before, it centres on a Sapphic love-triangle, however the introduction is of note here. It claims that unlike the “polarity of male-female” heterosexual modes of development, the novel focuses on the “alternative, or gay (in this case, Sapphic) view”. Of interest here is the specificity which it takes to note that it is only “in this case, Sapphic” [12], suggesting that male homosexual combinations are equally as valid.

Even further, it says that “an understanding of this view is necessary for a complete integration of all divergent aspects of the individual psyche” [12]. That is, homosexuality is not only a valid alternate route for individual development, but an understanding of it is necessary for individuation, the attainment of the Internal Adept grade. Retroactively, this would explain why Colin’s inability to process his homoerotic dream with Fenton was lingered on in the Greyling Owl, and also explain Leonie’s suicide in Breaking the Silence Down too, both are unable to integrate their homoerotic desires (latent in Colin, denied by Leonie) into their psyche.

This also links back to the pederastic question mentioned before. One of the central points of the novel is the relationship between the teacher Diane and her student Rachael. Whilst Diane’s age is not outright stated, given her position as a teacher and her “unblemished” skin, it seems fair to assume that Diane is somewhere between her twenties and thirties, and Rachael is stated to be sixteen when Diane and Rachael begin engaging with each other sexually.

The text not only engages with Rachael being sixteen, with it repeatedly emphasising that other characters in the story see her as a “child”, other manuscripts even goes so far as to suggest that Rachael actively seduces Diane [3]. If the O9A is to be taken at its word, that adherents are not judged by gender, then this would mean that the same configuration but for males should also be permissible, that is, a relationship between an adult man and a 16 year old male.

Even ignoring Breaking the Silence Down, such themes of attraction to adolescents is mirrored in The Girl Goddess [14]. The same story is used, of a teacher and a student, except that here, the girl is stated to be fourteen at consummation, not sixteen, It also goes even further in explicitly eroticising the adolescence of the girl, her “burgeoning breasts”, and there is evident attraction to the girl even when she is as young twelve.

The text seemingly distinguishes this from gay attraction overall, with the teacher (who is also the narrator) claiming that “mention of this subject was difficult, even amongst gay friends”. Contrary to some suggestions, that this might’ve just been a taboo exploration of sexuality, deliberately false, it was claimed that this was a real-life account, originally published in Exeat, and that the version present in Fenrir is “expurgated” [15]. In other words, a teacher sexually engaging with her fourteen year old student is not only being justified through the claims of the “Goddess” manifest in the girl and references to Sappho, but also that this is a sanitised real-world example.

With this in mind, it’s perhaps worth visiting an instance of sexual involvement of males with children in the O9A, in the novel The Giving. This concerns the character Mallam especially; he quotes the Marquis de Sade, who infamously wrote about the molestation of both boys and girls. Mallam routinely is sexually involved with children, his “paedophile activities” as is elsewhere stated in the text, and ultimately is ritualistically killed by Lianna.

Despite this killing of Mallam, it is worth noting that in The Magickal Art of The Deofel Quartet, this is supposedly not a moral point. The text goes out of its way to specify that “he is not chosen because of his “evil” activities” [3], the aforementioned ‘paedophile activities’ presumably, but because he is “overwhelmed” by his desires and controlled by them, rather than “using his desire for some purpose”. As The Giving more bluntly describes, Mallam and his associates “wallow in the dark side - without fully transcending it”.

With all of this in mind, it is hard to see how the O9A does not provide space for pederasty. While the eroticisation of adolescents mostly falls upon a female-female dynamic in-text, it is hard to see this as anything other than the projected fantasy of Anton Long, as discussed in the female homosexual section, not a limitation of such attraction to a female-female dynamic. Beyond the preferences of Anton Long, which explains the eroticisation of adolescent females specifically (given as he is presumably a heterosexual man), the very principles of the O9A itself make a female sexual exception simply untenable.

While the O9A elsewhere claims that “certain activities by adults involving children - and certain proclivities in adults, in respect of children” are “dishonourable and not something our own kind would do”, a “mark of mundanity” [16], this is superficial at best. The truth of the matter is that the O9A corpus regularly engages with exactly these “proclivities” towards children, and nominally claiming otherwise doesn’t undo that engagement. Therefore, the pederastic undertones of the Uranian label seems intentional, rather than accidental.

Transgenderism and Transsexualism

There is one O9A-affiliated text that extremely briefly deals directly with transsexual and transgender themes, Living in a Goddess Aphrodite Body. Although it was authored by Magister Hagur rather than Anton Long or the Inner O9A, the Inner O9A did repost it in 2022, claiming it was a “truly subversive MSS”, “increasingly relevant to some of the controversies shaking the (o9a) subculture” [17]. It was also, importantly, uploaded with the “trans”, “queer”, and “LGBT” tags, but there is no intersex tag, suggesting it is important because of how it relates to transgender issues and not intersex ones, despite the text overwhelmingly focusing on intersex themes.

There are two things worth examining in this text. The first, is about “Pancha Prakriti” (“five sexes”, Hagur claims), two of which are “male with female nakshatra”, and “female with male nakshrata”, this supposedly making sense “radical urges” some people have “to go out and change their gender artificially”. The wording seems condemnatory, as it seems to suggest both over-eagerness and a certain unnaturalness around transgender people.

It is worth countering this, though, because the same paragraph speaks of a “lusty misidentification as an [sic] homosexual adherent as condemned in these pages”. Despite this, the author, Magister Hagur, also wrote the Erotic Gay Puppy Mind, writing extensively about what seem to be his own experiences with gay fetish play, including a photograph seemingly of Hagur himself in fetish gear, titled “Hagur the Puppy”. Given this apparent contradiction, and that the Aphrodite text was published in 2010, whereas the Puppy Mind text was published in 2015,, the degree to which the transgender comment can be taken as illustrative of Hagur’s views seems suspect.

It’s also seemingly countered later by Hagur’s own sympathetic framing of transsexuals, speaking of them “jumping through hoops to convince the establishment they should be able to change from one gender to the other”. Note that the possibility of a gender transition is not denied, there is no hedging framing of ‘attempt to’, Hagur seems to outright accept gender transition as a genuine change in gender. Similarly, “jumping through hoops” seems to suggest that the lengthy process to transition is, in Hagur’s view, unneeded, and that transsexualism is almost against the establishment, needing to “convince the establishment” for their transition.

This is, however, all that is explicitly said about transsexual and transgender people. Anything else would need to be extrapolated

Vonixa Tiresia

ZLD, C. 2364

References

[1] A Glossary of Order of Nine Angles Terms

[2] https://archive.org/details/naos-practical-guide-to-modern-magick/mode/2up

[3] The Magickal Art of the Deofel Quartet

[4] Sapphic Sorcery - In Praise of the Feminine

[5] The Rounwytha Way - Our Sinister Feminine Archetype

[6] The Rounwytha Tradition

[7] Questions from a Rounwytha Initiate

[8] Psychopathia Sexualis, authored by Richard von Krafft-Ebing

[9] The Dark Goddess as Archetype

[10] The Rounwytha Way - In History and Modern Context

[11] An Inheritance

[12] Breaking the Silence Down

[14] Fenrir Volume III, No. 2

[15] The Dark Goddess As Archetype

[16] Mysterium - Beyond the ONA

[17] https://archive.org/details/Hermaphrodite/mode/2up

Indeed it also seems true that the Way of the Rounwytha is the most neglected aspect of the O9A in literature, amongst most self-proclaimed adherents there is little appreciation for its simplicity, pagan nature, and emphasis on the muliebral, defined as it is by the possession of the muliebral faculty of empathy (both natural empathy and its esoteric development within dark/esoteric empathy) [2].

Instead, there is an unhealthy degree of focus on far-right extremism, satanism, the “sinister”, and other such trappings. It seems to evade many why such a path is valuable or why it holds importance within the ONA, with it being said that the Way of the Rounwytha is “one of the core principles on which the ONA is based” [2], and even further that it is the “basis for the inner (esoteric) Way of the ONA” [2].

Rather than being viewed as a totally separate path, it is possible that the ethos of the Sevenfold Way and the Way of the Rounwytha are in alignment, with the Seveonfold Way being designed as a modern way of life for some to imitate the knowing that a Rounwytha possesses. Thus, the paths should be understood as maintaining the same esoteric core, this core perhaps being best described as the ‘sinisterly-numinous tradition’ rather than the ‘O9A’, due to it seemingly pre-dating the O9A via the Way of the Rounwytha, and surviving beyond it via the Hebdomian Way.

In this view, anything that is not found within both ways of life is not fundamental to this shared esoteric core (and thus also to esoteric progression), but rather an oddity of that particular path. If understood as such, then much like the later novels of the Deofel Quintet, the Way of the Rounwytha may be used to cut away at the mythoi and forms used within the Labyrinthos Mythologicus of the O9A to reveal this shared esoteric core.

The Way of the Rounwytha

The Way of the Rounwytha is said to have the following characteristics:

“i) There are no named deities or divinities or ‘spirits’. No ‘gods’, no ‘goddess’. No demons.

ii) There are no spells or conjurations or spoken charms or curses; no ‘secret scripts’ and no ‘secret teachings’; indeed no teachings at all.

iii) There are no ‘secret book(s)’ or manuscripts; indeed, there are no writings.

iv) There are no ritual or Occult or ‘wiccan’ or ‘satanist’ elements at all.

v) There is no calendar, as calendars are usually understood, and thus no set dates/times for festivities or commemorations.

vi) There are no oaths made, no pledges written or said.

vii) There is no organization, no dogma, no codification of beliefs, no leader(s), no hierarchy, and no stages or grades of ‘attainment’.

Four other distinctive features of this Way are perhaps worthy of note: (α) that there is no interest in, no concern with, matters beyond one’s family, one’s local area of dwelling, and beyond such problems of one’s neighbours that they personally bring to one’s attention because they may require some help or assistance; (β) that it is rooted in and nourished by a specific rural Marcher area of a specific country and cannot easily be transplanted elsewhere, as it most certainly cannot live - be lived - in any urban area; (γ) that men are the exception, women the rule; and (δ) that there is no conformity to conventional social/moral rôles but rather certain accepted practices.” [3]

With respect to i), the following quote is very valuable in tandem with this in relation to the Dark Gods (or ‘acausal entities’) of the Sevenfold Way:

“Which all imply that acausal entities are not material and not discrete objects, but rather what we may conceive of as types of (or variations in or patterns of) acausal energy, formless and timeless” [4]

As such, these “Dark Gods” are seemingly themselves another way of viewing the acausal, a form with a use appropriate to the lower stages of the Sevenfold Way (below Adeptship), strengthened by their absence in other ways such as the Way of the Drecc/Niner. As a Rounwytha has a direct apprehension of the acausal they have no use for such forms, and thus the mythology of the Dark Gods is absent.

Further, their status as named ‘entities’ contradicts the wordless principle of the Rounwytha, based as it is on the knowledge that “(...) esoteric empathy inclines us toward a knowing of the numinous essence that such a denoting obscures or hides” [5]. Some male, singular, named acausal entity called “Satan” is simply not something that can exist for the Rounwytha.

With respect to ii) and iii), it may indicate that such secret teachings, such as those found in the various editions of Hostia (for the Sevenfold Way), and even the idea of teachings more generally, are themselves irrelevant. Rather, what matters is a certain kind of living and the developing of certain skills to aid in this living. If your goal is to become an author then developing the requisite skill in writing ability is what matters, not adherence to the opinions of other authors.

Thus, texts such as Naos are not important as some kind of dogmatic corpus, but rather they attempt to inspire people to live in a certain way, to develop themselves with presented techniques and become someone different, as indicated here: “(...) the interior change of individuals, this esoteric alchemy, involves individuals: (1) developing a certain type of personal character; (2) acquiring certain skills both exoteric and esoteric; (3) acquiring - from both personal experience (pathei-mathos) and from an intellectual learning - a certain initiated knowledge and insight; and (4) living in a particular manner as a result of the foregoing.” [6]

With respect to ii) and iv), it may indicate that such things, the elements of ceremonial sorcery and satanism, are themselves illusory much like the Dark Gods, they are a form with a use appropriate to the stages of development below Adeptship. This is also seemingly reflected in the Deofel Quintet, whereby the earlier novels (Falcifer, Temple of Satan) have a focus on sorcery and satanism, whilst the later novels (The Greyling Owl, Breaking the Silence Down) are largely lacking in them, instead focusing on the manipulation and changing of individuals that is appropriate to higher stages of development.

With respect to v), the lack of calendars as usually understood is probably a reference to alchemical seasons, how a Rounwytha can know (sans denotatum such as a Gregorian calendar with its fixed and linear time) when the seasons change due to their empathy. An intellectual intimation of this is given in a helical model of time and the symbolism used to denote the alchemical seasons [9] (the following may be incorrect):

Aries - 🜄 (🜄), Taurus - 🜂 (🜄), Gemini - 🜄 (🜂),

Libra - 🜂 (🜂), Aquarius - 🜃 (🜂), Pisces - 🜂 (🜃),

Cancer - 🜃 (🜃), Scorpio - 🜁 (🜃), Sagittarius - 🜃 (🜁),

Capricorn - 🜁 (🜁), Leo - 🜄 (🜁), Virgo - 🜁 (🜄).

With respect to vi), this may be specific to the Way of Rounwytha. Whilst there are also no oaths/pledges within the Sevenfold Way (beyond the initiation rite which may itself be illusory, see below), it seems strange to include a note against oaths/pledges since nothing within the ONA corpus indicates something against them. Indeed, it seems to contradict the Code of Kindred Honour stated elsewhere, given as it is based entirely around a central oath/pledge.

With respect to vii), these things themselves are apparent within the Sevenfold Way with the exception of grades of attainment. However, it is possible that such stages/grades are an indication of advancement, not in themselves existing as discrete, separate stages. There is no concrete separation between, say, Neophyte and Initiate beyond a potential psychological one developed due to an initiation rite, rather these stages/grades show the skills of a person, what they have been through, the degree of acausality that exists within the nexion that is their mind, and therefore can be useful tools to discern between who knows what.

This also suggested here, regarding the initiate: “In a simplistic sense, they move, through the Grades, beyond “The Abyss”, toward The Goal, which is the transformation of the individual and the emergence of a new type of being, beyond the Adept” [7]. Note the language, “in a simplistic sense”.

This is further corroborated by the Emanations of Urania, where it is stated by David Myatt that “For both KcU and KiU the degree of mergence of ø and λ may be increased via tλ, giving thus an evolution in consciousness”, which can be expressed through “three (arbitrary and symbolic) stages, α, β, γ” [8], and also more explicitly stated elsewhere that “Development of consciousness implies an increase in ø elements in a particular KiU” [9]. These very same ‘symbolic stages’ are the same as those found in the Stat Game (also created by David Myatt), and are explicitly connected to the stages of initiation [9].

If this is so, then by the means of causal time (“tλ”), one moves through these three stages, each subcategorised into three more stages. They are however, inherently ‘arbitrary and symbolic’, not genuine categorisations in of themselves, but an abstraction to try and quantify an increase. Ignoring the substages, the respective changes between stages are at the grade of Neophyte (α(γ)) and Initiate (β(α)), and between the stages of Internal Adept (β(γ)) and Master/Mistress (γ(α)). For some reason, the Master/Mistress role is seemingly erroneously associated with ‘Adeptship’ [9].

With respect to (α), within the Sevenfold Way this may be manifest during the Internal Adept grade, as it seemingly incorporates an increasingly internal focus, away from politics, sorcery, and other forms and towards changing of people, known personally and guided personally. That is, the increasingly solitary nature of the Sevenfold Way as someone progresses through the stages is a rejection of magickal manipulation by proxy (ceremonial magick, hermetic magick, and the like), and a more direct manipulation of change through people.

This changing nature of the Sevenfold Way is, as mentioned before, also reflected in the Deofel Quintet. The later novels (Breaking the Silence Down, The Greyling Owl) lack an ‘occult’ context entirely, instead being located in a rural West Marches and university setting respectively. Indeed, they also largely lack any mention of sorcery or the ‘occult’ at all.

With respect to (β), this most likely ceases to be a consideration due to the nature of the Sevenfold Way which can be adopted regardless of things such as geographical location, and is therefore a trait of solely Rounwytha. Alternatively, it may be a consideration for some of those who pass through the Abyss and decide to take on a reclusive, rural lifestyle much like the Rounwytha, a reminder that it needs a specific environment to nurture this type of lifestyle.

With respect to (γ), this is apparent within the ONA itself. Whilst online the focus is largely male, if we are to take their word, in the real world women are more likely to possess certain skills (e.g empathy, intuition, manners, charm) that make them suitable to be part of the “Inner ONA”, who maintain the Camlad Rouning, all of whom are at least of the grade Internal Adept, to quote: “(...) the inner ONA is akin to an extended family who maintain, and who continue, on a personal basis, this particular esoteric tradition. Unsurprisingly; the majority of those in this inner ONA are women.” [10]

Despite the claims of some that women are supposedly inherently more spiritually capable within the O9A (the best evidence for this being the description of Sapphic sexual magick in Naos), it is not coherent with the view of evolution expressed in the Emanations of Urania. The very presence of male Rounwytha (however rare) also disputes this, as if it was about the person in question being female a male Rounwytha should categorically not exist, instead it is just rare.

Rather, as the O9A admittedly says, it has “always been biased towards the feminine aspect of The Sinister” [11]. Males have unambiguously always been expected to develop their feminine natures, with the O9A claiming that “one of the secrets of the male Adept (...) is their unification within themselves (for example (...) the archetypes re-presented by Satan and Baphomet”, and that one of the traits of the evolved “new type of male” is “Dark Empathy” [11], with this Dark Empathy itself recognised as being feminine [2].

A similar requirement of women, to develop their masculine sides, does not exist. Indeed, both the “Sapphic Sorcery - In Praise of the Feminine” and “Questions from a Rounwytha Initiate” documents both celebrate women that are ‘feminine’, condemning women that are “inside, like a man, like a mundane” [12], instead praising women that are “tough, skilled, and of inner strength, but still feminine” [13].

All of this to say that the O9A privileges femininity over masculinity, both within females and males. Femininity, or the ‘muliebral’, being as it is connected to traits associated with women, naturally is expressed more readily within women, and thus women (at the deeper levels of the O9A) supposedly are predominant. Positive examples of such femininity in men are readily apparent within O9A literature, such as Thorold in The Giving, and the gay Fenton in The Greyling Owl.

With respect to (δ), this is also apparent within the O9A itself. Rather than depending on socially accepted morality (or legality), it encourages an exploring of these areas, to go to and beyond your own boundaries up to an extent, with certain practices being discouraged (e.g rape) as seen here: “The insight of the understanding made her laugh; then cry. (...) Apthone’s attempted rape, her own anger, the fear and humiliation that had possessed her, had broken through this appearance to the real essence of the woman beyond. She was a unique individual and did not have to conform to someone else’s set of rules or ideas.” [14]

Vonixa Tiresia

ZLD, Authored C.2362, Revised C.2364

References

[1] Labyrinthos Mythologicus

[2] A Glossary of Order of Nine Angles Terms

[3] The Rounwytha Way - In History and Modern Context

[4] Some Notes Concerning Language, Chants, and Acausal Entities

[5] Denotatum - The Esoteric Problem With Names

[6] O9A - On Being Unpopular - Discernment, Pathei-Mathos and the Initiatory Occult Quest

[7] The Five Dimensional Magick of the Seventh Way

[8] Emanations of Urania

[9] Naos - A Practical Guide to Modern Magick

[10] The Rounwytha Tradition

[11] The Dark Goddess as Archetype

[12] Sapphic Sorcery - In Praise of the Feminine

[13] Questions from a Rounwytha Initiate

[14] Breaking the Silence Down

While there is in some a curiosity about the Order of Nine Angles (O9A/ONA) and its practices, there exists in O9A manuscripts an attempt to “entrap, enchant, entice, confuse, incite, dissuade, and jape”, a supposed “series of tests, a modern Labyrinthos Mythologicus” [1]. These traps are not mere intellectual roadblocks, they pose significant risks to the uninformed, poisoning beliefs towards extremism and potentially terroristic behaviour.

The extent to which this ‘labyrinth’ may be seen as a legitimate structure versus a post-hoc rationalisation is debatable, but is functionally irrelevant for this article. Rather, the only needed assumptions are that O9A texts themselves are capable of degrading those who read it, and that some will read the texts despite being told of this potential.

It should be said, and is perhaps obvious, that this is not an endorsement of reading O9A manuscripts themselves. Much akin to alcohol, the ‘substance’ itself is toxic, so abstinence is certainly preferable, but for some it is not realistic. Moralism is not of much use in this scenario, telling someone to not do it does not help those who will do it, ignoring the warnings.

For this reason, this piece will briefly analyse what counts as an O9A manuscript, then suggest four strategies to avoid potential harms of the O9A, and end with a heuristic study guide to anyone who may be interested in the O9A. The overall goal is harm reduction, advice to inoculate the new and uninformed before they become poisoned by the O9A’s deliberate deception.

A Brief Definition

A useful distinction here would be between foundational O9A material, and supplementary or interpretative O9A material. To understand the O9A itself, you need to read foundational O9A material, which describes the basic principles and ideas of the O9A. Supplementary or interpretative material instead expands or revises ideas laid out within the foundational material.

Foundational O9A manuscripts should be considered as manuscripts authored by Anton Long, the apparent founder of the O9A, as well as the ‘Outer Representatives’ of the Order, such as Christos Beest (Richard Moult) and Chloe Ortega (Chloe352), the respective ‘faces’ of the O9A.

All other material regarding the O9A, authored by individuals who are not Anton Long or the Outer Representatives, are supplementary or interpretative. They should not be considered necessary to understand what the O9A is, but instead viewed as additional material, validated or invalidated by personal judgement.

Therefore, to understand the O9A, the materials that should be read are foundational materials, not supplementary or interpretative materials. Any other supposed gurus or authoritative figures, any other pseudonyms or authors (including David Myatt), and indeed even this text itself, are secondary to a study of the foundational texts.

It is also noteworthy that much of the terroristic or extremist readings are either found exclusively in supplementary material, or are intensifications of ideas in foundational O9A material. This does not mean that foundational material is inherently any safer, but rather that supplementary material, especially those from or influenced by the Tempel ov Blood or the Satanic Front, often have much more explicit and forceful pushes towards extremism and criminality.

Reflect

The first strategy is the most fundamental. Prior to doing anything involving the O9A, ask yourself, what exactly is it that you hope to gain from it?

Perhaps you like the idea of challenge, or its philosophy is interesting to you, or even you just like the aesthetic. You must be honest with yourself and figure out what it even is that makes you engaged enough to consider reading more material, or even following one of its ways of life.

The second question that follows this, is does the O9A actually serve this motive the best? If your goal is to be challenged, does the environment of the O9A facilitate this better than say, a martial arts environment, or a philosophy degree, depending on the ‘challenge’ desired?

It is possible, indeed somewhat likely, that the motivations underlying the interest are best served through another vessel. Sublimating it to another medium can both serve this desire to a much greater extent, and cultivate an area where it can more properly thrive.

Personal Judgement

The second strategy is the simplest, do not take everything you read at face value, think about what is being said. As the Labyrinthos Mythologicus text itself states:

“As we have said/written for some forty years, we expect individuals to work things out for themselves, and thus use or develop their own judgement, and use or develop their own Occult abilities.” [1]

For those who are studying the O9A, it is essential that you develop your personal judgement. O9A texts are often meant to suggest an idea, not to enforce one. This means that many manuscripts exist solely for their impact, not their literal details, they are a ‘mythos’, meant to inspire people to deed.

Remember also that the O9A has no canon, no doctrine, and you are therefore not required to agree with the authors. Even the elusive Anton Long’s words “can and should be surpassed by others and are thus not imbued with any kind of grandiose or pretentious ‘authority’” [2].

Therefore, you must read the manuscripts and decide for yourself what you agree and disagree with. Nobody within or beyond the O9A has authority over you, and you must decide for yourself what the O9A means to you, if anything, and what aspects of it you choose to incorporate, if any.

A method of doing this would be to create your own journal, physical or digital. When you read an O9A manuscript, think about what is being said, the potential implicit assumptions, how it interacts with what you think about esotericism, as well as how it interacts with the O9A overall. Write down what you agree and disagree with, or what you view differently.

Suspect Aesthetics

The third strategy, and perhaps most surprising to those unfamiliar, is to treat all sources focusing on “Satanism”, the “sinister”, and the like, as heavily suspect. Ideally, you should not read these documents until you have a more solid grounding in O9A esotericism, but as you are learning about the O9A anyway by being here, simply preaching abstinence does not help.

If you are to ignore this, the second strategy is crucial here. You must journal what you agree and disagree with, because all of the manuscripts focusing on “Satanism” are themselves deeply poisoned, a jape. The trick is in how “Satanism” is understood, while on the surface level it is presented as a belief in a supra-personal entity of “Satan”, the truth is very different:

“(…) the ONA not only fits both standard definitions of Satanism but is the only avowedly Satanic association which is: (a) practising or disposed to practise evil; (b) actually or potentially harmful, destructive, disastrous, pernicious; baleful; (c) malicious; mischievous, sly; (d) bad in moral character, disposition; (e) hard, difficult, misleading, deadly, amoral; (f) malevolent, offensive.” [3]

Thus, “Satanism” at a deeper level of the O9A means to be evil, sly, baleful. This is not a moralistic argument; this means that you are a target of such harm if you absorb without thinking, the texts are meant to be disastrous to you personally. It also does not mean that the texts are forever off limits, as said before this kind of moralism does not help.

Rather, it means that it is better to develop your judgement before touching these texts, because they are more intentionally deceptive and/or dangerous to your psyche. Being able to think critically is core to being able to distinguish between dangerous and non-dangerous texts. Going in blind can promote being in thrall to the basal joy that can be found in transgression and being edgy, rather than an acute awareness of the harms that the O9A can cause.

Prevent Identity Entanglement

The final strategy I will present is to not allow your identity to be entangled with the O9A. Whatever belief systems you hold, whatever forms your person takes, you will likely find O9A texts that agree with them in some way, much as you may find O9A texts that disagree with them in some way.

This is likely another function of the labyrinth, to draw in as many people as possible. However, identity entanglement in this way prevents a purely rational, detached view of the O9A. If you feel you are part of its in-group, you will simply consume any of its material that affirms this view. In other words, it damages your individual judgment and turns the O9A into pure ego fuel.

You must recognise that, despite its transgressive nature, the O9A is designed to be appealing to a certain type of person. Like any polarising thing, it is meant to repel many, but to create for itself a small, fervent following. That following is how it has survived for some decades now, despite the degeneracy of its culture, and its tendency to self-cannibalise.

So, quite simply, do not think of yourself as O9A. Do not idolise the O9A, do not seek to be O9A, merely seek to be yourself, or a better version of yourself. If someone were to suggest you are not O9A, your response should be keen agreement, not defensiveness, because defensiveness would indicate you already care about being ‘O9A’, of their ‘kind’.

Reading List

As for a suggested reading list, I would give the following order (first to last) of texts, with accompanying reasons. All can be found with a simple online search:

Naos
Gives both breadth and depth in an introduction to the Sevenfold Way. Look for a typewritten, copyright 1989 edition, not a text one. Many of the text versions make modifications, e.g removing mentions of homosexuality present in the original version.

The Rounwytha Way In History and Modern Context
Gives a contrast to Naos, and will challenge implicit assumptions. Also helps to centre the faculties of empathy, and therefore to counteract extremist influence.

The Code of Kindred Honour
Gives insight into what ‘honour’ is in the O9A, and is core to understanding the O9A. It is, however, quite risky, because it’s what the O9A uses to define their ‘kind’ and can therefore be dangerous to the unassuming. Remember to prevent identity entanglement, and analyse what the text is saying when reading it.

Following these three, I would heavily recommend you read the Deofel Quintet. Unlike some supplementary material, they help to reinforce a more empathic and non-extremist worldview.

I would suggest skipping Falcifer though, as it is mostly just fiction, debatably entertaining, and does not provide much new insight. It instead is much more of a cartoonish caricature of what non-occultists (and some plebian ‘Satanists’) view Satanism to be. If you wish to read it, I suggest reading it last. Otherwise, I would suggest this order:

The Apolitical Deofel Quartet
A good, if very verbose/technical primer. Skip if you find it tedious

The Temple of Satan
Gives insight into a “Satanic” O9A perspective, also helps to challenge assumptions. It does, however, justify a ritualistic murder, and thus a critical approach is needed. Skipping it is also a reasonable choice, as for most it’s largely irrelevant.

The Giving
More ‘pagan’, Rounwytha adjacent, gives much more detail about how the Rounwytha act in practice. Similarly to the Temple of Satan, this novel also justifies a ritualistic murder, and thus a critical approach is needed.

The Greyling Owl
More of a ‘mundane’ setting, with little overt occultism, but far more ‘esoteric’ than the other novels. Helps to foreground the esotericism within a more academic (and non-extremist) context. If you only read one novel, read this one.

Breaking the Silence Down
‘Sapphic’, or lesbian novel. Similar to the Greyling Owl, it has little overt occultism. This novel is only particularly worth reading if you are opposed to such themes. Otherwise, it’s mostly just a rehashing of material already covered in The Giving, and The Greyling Owl.

The Magickal Art of the Deofel Quartet
Gives more insight into the esotericism behind the novels. Best to ignore at first. It provides interpretation of the esotericism present in the novels, but ideally you should already be analysing the novels and the potential esotericism therein, as per the second suggested strategy.

Vonixa Tiresia

ZLD, Authored C.2363, Revised C.2364

References

[1] - Labyrinthos Mythologicus

[2] - Mysterium, Beyond The Order of Nine Angles

[3] - Toward Understanding Satanism

This ethos is not just surrounding the literal religious elements of Abrahamic faith, but also associated cultural or value systems, such as patriarchy and “political feminism” [2], “white hordes of homo hubris” [1], and the Darwinian system of “might is right” [3]. That is to say, that ‘Magian’ does not only refer to those devotional to Abrahamic religions, but also those perceived to be heavily influenced by Abrahamic norms.

Similarly, but only somewhat relevant to this article, is the concept of “mundanes”, defined as those who do not live by the O9A’s own “Law of the Sinister Numen” [1], aka ‘The Code of Kindred Honour’, aka ‘The Code of Sinister Honour’, aka ‘The Sinister Code’, aka ‘The Dreccian Code’, depending on the desired level of edginess.

Those who are Magian are, by definition, also mundanes, because to be Magian (aligned with the Abrahamic ethos) is to be of the ‘Old Aeon’, and to not follow the code of kindred honour that supposedly defines the O9A, and the law of the New Aeon [1]. In this light, it might be better to think of the ‘Magian’ as a specific subset of mundanes, with ‘mundane’ simply being an ‘other’ category (albeit pejorative), and ‘Magian’ being more specific (and far more pejorative) in usage.

Despite what the title may suggest, this is not a critique of this supposed ‘Magian’, but instead of the ‘Magian’ abstracted category itself. That is, it’s not a critique of any supposed Abrahamic ethos, but rather of the bifurcation that the O9A creates between its own adherents, those ‘of our kind’, and mundanes and/or the Magian.

This will be done two ways. First, by critiquing the foundation of that broader mundane category to begin with, of kindred honour, and then focusing on the Magian abstracted category, along with the Vindex mythos surrounding it.

On ‘Kindred Honour’

Within some O9A manuscripts, it has been stated that kindred honour is the “one exception” to the principle of individual judgement, and that it is what “defines who is, and who is not O9A” [12]. Indeed, it is kindred honour that is used commonly to differentiate those of the O9A kind with the ‘other’ category of mundanes [1], and by extension, Magians.

How may this honour be applied, though? Let us take the case of paedophilia to analyse how. This is, hopefully apparently, not to defend paedophilia, but to analyse the ethical implications within the O9A corpus, given its pointed nature as an example, as well as some eccentricities about how it is treated within the O9A and by O9A adherents.

There are two contradictory claims regarding paedophilia. The first is that such individuals are “not of our kind”, whether offending or not, and that the “proclivity” itself is “dishonourable” [4]. The second is that “sexual preferences” are “old Aeon categorisations and prejudices” that are not considered when judging the person, and that “our kind are judged solely by their deeds and how well they uphold kindred honour” [1].

While this second quote ostensibly seems to mean homosexuality or bisexuality when speaking of “sexual preference”, it is not as though a ‘preference’ for children is somehow a ‘deed’. The O9A has also published what it seems it would consider ‘child abuse’ material before through ‘The Girl Goddess’, given that the threshold for adulthood is elsewhere set at sixteen years old [5].

What about the issue of promotion? If the first line of thought is followed through, that certain topics mark someone as having a rotten or dishonourable nature, then any level of positive engagement should demarcate someone as not of ‘our kind’, should it not? At the same time though, is this not to judge someone on their thoughts and words, rather than their deeds, or their honour? Can’t the same argument be made for the ‘preference’ itself, also?

Under kindred honour then, should association with such individuals be strictly avoided, due to their inherently rotten/dishonourable nature, or should association be decided upon by deed alone? There is an apparent contradiction here in how one is supposed to act/ How are adherents supposed to deem what is and is not acceptable according to this honour, and how should they treat those that violate it?

Perhaps one pertinent example here is how the “Seven Oxonians” (formerly known as the River Isis Kollective) themselves interacted with one Ryan Anschauung, and how they dealt with him after they argued he had gone against the O9A, despite his ‘crimes’ so to speak being far less grave than paedophilia.

Framed in the style of a “legal trial” with a “prosecutor” and “defendant” [6], these ‘Oxonians’ published a discussion they had where they asked Ryan a few questions about the supposed esotericism of the O9A. These questions, with the arguable exceptions of the antecedent of esoteric chant (seemingly Gregorian Chant, found in the mention of ‘Sangallian’ notation [7]), simply cannot be found in the O9A corpus.

While these ‘Inner O9A’ may say that is the exact point, that they test knowledge about a supposed ‘aural tradition’, someone may indeed reach the grade of Internal Adept, as per Naos, without ever encountering any of these terms. They are thus not truly a test of adeptship, but of internal contact, because they do not test genuine Adeptship as per the tasks laid out within Naos.

This is only furthered with the ‘Ten Questions’ released thereafter, now thirteen. Such concepts, such as “Yusra”, “Azal, Dhar, and Zamal”, and supposed texts such as “Al-Kitab Al-Aflak” [8] do not exist within Naos. They may or may not genuinely exist within this ‘aural tradition’, but are absent from Naos, which claims to guide “any individual” to the “emergence of the Adept” [9]. Thus, testing adeptship based on materials absent from Naos seems suspect at best, or actively malicious at worst.

There is a genuine argument to be had here that, given Ryan’s apparent incapacity to know where to find the answers to some questions, some of which may have legitimate textual grounding, he should not have been communicating with academics under the pretense of having esoteric knowledge regarding the O9A.

Similarly, his fantastical (and almost certainly fictional) stories, his egotism and delusions of being ‘sinister’, as well as his overly dense prose, might also demarcate him as being relatively early in his occult journey. It is not unreasonable to extrapolate from this that he is indeed not at the stage of Internal Adept.

The issue is instead the Seven Oxonian’s framing of this issue. Despite the O9A’s manuscripts proclaiming that they allow adherents to progress “at their own pace” [10], and that the overall occult journey takes “several decades” [1], they instead argue that “eight years (...) is long enough” [6], and treat it as evidence that he is not O9A.

A similarly raised argument against Ryan in the same collection is that he failed to follow the “logos of the O9A”, and that “the logos of the O9A is the law of kindred honour”. Based on his “etiquette” [11] towards other anonymous persons who self-identified as being O9A, this supposedly marks him as not O9A, which in turn raises the matter of to what extent this ‘kindred honour’ may be rejected by an O9A adherent.

In the same collection of manuscripts, one ‘R. Parker’ asserts, again without any corroborating sources, that kindred honour is the “one exception” [12] to the authority of individual judgement. This is in spite of the same ‘R. Parker’, in another article. stating that such kindred honour is merely an “exoteric manifestation of the Logos of the O9A” [13], and thus an exoteric manifestation is supposedly meant to override the axiom of individual judgement within an esoteric organisation.

Not only this, but it is in active conflict with Anton Long’s own statements that his words “can and should be surpassed”, and are “not imbued with any grandiose or pretentious ‘authority’” [14], as well as Anton Long’s statement that the Way of the Drecc/Niner, defined exactly by the adherence to the code of kindred honour, is merely “another means” of “discovering and contribution”, one of many “sinister forms” [15].

It is also presented as a choice, not a mandatory requirement of O9A adherents. See for this, the quote about individuals who have “followed our Sevenfold Way or (...) chosen the life of what we now term ‘a niner’ or ‘a drecc’ [3], with the “or” meaning adherents might follow the Sevenfold Way but not the way of the Niner/Drecc. As Rachael Stirling more aptly says, this instead means that “anyone can interpret O9A esoteric philosophy in whatever way they want (...) with there being no “authorized” version of O9A philosophy” [16], up to and including the issue of kindred honour. What R. Parker says regarding kindred honour and its supposed exemption from individual judgement is merely an interpretation, not a definitive fact as they present it.

Ergo, despite the pretensions of the Seven Oxonians, of having ‘prosecuted’ Ryan, their excuses fall flat upon examination. So too is this indicated by them, rather recklessly, admitting they had “communicated in private to certain accredited people (such as an academic or two)” that he was a “fraud”, “one of the O9A pretendu crowd”, despite not “confirming” it prior [17]. They even go so far in their pitiful rhetoric to say that it’s “not even about interpretations of a written code of honour” [17], despite one of the key hinges in their argument being exactly what ‘kindred honour’ supposedly is.

Even further, despite the apparent membership of one ‘June Boyle’ in the ‘Seven Oxonians’ group (q.v “Deconstructing a Mythos”), and that this ‘June Boyle’ was in the same messaging group as Ryan Fleming when ‘prosecuting’ Anschauung [6], Fleming being a convicted paedophile who ran a Yorkshire-based O9A nexion called Drakon Covenant, with Fleming perhaps even instructed by Boyle themselves [18], it appears that to this day, June Boyle, nor the Seven Oxonians, nor the River Isis Kollective, have released any document denouncing Fleming or his Drakon Covenant, nearly a decade after his conviction of child sexual abuse, and despite Fleming’s continued influence in some O9A corners.

This is in contrast to the 144 page compilation released denouncing Anschauung [19], and the numerous individual articles within, one even suggesting Ryan Anschauung as an “opfer” [20]. How much is this truly about honour, given that is the case? It seems rather, that ‘Kindred Honour’ is a yardstick imposed on prospective adherents, but not actually followed by said Seven Oxonians themselves.

Just to what extent then, may this kindred honour truly distinguish who is O9A from who is Magian or mundane, if it is merely abandoned when inconvenient by the ‘Inner O9A’? This perhaps leads to the question of what the Magian truly is, and indeed if the category is even valid to begin with.

On ‘Vindex’ and the Magian

As stated before, compared to the broader classification of ‘mundane’ as an ‘other’ category, the ‘Magian’ is more specifically defined as an ‘ethos’ that is Abrahamic/Semitic in origin. One manuscript, however, deals with mundanes in a way that will become relevant to the Magian evidently after some explanation.

The manuscript in question is rather careful to specify that the ‘mundane’ group is not dependent on “social abstractions” [4], that is, someone should not be deemed ‘mundane’ due to any perceived belonging to a social strata or group. It does not, however, posit nor discuss the idea that such a grouping, of ‘mundane’ or ‘Magian’, may be dependent on other abstractions, such as ideological ones.

Indeed, the Seven Oxonians themselves use a definition of abstraction that would seemingly include categories as the Magian, see below for this definition:
“Understood exoterically, an abstraction is the manufacture, and use of, some idea, ideal, ‘image’ or category and thus some generalization, and/or some assignment of an individual or individuals to some group or category. The positing of some ‘perfect’ or ‘ideal’ form, category, or thing, is part of abstraction. Abstractions hide the true nature of Reality, which is both causal and acausal” [21]

What exactly is the ‘Magian’, if not a “category and thus some generalization” over a supposed ‘other’? What are they, if not a supposed failure of upholding the ‘perfect’ form of kindred honour, or a failure to uphold the ‘ideals’ of the O9A itself, dependent as it is on such idealisms as strength and pseudo-Nietzschean self-overcoming?

So too, is such an idealised category, of ‘us’ versus ‘them’, against the stated values of personal judgement. Rather than judging someone as they are, sans abstractions, the categories of ‘Magian’ and ‘mundane’ instead encourage collective judgements, the grouping of people by a supposed ‘ethos’ (or lack thereof) and judgement through the ethos, rather than of the person’s character and deed.

This can be seen through the O9A’s own manuscripts, where both ‘mundane’ and ‘Magian’ are treated as pejoratives. For example, when analysing Crowley, much of the criticism levied at him focuses on the idea that he “propagated the corrupt and bastard system of The Golden Dawn”, which Golden Dawn “re-presents and re-inforces the “Magian” distortion of the Western Tradition” [22].

That is, rather than analysing Crowley’s character, where legitimate criticisms may be levied according to the O9A’s own standards (even if themselves idealisms and thus abstractions), they instead create an enemy category, of the “Magian”. Alignment with this abstraction alone, not personal character, nor honour, may be seen in a negative context, and used as evidence against someone.

Related also to the Magian is the notion of Vindex, who opposes the Magian, and through manifesting the “Law of the New Aeon”, that being personal honour, prepares the “practical beginnings” of the New Aeon [1]. There is a contradiction here, however, between the idea that Vindex upholds personal honour (and thus, judgement sans abstractions [23), and the idea that Vindex somehow ‘avenges’ the defeat of the Nazis.

These claims, that Vindex “via the shedding of blood, by sacrifice, (...) bloodily avenges the defeat of 1945” [8], do not seem to be said directly in the manuscripts beyond this source, but is perhaps indicated by the Latin meaning of the term vindex, quite literally “vindicator”, the verb of which (vindicō) is the root of the English word ‘vindicate’, along with the repeated ‘victory’ diatribes, whether against a perceived ‘Magian’ [24] or more broadly.

Yet, what is there to ‘avenge’, or ‘vindicate’? The veiled reference to 1945, the date of Hitler’s suicide, and indeed the entire ‘year of Fayen’ dating system (based as it is on Hitler’s date of birth), both suggest that what is being avenged is a perceived loss of National Socialism. But, aren’t adherents supposed to “(prefer) combat to war because combat is a personal choice, founded upon honour, whereas war is the choice, the method, of some supra-personal entity” [3]? What honour is there to be found within ideological disputes?

It might be argued, as Richard Moult has done prior (q.v “An Afternoon with Christos Beest”) that such ideologies are merely evaluated aeonically, that their support should be determined solely by what changes they may create. This is not, however, what “avenge” implies, which is instead a punishment or correction for a perceived wrongdoing or fault. To “bloodily avenge” especially requires some personal identification or proximity, the word carries a sense of injustice and emotionality that the supposedly “cold” calculation of aeonics should lack.

It also misses the point. Even if such an argument were to be permitted, that national socialism for whatever purported aeonic reason, is going to flower, this does not have any impact on honour. Such a “shedding of blood”, of “sacrifice”, is explicitly ideological in nature and thus not founded on the principle of personal honour, “the key to both living and dying” for both men and women in the New Aeon, and which Aeon’s law is supposedly that of personal honour [1].

The two are fundamentally incompatible. It is either that ideologies are merely tools, a means to an end, and thus there should be zero inherent preference for national socialism, and certainly no need to “bloodily avenge (...) the defeat of 1945”, with the focus instead being the establishment of the law of personal honour. Or, it is that national socialism has some privileged or otherwise unique aeonic position, above even the new aeon’s law of personal honour, that demands dishonourable ideological violence.

If the former is correct, this also means that whatever “Vindex” may be, insofar as it is assumed to be at least partially true (based as it is in mythos), is very different from the image that most O9A associates attach to Vindex. Whatever violence is involved (if any, see below) cannot be on abstracted grounds such as ideology, ethnicity, race, place of birth, sex, sexual preference, or any other perceived belonging to a certain ‘group’ or ‘category’. Nor can the result of Vindex be the establishment of some authoritative structure or ‘Imperium’ that privileges certain abstractions (again, such as race) above others.

It is also, then, noteworthy that the second option, of a unique privileging of national socialism justifying ideological violence, is explicitly contradicted elsewhere in O9A manuscripts. The “essence of (the) New Aeon” is “muliebral” [25], or feminine, with the “masculous” or masculine being defined as “the abilities and qualities (...) historically associated with men, such as competitiveness, aggression, a certain harshness, (...) and a desire for adventure and/or conflict/war/violence/competition over and above personal love and culture.” [26]

This means that, categorically, the violence supposedly manifest through Vindex, about bloodily avenging the Nazis, and using sacrifice to bring about the new aeon, are directly at odds with the very nature of the new aeon. It is masculine, or ‘masculous’, because of the use of violence, aggression, and harshness, contradicting the ‘muliebral’ nature of the new aeon, which should instead manifest through traits such as “empathy, sensitivity, gentleness, compassion, and a desire to love and be loved”. [26]

If Vindex is truly the harbinger of the new aeon, and they operate through personal honour, which personal honour is also supposedly the very foundation of this new muliebral aeon, then the methods of Vindex must be muliebral also, or it is not a true emergence of the new aeon. From this perspective, it is questionable to what extent Vindex will be a “warrior” [1] at all, because the extent to which combat can be considered sensitive, gentle, or loving, rather than harsh, aggressive, or competitive, seems like an unfavourable comparison to say the least.

There is the potential argument here that Vindex is a herald, or a necessary change, rather than representing the essence of the new aeon itself. This, however, does not hold, the feminine cannot miraculously be birthed from the masculine. Acausality is irrelevant here, as the dichotomy between feminine and masculine is itself causal and within causal space-time, with acausal entities not beholden to biological sex, nor gendered differences [27] and thus irrelevant to said dichotomy.

Within these laws of causality, an effect always is representative of a trait of what caused it. Kindling might burst into flames when exposed to a spark, because that spark has some potential to cause fire within itself. Something lacking that trait cannot produce the same outcome, because it does not follow cause and effect. In the same way, a masculine Vindex figure would simply lack the requisite traits needed, it would be like pouring water onto kindling and thinking it will light.

This means that such an aeonic shift, towards a muliebral aeon, must itself be beholden to the laws of causality, and thus Vindex must manifest something of the muliebral, the feminine. The sex of Vindex, if Vindex is manifest in an individual person, may indeed be male, but such a person must in essence be feminine, redolent of the muliebral itself, to create the necessary causal changes to presence a new muliebral aeon.

Even more revealingly, there is the claim that part of the O9A mythos is the “the division (via a logos) into ‘us’ and ‘mundanes’”, and even further that “if a mythos was literally ‘true’ in all its details it wouldn’t be a mythos” [28]. Therefore, the very division that the O9A seeks to create, via the exoteric ‘logos’ of kindred honour, is intentionally false, either partly or entirely, It stands to reason that such an abstraction such as ‘magian’, similarly to ‘mundanes’, being a division of ‘us’ versus ‘them’ via a logos, is part of the mythos also, and is therefore also partly or entirely false in construction, showing the basis of Vindex as opposing the ‘magian’ as being mythic, and therefore not fully true.

The Seven Oxonians may, and within said article even do, argue that this mythos serves some supposed function, but it cannot be both ways. Either the ‘Magian’ (as well as the ‘mundane’) are abstractions, myths which obscure the true nature of reality and must be eventually discarded by the practitioner, or they are legitimate (and non-mythic) categories of people who must be opposed and eventually defeated.

The former view is somewhat tenable, naturally compatible with the idea of ideologies and tools and that personal honour is the essence of the New Aeon, albeit with heavy reinterpretation. It is also explicitly supported by the Seven Oxonians’ statements themselves, though they may disagree with this specific wording/formulation of what it logically entails. The latter view, fairly compatible with the idea of national socialism as uniquely privileged, is simply untenable, the abstractions it depends on, such as ‘Kindred Honour’, and on ‘Magian’ and/or ‘mundane’ as an ‘other’ category, collapse upon inspection.

Therefore, and as should have perhaps been evident through such faculties as natural and/or esoteric empathy, as well as the O9A claiming ‘possible’ Islamic roots (q.v “Notes on O9A Ontology And The Ruhaniyyat”), the categories of both the ‘Magian’ and ‘mundane’ are at odds with other manuscripts. The cleanest solution is the discarding of both, the regarding of them as abstractions.

Vonixa Tiresia

ZLD, C.2364

References

[1] O9A Glossary

[2] The Rounwytha Way - Our Sinister Feminine Archetype

[3] Questions from a Rounwytha Initiate

[4] Children and The ONA

[5] Satanism and Child-Abuse

[6] An O9A Education

[7] Chant Notation and its Transcription (Fenrir Volume III, No. 2)

[8] Esoteric Notes LXI

[9] Naos - A Practical Guide to Modern Magick

[10] The Methods and Tradition of The Sevenfold Way

[11] The Outing of Kris McDermott

[12] The Authority of Individual Judgement - Interpretation and Meaning

[13] Aristocracy, Anarchy, or Nihilism? - The Continuing Internal O9A Debate

[14] Towards the Sinister Mysterium

[15] Geneseos Caput Tertium

[16] The Paradox Of The O9A Authority Of Individual Judgement

[17] Ryan Anschauung And His Temple of Them - The Amusing Case of Aussie Alex

[18] The Great Discrepancy, available in Darganfod

[19] Satanism Plebianized and O9A Pretenders

[20] Ryan Anschauung As O9A Opfer?

[21] Misunderstanding Occult Terminology - Part One: Mundanes

[22] The Septenary, Crowley, and The Origins of The Order of Nine Angles

[23] Warriors, Freedom, and the Sinister Way

[24] Vindex and The Defeat of The Magian

[25] Bealuwes Gast

[26] Masculous and Muliebral - The Sinister Feminine And Homo Hubris

[27] Some Notes Concerning Language, Chants, and Acausal Entities

[28] Some Recent Posts About Ryan Anschauung and O9A Mythos

While I had intended to release my own edition of Bealuwes Gast, satirising and mocking Myatt in an introduction, I’ve come to the realisation that I simply just do not care about Myatt enough to do this. Whatever fun there is in poking through the obvious narcissism and self-mystification, a la Ozymandias, is rather lost when you have to manually copy every page, check every detail, transfer photographs, correct sloppy formatting, and the like.

As a note, the edition sold by one Suicidal Collective is not the original and is edited. Rather than the “Three Perspectives” of the original, which, from exif data was created circa 2011, theirs has “Four Perspectives”, with one “Sirius al-Ghûl” included that is not in the original edition. Especially given the dating (136yf, which would be 2025-2026), it seems he and his cronies had attempted to edit himself into Bealuwes Gast.

Beyond this, my, perhaps flawed, opinion is that those who fall for this pretentious book wouldn’t be swayed by said introduction either way, nor would those already critical of Myatt. Beyond schadenfreude at the obnoxious writing, or my own positioning (which this post serves for regardless), there is nothing to gain from said introduction, especially for the effort put in.

I thus will simply just release the version I now have. For those interested, the link is below. Note that it is claimed to only be the first part of a supposedly broader document. If and when I have access to said document, I will similarly publicly release it:

https://archive.org/details/bealuwes-gast

The more interesting of the two books, Myndsquilver, is also released in the version I have received. Moult is relatively less prone to speaking about himself ad nauseam, and thus details about his personal life have been fairly scant. Myndsquilver solves this somewhat, providing insight into his early artistic years, and his beginnings in the occult, such as his involvement in the Illuminates of Thanateros.

While the book explicitly states that it is supposedly only intended for a selected group of initiates, quite bluntly, I do not care about what Moult had wanted. My ethos is that clear, critical content around the O9A is what is needed, and thus his mystification and excuses simply do not matter to me.

To be even more explicit, my releasing of these texts is not because I believe they are of particularly high literary merit, nor because they are of much informational use (except perhaps Myndsquilver), nor any supposed sympathies for the authors. Rather, it is for the purposes of demystification and public access, as well as preventing their resale by some within the O9A for extortionate amounts. This is similarly why I also released Charnel House.

Therefore, his work is similarly published, at the link given below:

https://archive.org/details/myndsquilver

For those interested, Charnel House may also be found here:

https://archive.org/details/charnel_house

My upcoming “Against the Magian” article is almost complete. Ideally it should be released either by the end of today, or tomorrow morning.

Vonixa Tiresia

ZLD, C.2364

Yet where are such ‘aristocratic’ persons? Where are the swathes artists, the musicians, within the O9A? From a surface level, such a statement does not seem to hold true, as any survey wouldn’t show such persons, but instead a mixture of edgelords and extremists.

While I have no affection for Abrahamic religion, there are still moments of wisdom in an otherwise boring work, most pertinently here, that a tree shall be judged by its fruits. More specifically, in Luke 6:43-44, it is said “For a good tree does not bear bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. For every tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they gather grapes from a bramble bush.”

What exactly, then, are the fruits of the O9A? How shall its ‘tree’ be judged? The two main areas of concern here seem to be what notable people the O9A produces, and what art it produces. Let us begin with the kinds of people the O9A seems to attract or cultivate.

On Adherents

Let us be charitable for a second and ignore the potential of AL being DM, to exclude one extremist from the equation. Other than AL, who are the notable figures inspired by the O9A?

Some might go to Richard Moult, aka Christos Beest, and while he is (or rather, was) certainly an artist, his work within the O9A was not up to calibre, as will be discussed later. He also has had little to no recognition beyond the O9A itself, perhaps because of this mediocre ability, and the O9A’s wide perception as being neo-nazi and extremist, and he is thus hardly of ‘note’ beyond the O9A’s own niche.

Indeed, so might his popularity within the O9A itself be more of a ‘beggars can’t be choosers’ effect, where the lack of options means that okay or even poor artists are absorbed and celebrated by the immediate community. His proximity to Anton Long certainly helps here too, to generate mystique and relevance.

So, what about barring Moult? Well, the fact of the matter is that otherwise, the O9A only has extremists, terrorists, and sex offenders of varying stripes. Ethan Melzer, Joshua Sutter (who remains active via ‘Agony’s Point Press’, the Satanic Front, etc), Ryan Fleming, and other degenerates are those who are perhaps most notable, especially to the media.

This extremism is also evident by simply observing the adherents that the O9A attracts, too. Any person would be hard-pressed to find an O9A adherent who does not promote, or is connected to, extremism in any way, with many openly having neo-nazi symbols in their profiles, and/or celebrating the deeds of various criminals/terrorists. They are perhaps as subtle as a neon sign.

The route that many take to find the O9A seems to be through such neo-nazi pipelines too, perhaps seeing an edgy video on Telegram, or being spoken to in private channels by adherents. This only reinforces the extremist atmosphere, with many adherents having their identities wrapped in political extremism from the beginning. The O9A, in this light, is little more than fuel for the fire, a spiritual motivation to keep being neo-nazi thanks to its claims of aeonics.

Yet some may balk at this explanation. The O9A is “open source” [2] you see, and thus, the O9A is magically not culpable for its failures, but instead the adherents have been tricked, or are otherwise personally responsible. Despite the O9A’s own sources claiming to “ensnare, entrap, enchant, entice, confuse, incite, dissuade, and jape” [3] its adherents, it has to be the failure of the adherents due to this ‘open source’ structure.

One only needs to look at Wicca to see such an excuse falls apart. Wicca itself is ‘open-source’ and leaderless, without even an ‘inner’ group to speak of. Yet where are the Wiccan terrorists? If the open nature of the ONA were truly responsible for its failure to produce such cultured persons, and for its portrayal as extremist, surely it would also apply to other open-source systems?

But that is not what is observed. Because Wicca has its own internal ethical system via the Wiccan Rede, summarised principally by the phrase ‘An ye harm none, do what ye will’, it simply does not produce such individuals at scale. In contrast, the O9A explicitly mocks such an ethic, the supposed “pretentious harmless revivals that garner so much mundane Media attention” [4]

The irony here is that the O9A itself is rather insufferably pretentious, with its delusions of grandeur and claims to elitism, and despite five or so decades to produce any individuals of note, it has repeatedly failed to do so. So too is the esotericism of the O9A little more than a basal and edgy copy of Thelema, a far cry from some secret and hidden ‘western’ tradition it lays claim to, but that is a topic for another day.

Some may argue against this, saying that the reason that Wicca does not produce such moronic terrorists is because, as the O9A says, Wicca is ‘harmless’, whereas the O9A is supposed to be uniquely ‘heretical’ in contrast. Let us then compare the O9A with another ‘heretical’ esoteric organisation, that being Thelema.

The natural response here is likely to say that Thelema isn’t as ‘heretical’ as the O9A. Perhaps this may be true in the modern era, where Thelema has dulled itself, but Thelema was originally scandalous to Victorian and Edwardian polite society. Sex and blood magic, drug use, open bisexuality, it is no coincidence that Crowley was lambasted as “the wickedest man in the world” by the tabloid John Bull.

Association with Thelema, or Crowley himself, was socially risky, because Thelema was genuinely ‘heretical’ for its time. Indeed, the Abbey of Thelema in Sicily was forced to close because Mussolini demanded Crowley leave Italy, after a long series of attacks against Crowley by the press.

Despite this, Crowley accrued a large circle of artists, scientists, and even an actor or two. Jane Wolfe, Jack Parsons, Marjorie Cameron, all would eventually throw their weight behind Thelema. Thus, even with a toxic social reputation, the physis of Thelema seemed to be healthy enough to produce some good ‘fruit’, ergo the ‘tree’ of Thelema is not wholly rotten.

Not only this, but prior to the late 2010s, the O9A itself did not have such a toxic reputation as it does nowadays. Through Chloe352 and her nexion’s “progressive Satanism”, a new digital era of the O9A was ushered in, one which some oft complained wasn’t ‘hardcore’ enough. Ironically, the O9A’s reputation in this era was far less heretical than Crowley’s was for his time, and thus the O9A’s failure to produce ‘cultured’ individuals of note is even more glaring.

So too, does lack of heresy in the early digital age of the O9A diffuse any arguments about supposed hidden artists or cultured people within the O9A. Even to assume that such persons might exist (without proof they are irrelevant as per what the O9A has produced, just mere speculation), there isn’t a reason to assume that the then less ‘heretical’ O9A would have more such hidden persons than Thelema, especially given Thelema’s far greater pervasiveness in occulture.

Thus, a supposed ‘heretical’ social positioning does not excuse this failure of the O9A to reach that ‘aristocratic’ level to which it claims. If Thelema was able to produce individuals with genuine ability, regardless of extreme social hostility, and the O9A was unable to do so in a period without serious mainstream hostility, then the issue instead becomes structural. Something must be uniquely deficient within the O9A.

On the Art

Let’s now move on to the art that the O9A has produced, beginning with the Sinister Tarot. Take the below Figure 1 for an example of the Sinister Tarot deck, created by Richard Moult (”Christos Beest”). Even if we are to ignore the lacklustre technique of most of the cards, the biggest artistic issue here is simply a lack of style.

Across the cards, there is a clearly underdeveloped artistic eye. Rather than seeming like different textures or moods within one style, it seems like the same edgelord posture repeated dozens of times. There is no real development, no contrast, and darkness without contrast simply becomes muddled and dull.

So too are the tarot cards emotionally flat, with the only manifest feeling being just a vague creepiness. Despite the evident gore and violence of the cards, there is little experience of horror or fear when viewing the cards. The lack of refinement and contrast make it little more than the aesthetic equivalent of a Halloween skeleton, or a scream from a tacky horror movie. Without being already invested in the O9A, it reads as shallow.

Art can certainly be dark in tone or appearance and still be interesting and varied. Baroque art is a great example of this, such as with its use of chiaroscuro, so the darkness is not the issue. Neither is the issue about the dubious moral content of the Sinister Tarot; from the pederastic undertones of Amor Vincit Omnia by Caravaggio, to the brutal violence depicted in Judith Slaying Holofernes by Artemisia Gentileschi, Baroque art is perfectly capable of depicting morally problematic content in a manner that has aesthetic appeal and emotional impact.

Let’s now compare the Sinister Tarot with the Thoth Tarot. The O9A suggests that Thelema was merely a “monumental jape” [5] that promotes “self-satisfaction and self-stupefaction” [6], so surely the O9A, being such a cultured organisation of “esoterrorists” [7], should demonstrate a clear artistic advantage over Thelema?

If you look at the cards however, see below for Figure 2, the opposite is true. Not only are they aesthetically and technically much more refined, but there is a very clear style. It is almost Romantic or Symbolist in inspiration, with vivid watercolour details, and borderline fantastical details.

So too, is there variance within the deck. It is not mere doom and gloom, there is violence, love, joy, sexuality, death. It is a much more diverse deck, and this contrast within a specific aesthetic is what makes it a true style, rather than an aesthetic posture.

Perhaps it also is of note then, that once Richard Moult left the O9A and began experimenting with a more varied aesthetic palette, his artwork became of a much higher calibre. Rather than the repetitive and dull textures obvious in the Sinister Tarot, his work takes on a much more unique quality, both naturalistic and uncanny, shifting between lighter and darker moods, see below for Figure 3. It is through this style, as well as Moult’s increased competency, that his work rivals or even surpasses the like of the Thoth Tarot.

But let’s say this is an unfair comparison for whatever reason conjured. Maybe it is that, despite the O9A’s own claims that “our Inner ONA has always attached importance to an appreciation of music, literature, poetry, and the Arts in general” [1], these artistic forms are argued to be mere frills, irrelevant. In lieu of accepting mediocrity, some adherents may assert art is simply of no importance. Very well. Let’s analyse something of irrefutable importance, the Diabolus, an ‘esoteric chant’, with the chant stated to be “one of (the) aural traditions” [8] of the O9A.

Let us ignore the issue of originality, with this so-called ‘esoteric chant’ being little more than a repackaging of Roman Catholic Gregorian chant, including its “Sangallian” notation. Let us also ignore the edgelord posturing obvious in said Diabolus chant, it merely being a darker copy of the Roman Catholic ‘Dies Irae’ chant, with “Iudex” swapped for “Vindex”, and “David” swapped for “Satan”. Technique and interpretation only.

The most popularised form of the Diabolus comes courtesy of one “Nameless Therein”. Despite Nameless’ middling ability with chant, with obvious strain as he attempts to reach higher notes (q.v “Baphomet Baphomet”), and a far too nasal-forward colour (q.v “In the Night”, perhaps both caused by a soft palate that isn’t properly raised), he quickly came to prominence as the O9A’s foremost cantor. This is, however, not to speak of his ability as a guitarist or as a composer, which seem substantially more refined.

So too, is the ‘performance’ of the piece grating. For some reason, Nameless seems to have thought it best to apply a distortion effect to the piece, perhaps to bring it in line with the edgy aesthetic of the O9A, or to hide his own mediocre technique. Either way, the end result is a piece that just cannot live up to the reputation of the Dies Irae chant.

Even to look at other examples of this ‘Diabolus’ chant, the same pattern occurs. Richard Moult’s version, while lacking the distortion of Nameless’ piece, is technically even weaker, with shaky vocals and a lack of resonance from holding his voice back. These flaws in Moult’s chant indicate a beginner vocalist, one who lacks security in his own voice lest his voice cracks or misses the desired pitch.

However, there is a performance of the piece that is tolerable, or even good, by the ABG Lodge. The female singer seems skilled, with only minor issues such as pronunciation (‘temor’ when it’s ‘tremor’), the guitar is played well, and for a while there is a genuine magnetism to the piece. Then it overreaches, and a more mediocre male singer is introduced, making the last minute or so rather clumsy.

Still, it stands as a solid contribution artistically to the O9A. It is noteworthy, then, that this version is extremely difficult to find. While Nameless’ and Moult’s versions are plastered all over YouTube, the ABG Lodge version, as of the date of publication, only seems to be available as part of a 1-hour compilation of ABG Lodge pieces, not as a standalone piece. Prior to this upload, two weeks ago, it was simply impossible to find on YouTube.

Said compilation also only has a double-digit number of views. Compare this to the near 100,000 of one “Noctyr Wyrd”’s version, which exhibits the distortion of Nameless’ piece, with the technical weakness of Moult’s, as well as a new reverb effect which helps to obscure even the pitches being sung. A more unholy trinity of poor musicianship could hardly be imagined.

Rather than rewarding musical ability and the performance of a piece, which should naturally lead to the ABG Lodge’s piece being favoured, the individuals surrounding the O9A instead favour pieces that feed into the ‘sinister’ aesthetic of the O9A. This requires and breeds little real musical ability, hence why objectively weaker Diabolus pieces, such as those by Nameless or Noctyr especially, thrive, whilst more capable artists, who are perhaps less obnoxiously dark, are sidelined.

Conclusion

The rather simple fact is that to have a good aesthetic eye is synonymous with possessing aesthetic sensitivity, and to arouse certain emotions via art also requires a degree of emotional sensitivity. Such an association between art and sensitivity is recognised by the O9A itself, with the comments that the few male Rounwytha tend to have a “sensitive/artistic character” [11].

It is this very sensitivity that simply cannot bloom within the O9A. The very methods of the O9A, but also especially the community and culture that surround the O9A, if they can earnestly be called either, are toxic to any perception of “weakness”. Empathy is instrumentalised, when valued at all, and a supposed “warrior” ethos is repeatedly bashed into the adherent like a trepan to the skull.

Take, for example, the “culling” process of the O9A. It is merely an “evil” deed with regards to conventional morality, and there is nothing emotionally or aesthetically to explore, as it is just a coldly rationalised murder. Despite claiming the deed removes what is ‘diseased’, the act itself is dispassionate, and worse, ugly, and thus naturally repels any with the required artistic sensitivity.

If we are to compare this with the Baroque artworks before, the ‘dark’ or ‘evil’ subjects are much more morally complex. Forbidden desire, duplicity, vengeance, there is a tension there that arouses the mind very easily, and a very human passion. So much so that, in the case of Amor Vincit Omnia, it was responded to with Amor sacro e Amor profano by Baglione, forming the basis of a longstanding conflict between the older Baglione and the superior Caravaggio.

In this light then, the pattern of the most notable adherents being terrorists, artists being lacklustre in the O9A prior to renunciation, and a failure to even perform its own derivative traditions at a good artistic level, the lack of excellence within the O9A is not symbolic, but systematic. The O9A is uniquely toxic to traits that it itself deems to be ‘cultured’ compared to other esoteric traditions.

Avoiding such structural deficiencies won’t do anything. It is time to ‘face the music’, as it were, pun intended.

Vonixa Tiresia

ZLD, C.2364

References

[1] The Rounwytha Tradition

[2] Conflict, Outer Representatives, and the Sinister Dialectic

[3] Labyrinthos Mythologicus

[4] Dark-Empathy, Adeptship, and the Seven-Fold Way of the ONA

[5] A Sinister View of The Book of The Law

[6] Satanism and Satanic Influence

[7] Towards Sapanur

[8] Myths, Legends, Dark Gods, and Occult Mystique

Instead, the “sinister” is roughly equivalent to what is ‘dark’, and/or what is ‘evil’ with regards to conventional morality. The ‘acausal’ realm is explicitly considered to be ‘dark’ or ‘evil’ (and thus ‘sinister’), as are the “Dark Gods” said to inhabit it.

There is, however, a tendency within the O9A for its adherents to cling to forms of the sinister that are degenerate, through three key ways. The first is simply the indulgence in forms of ‘evil’ that, by their nature, debase the adherent by engaging with them. Secondly, is the tendency of many to become trapped in the ‘sinister’ and to be unable to transcend it. Thirdly, and linked, is the misinterpretation of “Satanism” as a literal veneration of Satan, or indeed any extended engagement with a supposed “Satan” at all.

Much in the vein of my older, if much rougher, piece (q.v “The Blight of the Numinous”), this piece will explore the degenerate nature of some practices supposedly inspired by the O9A. This piece will, comparatively, focus on degeneracy in the sinister rather than the numinous, both actual (with practitioners currently doing it) and potential (as traps the adherent may fall into).

As a note, it is important to note that “degenerate” here is not being used in the far-right sense, usually in some vague gesture towards perceived decadence or moral decay. Rather, “degenerate” in this sense is literal, within the context of an initiatory occult pathway. That is, “degenerate” is referring to things that are detrimental and/or impede what is generative to individual progress and character.

Degenerate by Nature (‘Physis’)

Despite the claims of the O9A of being “amoral” [3], and claims that there are no ethical guidelines, with the initiate supposedly deciding for themselves what is or is not ethical [4], this simply does not hold under scrutiny. Certain acts (such as pedophilia), by their very nature, supposedly deem someone’s character as ‘rotten’, and thus makes them suitable victims of culling (‘Opfers’).

Indeed, the entire ‘character tests’ of the Order’s culling process is an ultimately ‘ethical’ choice-making decision, even if these ethics seem foreign or unethical to most. In the given example in The Guidelines for Testing Opfers, the ‘correct’ deed is to physically help a woman perceived to be in the process of being sexually assaulted. Failure is to not help, or to not physically help (e.g to phone the police).

So too, are certain ethical traits embedded in such things as “Kindred Honour” of the Order, such as the valuing of personal knowing. The lack of judgement by “Old Aeon categorisations or prejudices” [1], a disliking of patriarchy [5], and indeed the valuing of honour at all (personal or ‘kindred’), are all also examples of the ethics of the Order.

Whether these specific deeds are called “rotten”, or “unwise”, or “evil” is fairly irrelevant, they all serve the same purpose of having an undesirable category of action, and thus to bifurcate deeds into what is acceptable or not, known as ethics. Whilst there may be some leeway for individual decisions in ethical choices, many of the choices seem fixed. You could not, for example, decide that rape is actually ethically acceptable and still be considered O9A.

Thus, to engage in, or indeed even to promote or romanticise, “sinister” deeds that are related to sexual assault, misogyny, domestic violence, or other deeds perceived to be dishonourable or ‘rotten’, is to engage in what is degenerate. Simply being “evil” in conventional morality is not enough, the Order only seems to view specific deeds within this “evil” as being ethically acceptable, or generative to individual growth.

This isn’t to say that the Order’s ethical system is agreeable, or “ethical” in the common sense of being morally correct, but rather that it has its own method of defining what deeds are acceptable or not, which is what defines an ethical system.

Degenerate by ‘Wallowing’

Another fairly common form of degeneracy is when an adherent simply does not grow beyond the ‘sinister’ aspect. It seems that many, in a rather adolescent fashion, simply seek to rebel against what they view as the norms of society, to glorify ‘evil’ as some supposed higher value in of itself. This is especially prevalent in those who grew up within an Abrahamic religion and experienced trauma, and/or those who are moderately mentally ill.

They thus become trapped to the culture they seek to rebel against, because to be against something (‘evil’ rather than ‘good’) is to be defined by what you are opposed to. To worship a ‘Satan’ figure and to hate a supposed ‘Nazarene’ is to base your entire identity as antithetical to the Nazarene, and thus cannot exist without the Nazarene. You need the supposed enemy to define yourself.

There is, perhaps more immediately notably, a lack of going beyond, a stagnancy, that is uncharacteristic of a “Satanist” in the vision of the Order, when someone is stuck in the sinister. A Satanist is someone who goes beyond, in every imaginable regard [6]. They are supposed to push themselves, physically, mentally, spiritually, to reach the highest point that they can.

As noted by Monica in Falcifer:
“Well, some of the experiences involved confronting the dark or shadow aspect, that hidden self which lies in us all. Liberating it through experiences. Then rising above it.”

“And Mallam and his cronies? They wallow in their dark side - without transcending it?”

“Something like that.”

That is to say, contrary to popular opinion, that being ‘sinister’ has little to no innate value. The sinister is a phase, an aspect, that an initiate is supposed to engage with temporarily, but to then transcend. The value is in the development of character, experiencing the ‘shadow’ aspect of personality (as compared to simply the ego), and then going beyond it. To then experience the ‘numinous’, and then integrate these two together, and even further to annihilate the resultant amalgam.

Despite this, it is readily apparent that many practitioners never transcend it at all, indeed many (especially those influenced by the Tempel ov Blood) simply “wallow” in their supposed evil and never see the greater metaphorical ‘point’. Their occultism, if it can even be called that, is by nature degenerate then, as it does not allow the practitioner to progress any further than a basal edgelord posture.

Degenerate by Veneration

Potential degeneracy is perhaps most characteristic within the supposed “Satanism” of the O9A. In the broader occult milieu, and prima facie even within O9A, “Satanism” refers to a belief in a supra-personal supernatural entity called “Satan”. However, this is not the only definition of what “Satanism” is within the O9A, nor is it intended to be a prolonged spiritual practice.

So too, within the broader occult milieu, does “Satanism” also refer to the veneration of “Satan” as some supposed godly figure, most notably in the vein known as demonolatry. This kind of Satanism explicitly goes against the O9A’s stated view, which is that ‘Traditional Satanism’ does not regard Satan as a being “to be worshipped, feared, and obeyed in a conventional religious sense” [7].

A ‘Satanist’, in the eyes of the O9A, does not submit to anyone. Not to any supposed ‘master’, not to any ‘god’ (Abrahamic, dark, or otherwise), not to any rule or convention. To submit to a ‘Satan’ through veneration then, is to not be a Satanist as the O9A intend the word to mean. It is not meaningfully different from simply worshipping Yeshua or YHWH, other than with darker garbs and edgier ideology.

Indeed, many of the adherents of the Order seem to confuse what the Order means when it uses the term “Satanism” with this broader definition of “Satanism” within the occult milieu. What is supposed to be a temporary initiatory experience, an engagement in what is “sinister” (or ‘evil’ in conventional morality) is instead elongated into a supposed spiritual practice.

So too are rites and rituals not the ‘point’. For some they are perhaps a beginning to a longer quest, an entry route into the occult, but they are far from the end goal. For most others, Satanism becomes a ‘role’ that they are trapped in, the supposed dark satanic master, which they never transcend. To quote:

“(...) the archetypical image is of a dark master who could kill at just the drop of a hat. That image is very important because it allows people to play a role which people are swayed by. What some of the ONA manuscripts do is allow people to play that role. But it has to end at some point, and if it doesn’t end they become possessed by that role, and their Satanic quest is finished. They’ve lost insight.” [8]

It is perhaps notable, then, about just how many in O9A or O9A adjacent spaces are exactly this “dark master” persona. Losers cutting themselves to smear some blood over a portrait of a long-dead serial killer or a book, just what insight does this provide, exactly? It seems many are lost in the aesthetics of the O9A, rather than the intent behind those aesthetics and terminology.

And, regarding rituals as merely a beginning, see again Falcifer, which rather bluntly states:

Note it is “not a charade, exactly”. That is, it is not unreasonable to think of it as a charade, which can only be true if the rituals themselves are of little intrinsic importance. Rather, as “inducements”, the rituals serve to inspire those who engage them into action. They provide the adherents with an identity, some sense of purpose, but such things can also be acquired through other means. Such rituals, satanic or otherwise, are of little importance.

Conclusion

Overall, there is a common tendency amongst these three which is the underlying cause of the degeneracy. This tendency is to treat the “sinister” as a goal itself rather than a means to an end. If the ‘sinister’ or ‘evil’ is regarded as a goal itself, then it would make sense to use any form of ‘evil’, to engage in it for a prolonged period, and to venerate Satan as an apex of sorts for this ‘sinister’ ideal.

However, within the O9A, the ‘sinister’ primarily exists for the purpose of development, especially on an individual level. It is intended to generate a more unique and excellent (ἀρετή) character, and thus there are limits on what ‘evil’ is to be explored, and for how long. That is, it is almost entirely instrumental, used towards a greater purpose.

Whether or not the O9A actually produces any of the excellence it aspires to, is another question for another day.

Vonixa Tiresia

ZLD, C.2364

References

[1] A Glossary of Order of Nine Angles Terms

[2] Some Notes Concerning The Aeonic Perspective - Being An Introduction to The Order of Nine Angles

[3] The Sinister Dialectic and Diabolical Aims of The Order of Nine Angles

[4] The Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown - Volume II

[5] Questions from a Rounwytha Initiate

[6] A Satanic Revealing

[7] The Ontology and Theology of Traditional Satanism

[8] An Afternoon with Christos Beest

Within the Order of Nine Angles (O9A/ONA) manuscript the Grimoire of Baphomet, it is stated that “each named board of the Star Game - for example Sirius - has an associated acausal-entity, and these Star Game associated entities can be deduced from an initiated study of how each board relates to the Septenary Tree of Wyrd”.

Therefore, the goal of this article is to use manuscripts to decode which dark gods align with which spheres. Unfortunately, however, a la the Labyrinthos Mythologicus, it is not just the rhetoric of the O9A that is snarled, but its esoteric correspondences too.

The literal correspondences given in Naos (and the O9A corpus overall) are often contradictory, and thus correspondences in Naos won’t be treated as definitive, but as supportive. So too will the statements given in other manuscripts or by authors not be treated as definitive. The goal is to provide an exegesis of the manuscripts to identify key dark gods.

Aeonic relevance will also be considered, and unless otherwise undeniable (such as with Noctulius), gods with direct ties to the aeon their sphere corresponds to will be prioritised, due to their increased influence with regards to cliology.

The identity of the dark gods of certain spheres are contested, and thus both arguments will be presented so the reader may reach their own conclusions, though I will also give my own interpretation of which is more fitting. The reader is, obviously, not obligated to agree with my interpretations.

If not apparent, the equivalences for the Spheres and boards are as follows:
Moon - Sirius
Mercury - Arcturus
Venus - Antares
Sun - Mira
Mars - Rigel
Jupiter - Deneb
Saturn - Naos

Moon - Noctulius

The dark gods that preside over the spheres of the Moon, Mercury, and Jupiter are all stated in certain manuscripts. As such, it has been stated that Noctulius is the dark god of the Moon, see below for Figure 1, which also contains a statement about ‘Satan’ being the dark god of Mercury (q.v “The Nine Angles and The Septagon”:

The more interesting question then, seems to not be which dark god it is, but rather why Noctulius is so important as to be the dark god of a sphere. At first glance, he seems fairly irrelevant in comparison to very important gods like Satan, Apollo, and Baphomet. However, it seems that Noctulius may actually be a byname for Dionysus, as a god connected with night, earth, and sexuality, or more veiledly, “enchantment”.

Dionysus has connections to the moon and night, whose Bacchic rites were often conducted at nightfall, and in the mountains or other wild places of Greek landscapes. Hence then, “Noct-” in Noctulius, and Nox as the word for the Moon sphere, both roughly meaning ‘night’. Perhaps also, the completely Latin construction of the name Noctulius might imply some Roman heritage.

Like Apollo, Dionysus receives individual mention, most notably perhaps in Charnel House, where he acts as a stand-in for the audience. If Charnel House is read as an initiatory text, it would make sense for Dionysus to be here, as he would be equivalent to the stage of Initiate via a moon correspondence. He is also mentioned in Falcifer twice (as Bacchus), with Falcifer explicitly equivalent to the Initiate stage [1].

Noctulius is stated to be an “earth based” deity. Dionysus is routinely associated with the earth as a chthonic god, as well as the wilderness, however a particularly intriguing example is an earlier Orphic telling of his death and rebirth. After being ripped apart and mostly eaten by the Titans, Apollo took the heart of Dionysus and buried it in the earth of his sacred lands of Delphi, from which Dionysus was reborn, giving Apollo the epithet “Dionysiodotes”, or ‘Giver of Dionysus’.

Interestingly, the ‘Kabeiroi’ are also given as the chant for the Moon sphere in Naos, and in some ONA manuscripts, Dionysus is given as synonymous with the Kabeiroi [2]. The Moon is also said to have a ‘horned beast’ as its symbol in Naos, with Dionysus regularly associated with bulls. So too, in earlier myths and tellings, is Dionysus himself presented as a horned beast [3]:

Perhaps more telling still is the association of Dionysus with the star Sirius, the ‘Dog Star’, with Pindar remarking that the “pure light of high summer” was related to/an embodiment of Dionysus. This “pure light” refers to the rising of Sirius with the Sun during the Mediterranean hot months of summer, hence the development of the term ‘dog days’ to refer to hot periods, thanks to the ‘dog star’ Sirius.

Despite this association with the heat of summer though, Dionysus also has associations with winter, as he held control over the Temple of Apollo in Delphi during the winter months, when Apollo was in Hyperborea. He thus also fits the Sinister tarot description of the Noctulius tarot card as associated with “winter in the wildest of woods”.

So too is the Noctulius tarot card described as “Nature as it is, raw and unaffected”, “acts that challenge the existence of the ‘sacred’”, the “real meaning of liberation”, and “the laughter of the savage, wild god. Terror to the uninitiated” [4]. Dionysus fits all of these, particularly with the Ἄγριος (‘Savage’ and/or ‘Wild’), Ωμάδιος (‘Eater of raw flesh’, which additionally designated him as a god who receives human sacrifices) and Ελευθέριος (‘Liberator’) epithets.

There is something of an apparent contradiction with Noctulius being the dark god associated with the Moon that should be elaborated on. Typically, the Moon is viewed as feminine in ONA literature, and Noctulius as a seemingly masculine god (the -ius suffix is classically masculine), may seem to be a contradiction.

However, Dionysus himself manifests something of the muliebral, the feminine (q.v the Bacchae, “that effeminate stranger” [3]) despite being in a male body. A god simply having a male form does not preclude them being characteristic of a feminine principle, if the dark gods indeed have a ‘gender’ at all [5].

Indeed, Dionysus specifically was regarded as especially effeminate in his sexuality, with the epithet of ‘Androgynos’ due to his taking of receptive and penetrative positions during sex, and the receptive role being coded as womanly/feminine in Greek society. It was extremely taboo for a man to take on such a receptive role for this reason, as it was seen as unbecoming of a man. It is also, then, perhaps worth noting that Dionysus’ laugh is equated to women laughing in an O9A manuscript. [6]

Mercury - Lucifer

As shown in the above Figure 1, ‘Satan’ is given here as the corresponding entity. However, as will be discussed in much more depth later, ‘Satan’ is not one singular entity, but seems to be one whole with two aspects, one light and one dark [2]. The light/Lucifer aspect is relevant here, given that the Agios o Lucifer is independently given as the chant for the Mercury sphere in Naos, and the Diabolus is instead given for the Mars sphere.

Somewhat confusingly, Lucifer is sometimes regarded as separate from Satan (“either Lucifer or Satan” [7]), or as the same entity (“Lucifer/Satan” [8]), or even as a subfacet of Satan (“the ‘Lucifer’ aspect” [2]). It seems they may have earlier have alternated between being synonymous and independent, before Baphomet and Satan were both bifurcated.

It seems then, that the Mercury sphere may be ‘Satan’ in this lighter aspect, aka as Lucifer. This is corroborated by the Dark Gate being corresponded with “Satan/Lucifer”, as well as the rising of Arcturus being linked with August [9], which matches the correspondence of this ‘lighter’ aspect with Karu Samsu also [2]

Hence also, the associations of Mercury with the symbol of a sun in Naos, an otherwise erroneous astrological association. If Karu Samsu means “I invoke the sun” as per Naos, and Karu Samsu is a byname of Lucifer, then some kind of solar association makes sense, supported also by the rising of Arcturus in summer. It is also supported by the description of Mercury in the Self Immolation Rite as “desolate” and as having “fiery tempest”, as well as the “eye of Satan”.

Venus - Darkat or Azanigin

Darkat, as Lilith (‘Lilitu’), is supposedly Sumerian in origin, and thus an immediate aeonic tie exists. In Naos, correspondence is also given between Darkat and the sphere of Venus. However, this may or may not be instead Lidagon, as the symbol next to the Sumerian aeon is of Lidagon rather than just Darkat. Further, Dagon is similarly Sumerian in origin, and thus his inclusion is not anachronistic. So too, does Christos Beest note that Darkat is “the ‘entity’ traditionally associated with Venus” [10]

It is important to note however, that Lilith (even as ‘Lilitu’) did not exist in Sumerian mythology as the individual demoness most associate with the word nowadays, but rather with a class of demons called the Lilu (or ‘Lilitu’ if female). The closest analagous figure instead seems to be Lamashtu, a completely separate demoness, and rather monstrous in appearance and behaviour compared to the slim, pale seductress seen in later traditions. All of this is to say, ‘Lilith’ as we would recognise her is not Sumerian in origin, but Semitic, and thus her supposed ties to the Sumerian aeon might be very weak.

It is interesting to note then, that in some editions of Fenrir, a chant to Gaia is given as corresponding to the Venus sphere [11]. So too, is Gaia referred to as a ‘light’ reflection of Baphomet [2]. Also, it is stated that while Baphomet’s “acausal or Sinister” aspect is reflected in the sphere of Jupiter, her “reflexion” or “causal nature” is given in Venus [8].

Darkat seems to fulfil much of the same role as Baphomet, as the “darker, sensual side” [12]. So too is Darkat treated as literally synonymous with Baphomet, describing Darkat as “the name used before “Baphomet” became the common usage” [2], making them literally the same thing. In this sense, Darkat is not a reflection of Baphomet at all.

It is also worth noting that, if Mercury is Lucifer, and Mars is Sapanur, then both ‘Light’ and ‘Dark’ aspects of Satan have been covered. It would be strange for both aspects of Satan to be covered, but for only the ‘dark’ aspects of Baphomet (with ‘Gaia’ stated to be the ‘light’ side) to be covered.

‘Gaia’ herself is not Sumerian in origin but Hellenic, however it is also fairly obvious that “gaia” here is representative of an earth-goddess motif rather than being literally the goddess Gaia, as “Azanigin” and “Aktal Maka” are given as suggestions for the ‘light’ aspect’s name [2].

Given that “Aktlal Maka” is a “chant”, meaning “the flowing waters of Earth” [2], it is not apparent that Aktlal Maka is a dark god. In comparison, Azanigin (as per Naos) is described as the “Mother of all demons who lie waiting in Earth”, and is thus obviously a dark god of some kind, a maternal one with earth themes. It therefore makes more sense to ascribe the position of ‘Gaia’ to Azanigin.

Similar earth-goddess motifs do exist in Sumerian mythology through the goddess Ninhursag, speculated to be equivalent to both the earth goddess Ki, as well as Dagon’s wife, Shalash. Thus, if Venus is truly Lidagon, rather than just Darkat, ‘Gaia’ as a Hellenic equivalent of Shalash makes more historical sense than Darkat, as Shalash and Dagon are a known pair in ways that Darkat and Dagon aren’t.

My best guess is that Darkat was probably intended here for Venus in Naos, perhaps as Lidagon, however this was later conflicted in some later manuscripts as the ONA developed away from a one-dimensional satanic/sinister image, and also makes far less symbolic sense than Azanigin (or Shalash) being the true goddess here.

Sun - Sauroctonos

This is a fairly easy one. While in Naos, “Karu Samsu” is given as the word for the Sun sphere, it is also suggested as the ‘light’ or ‘Lucifer’ component of Satan [2]. Compared to the Mercury and Mars spheres, which both repeatedly show overt Satanic influence, the Sun sphere is decidedly Hellenic in character, and thus Karu Samsu (if truly the ‘light’ or ‘Lucifer’ aspect of Satan) simply does not fit.

While it has also been suggested in the same manuscript that Lucifer and Apollo are synonymous, thus resolving this apparent contradiction [2], the issue with this becomes that there would then be no apparent dark god for the Sun sphere.

Given the aforementioned inconsistencies between Lucifer being separate to/the same as/part of Satan, and that this Apollo link is even more scant to be referenced, it seems contentious as to whether or not it should be taken as legitimate. Lucifer would also betray the Hellenic nature of the aeon.

It is also unclear whether or not “Karu Samsu” is a god at all, as Naos refers to it as a “word of power” rather than a god in its own right. It supposedly means “I invoke the sun”, and indeed “Lux” is also given as a word for the Sun sphere, referring to light (from the sun or a star). Alternately from it being associated with Lucifer, it may be that “Karu Samsu” is a byname of Apollo in the ONA, and/or a way of presencing the energies of Apollo.

In comparison, Sauroctonos is a known epithet of Apollo. A description of Sauroctonos is absent from Naos itself, but in the Sinister Tarot, Sauroctonos is associated with the Hermit card, described as “intimations of the Abyss” and the “culmination on a personal level of energies created by Change”. The sigil for Sauroctonos also seems to signal this solar element, as it is a combination of the astrological symbols for the Sun and Mercury.

These descriptions, of the “surfacing of individual factors hithero only known on an unconscious level”, and “discovery that will lead to insight, (further) knowledge of wyrd”, align fairly well with the stage of Internal Adept, which culminates in Individuation. The Abyss indeed lies between the Sun and Mars, and thus “intimations” of the Abyss may very well come at the stage of Internal Adept.

It is also worth noting that, in alchemical traditions, Apollo is already regularly associated with the Sun (see below for Figure 2). Given Aeonic theory on top of that, with the Sun associated with the Hellenic Aeon, Apollo becomes even more of a fitting choice, as Apollo is widely viewed as uniquely representative of Ancient Greek culture.

Apollo also gets individual mention in several ONA manuscripts, and even has one in his namesake (q.v “The Lay of Apollo”). He is mentioned alongside the Kabeiroi as being one of the important parts of the “mythos” of the Hellenic aeon, and Delphi is also given as its centre [13], famously known for its Temple of Delphi, Apollo’s most famous cultic centre.

So too is “prophecy” given as a form of working appropriate to the Sun sphere, and oracles as a predominant form of magic in the Hellenic aeon [14], with Apollo known for his oracular abilities. Several of his lovers (Branchus, Carnus, Iapyx) were given or offered the gift of prophecy, and his Pythian Oracle was renown throughout Greece for her abilities.

Mars - Sapanur

Mars is the most difficult to decode. While it may be tempting for some, given Mars’ correspondence with the Western aeon to suggest Vindex as the dark god of Mars, it’s important to preface that Vindex is not a dark god at all. Rather, “Vindex” is a nexion, a person(s) who brings about the next aeon [15].

This also means that Vindex is not categorically of the Western aeon, but instead marks the transition from the Western to the Galactic aeon, hence the association with Saturn instead of Mars or Jupiter [14].

The more well-read still may suggest Shugara as the dark god of Mars, given correspondences in Naos. Three issues arise from Shugara here, however. First and foremost, is that the Moon card (to which Shugara is corresponded) is very clearly, as the name suggests, Lunar. Indeed its description, of the “Dark Pool beneath the Moon” overtly references the imagery used in the Self Immolation Rite for the Moon sphere.

Secondly, neither of the chant tables indicate “Agios o Shugara” as corresponding to Mars. Indeed, it is Agios o Alostoros (as per Naos) and the Diabolus [11] that are used. Satanic imagery is common overall in association with the Mars sphere, with the Western Aeon having an inverted pentagram as its symbol.

Thirdly, Shugara has no aeonic tie to the Western aeon. While symbolically there is a connection between his ties to destruction and the destruction manifest in the Western aeon, there is no overt tie between Shugara and the Western aeon as there has been for other dark gods. He simply only has a thematic tie.

As mentioned before, Baphomet (the symbolic opposite of Satan) is stated to have two ‘aspects’, a lighter one in Gaia, and a darker one in Darkat/Baphomet [2]. The same manuscript then goes on to state that Satan is similarly bifurcated, with ‘Sapanur’ as the ‘sinister’ or dark aspect of Satan, separate from the lighter aspect of Lucifer/Karu Samsu.

Given then, that Mars and Mercury are both associated with satanic imagery, it is interesting that it is stated that “Mercury is the ‘shadow’ of Mars” [16]. It seems plausible that, much like Baphomet, the bifurcation of Satan might leave his ‘light’ aspect and ‘dark’ aspect in different spheres, and given the satanic imagery present in both Mercury and Mars, and their tie via Mercury being a ‘shadow’ of Mars, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to think Sapanur fits into the Mars sphere.

Man’s Gate is also given as corresponding to Mars, and given that Sapanur is a “primal atavism of human origin” in Naos, and this Man’s Gate being a “dark angle” (with Sapanur being the ‘sinister’ aspect of Satan), there is a heavy symbolic link. So too, does the Western aeon being “Promethean” (or “Faustian”) in character [17] fit this human origin of Sapanur. Further, given the current aeon is one of “fire” (‘Year of Fire’), and Sapanur is described in Naos as the “sudden fire of destruction”, he carries those fiery connotations rather well.

Jupiter - Baphomet

Similarly to Satan (who seems to be both synonymous with ‘Lucifer’ and also more than just Lucifer), it seems that Baphomet too is synonymous with the figure commonly known as ‘Baphomet’ in the literature (specifically a dark kind of feminine goddess), but also as the mixture of both the dark and light sides of Baphomet.

The Jupiter sphere specifically seems to reflect her ‘sinister’ nature as noted prior [8]. There is, however, relatively little to say here. Jupiter simply is connected Baphomet, and there is no noted contradiction elsewhere in the corpus, to quote, “Baphomet, as Mistress of Earth, is linked to the sixth sphere (Jupiter) and the star Deneb.” [8]

Saturn - Atazoth

Unlike previous spheres, where there has been historical material to work off of, some esoteric theory, or correspondences, this is much like Jupiter where there is little to say. Saturn as a sphere is most consistently linked with “chaos”, and is stated to be neuter in gender. It is the only planet to be so, with Mercury, the Sun, and Mars being masculine, and the Moon, Venus, and Jupiter being feminine [2]

A visualisation of Atazoth is described as a “dark and nebulous chaos issuing forth from a star-strewn space” [18]. So too is Atazoth linked to “the gateway/nexion to an acausal, and thus immortal, existence”, with the Saturn sphere linked to the grade of ‘Immortal’ in Naos. Atazoth is also given, along with Vindex (who as mentioned before, is not a Dark God) in the Self Immolation Rite in the Saturn sphere.

Perhaps too, Atazoth’s description in Naos as the “most powerful of the Dark Gods”. If Atazoth is indeed linked with Saturn, and the full emergence into the Acausal, such an important role makes sense.

Following all of these rather dense and intertextual explanations, I have produced a graph (Figure 3), if rudimentary, to show how such gods would correspond to each of the spheres, as well as to highlight the structural symmetry such a model produces. For what has been a scattered exegesis of an even more scattered corpus, I’m rather pleased with the results it produces. The shrewd should also compare also to the attached Figure 4 (q.v “Notes on the Septenary Stars”) for esoteric similarities.

Vonixa Tiresia

ZLD, C.2364

References

[1] The Magickal Art of the Deofel Quintet

[2] Baphomet and Opfer (from Fenrir Volume II, Number II)

[3] The Bacchae - Authored by Euripides, translated by Ian Johnston, available at https://johnstoniatexts.x10host.com/euripides/bacchaehtml.html

[4] The Sinister Tarot

[5] Some Notes Concerning Language, Chants, and Acausal Entities

[6] Breaking the Silence Down

[7] The Giving

[8] Baphomet - A Note On The Name

[9] Notes on the Septenary Stars

[10] Melos and Aeonics

[11] Fenrir - Volume IV, Number I.

[12] Crowley, Satan, and the Sinister Way

[13] Cliology - A Basic Introduction

[14] Naos - A Practical Guide to Modern Magick

[15] A Glossary of Order of Nine Angles Terms

[16] The Nine Angles - Esoteric Meanings

[17] Aeonics and Manipulation I

[18] The Rite of Nine Angles

Within the Order of Nine Angles (O9A/ONA), there exists a concept referred to as the “acausal”, a number of dimensions that are said to be “a naturally existing part of the Cosmos, and merely the realm or realms or continuum where acausal energy exists” [1]. These dimensions are supposedly non-Euclidean, not subject to linear time, and also not subject to cause-and-effect (hence acausal).

Within O9A cosmology, the Dark Gods and the Nekalah are said to reside within the acausal, and various types of ‘energy’ are also said to exist within the acausal, imbuing life. It is the supposed acquisition of an eternal existence in the acausal that is the “immortality” achieved by following the Sevenfold Way [2].

Still, the dimensions of this supposed acausal continuum are not very expounded upon, and the literature surrounding the subject is scattered. It is implied (but not outright stated) that these ‘dimensions’ are both literal physical locations, accessible via travelling through Star Gates and/or Earth Gates, as well as psychological states of being, accessed through greater intake of pathei-mathos.

Therefore, the goal of this article will be to coalesce these sources and make one streamlined argument about what exactly the dimensions of the acausal are, as well as their functions, and how they are modelled in the O9A.

Acausal Spatial Dimensionality and the Tree of Wyrd

The spatial element of dimensionality is the easiest to decode, and can be deduced readily within the manuscripts. It is directly stated that there are “five acausal-angles”, with ‘angle’ being synonymous with ‘dimension’, and further that there are “two aspects of cosmic Time, causal and acausal” [3]. This means that, for there to be five acausal spatial-temporal dimensions, and only one of these dimensions are temporal, then there must be four acausal-spatial dimensions.

Perhaps or perhaps not connected to these four spatial dimensions are the four alchemical substances of Water, Earth, Fire, and Air, as well as the four kinds of Gates (aka nexions) mentioned in ONA literature, Earth Gates, Man’s Gates, Star Gates, and Dark Gates. It doesn’t seem apparent that any link between these concepts exist formally in the corpus, however it is possibly notable that each of the Gates has a distinct sphere correspondence (Jupiter, Mars, Venus, and Mercury respectively), and that the differences between these ‘Gates’ have concrete impacts on ritual practice [4].

Heuristically, it may be that each ‘spatial’ dimension of the acausal is a fundamental kind of acausal energy, from which the spheres, dark gods, and other such more complex constructs/forms derive, aligning with the four alchemical substances. The three alchemical bases are in turn derived from these four, Salt from Earth and Water, Mercury from Water and Air, and Sulphur from Air and Fire. So too may the Gates reflect these energies, Star Gates of Water, Earth Gates of Earth, Man’s Gates of Fire, and Dark Gates of Air, following their planetary correspondences.

To continue, seemingly against popular thought, the Tree of Wyrd is not a map of these acausal-spatial dimensions, but rather a map of nexions themselves [5]. Hence then, seven spheres, to represent the three causal-spatial dimensions in tandem with the four acausal-spatial ones, with the ‘spheres’ themselves also being nexions.

Viewing the Tree of Wyrd within a causal frame, the initiate, when ‘progressing’ through the spheres, slowly increases the ‘acausality’ within their own nexion, that is, their mind. Each sphere possesses a unique kind of acausal energy that gradually accumulates within said nexion. The rites and ordeals of the Sevenfold Way then, serve to gradually increase this acausality, culminating in the Rite of the Abyss, when the initiate “transcends” the causal. [5]

This however, also implies the breakdown of more formal ‘stages’. There is little fundamental difference between, say, an Initiate who has completed all of their tasks, and an External Adept who has just completed their External Adept rite, as the degree of acausality between the two only has a very slight difference, if it is at all present. While some rites create larger differences (namely the Rite of Internal Adept, especially extended, as well as the Rite of the Abyss), the majority of grade rituals instead seem to serve psychological and practical functions.

To pre-empt a few things, whilst “a-spatial” [6] and “nonspatial” [7] are used synonymously in some texts with what would be acausal-spatial dimensions, this supposed lack of spatiality seems to instead refer to a lack of causal spatiality. That is, it is non-spatial with regards to Euclidean geometry, with Euclidean geometry specifically defined as “three spatial dimensions at right angles with each other” [5].

Secondly, whilst there is reference to there being “infinite realms of acausal Space” [8], this does not preclude acausal space having a finite amount of dimensions, that is, axes. To speak symbolically here, if we were to map a co-ordinate system to the acausal (with the dimensions of W, X, Y, and Z), each of these may very well stretch out infinitely. So too, may there be infinite subdivisions within these dimensions, realms/planes where, despite existing in the same four-dimensional acausal-spatial continuum, they may otherwise be discrete.

Acausal Temporal Dimensionality

While the exact number of acausal temporal dimensions is easier to know, as it is said outright that there is only one as seen above, the nature of this dimension is much harder to know. The linear nature of causal time means that, perceptually, trying to understand something that is not linear temporally is fairly difficult. It can be deduced, however.

As the time model of the ONA is stated to be helical, and the causal element specifically is linear [4], this perhaps suggests that the acausal element in time is cyclical. Thus, when the linear and cyclical intersect, a helix is formed. Such a cyclical form of acausal time is also concordant with the Wheel of Life, which is presented as a circle, with the Zodiac (and their correspondent seasons) arranged around this circle, see below for Figure 1.

As the acausal is, definitionally, synonymous with life, or what is alive (“it is acausal energy which animates physical, causal, matter imbuing such matter with life” [6]), this Wheel of Life may very well also show something of acausal time and how it intersects with causal time, hence the “helical path” model below the Wheel of Life. As seasons exist within causal time, so too is this “helical path” imbued with the linear nature of causal time, creating a helix.

While this Wheel of Life is an abstraction over the “alchemical seasons” originally designated to the Rounwytha [9], the addition of elemental correspondences to the Zodiac and their respective seasons means that acausal time is of importance to those following the Sevenfold Way as well, as is implied by some more elaborate rites (such as the Rite of Nine Angles) being dependent on the correct astrological alignment and/or the correct alchemical season.

The Star Game

Interestingly, while it has been mentioned in the corpus that these nine angles/dimensions are represented in the Star Game, this seems to not be fully explained yet. The seven boards mirror the seven spatial angles mentioned prior (three causal spatial, four acausal spatial), whilst the arrangement of the board into a helix represents the dimensions of time (one causal temporal, one acausal temporal). The Star Game is thus symbolically a nexion, a representation of an intersection between the causal and acausal.

Compared to the Tree of Wyrd, which only exists as seven static ‘spheres’, the Star Game has seven boards which pieces may freely traverse between. So long as a piece is sufficiently developed, it may freely travel from, say, Sirius to Naos, no connection required. The spheres of the Tree of Wyrd are comparatively discrete, with pathways existing to connect the spheres.

The Star Game also exists within three dimensions, compared to the mere two of the Tree of Wyrd. Whilst this may not seem relevant, as mentioned before, the acausal has four spatial dimensions, and thus a three-dimensional representation is more accurate/complete than a mere two-dimensional one, especially with the removal of the aforementioned ‘pathways’.

The symbolism of the Star Game, via the seven boards, their formation into a helix, the individual states of the game pieces (and the resultant correspondences), as well as the Star Game itself as a nexion, all also better demonstrate a model of nexions. The increasing level of detail and complexity, along with ‘pieces’ within the spheres transforming as they move, reframe nexions from a fairly abstract and metaphysical system (a la the Tree of Wyrd), and into a more concrete, physical realm, which may be accessed.

It seems then, that the Star Game serves a pedagogical function, both to increase the accuracy of the abstraction used to represent the causal and acausal, and also therefore to develop the faculty of acausal thinking, derived from the symbolism that the game uses.

One such important development of acausal thinking, which may be derived from observation of the boards, is that indeed there are no independent ‘spheres’ to begin with. As is said in a few manuscripts, the acausal is a ‘continuum’, that is, discrete points within it do not truly exist, and are abstractions. Hence then, the lack of pathways in the Star Game, and the ability for pieces to traverse freely between boards.

Analogous to colour, we as humans may divide the spectrum into ‘red’, ‘orange’, ‘yellow’, and any other number of supposedly discrete ‘colours’, but these are all human distinctions. The true continuum itself, or spectrum, is undivided, unified. Perhaps not internally all the same, there is a difference between points in the continuum, but to view such a continuum with ‘points’ is hence to create abstractions and form, and thus to miss the metaphorical point.

This is perhaps indicated by the above Figure 2 (q.v “The Nine Angles and the Septagon”). The shrewd may notice that between the Sun and Mars lies a construct, with a white and black halves. This construct is the Abyss, and crossing it entails the loss of all duality. It is then noteworthy that another construct exists between Venus and the Sun in the given figure, but this time, it shows the structure of the Septenary.

This seems to suggest that the idea of seven discrete spheres is transcended, fitting given that the correspondent grades it lies between (External Adept and Internal Adept) involve increasing use of the Star Game, with the ‘advanced’ form of the Star Game having planes vertically in-between each of the seven boards. Such a representation would be misleading if the spheres were truly discrete.

Vonixa Tiresia

ZLD, C.2364

References

[1] Sorcery and the Esoteric Nature of The Acausal - Debunking the Chaos

[2] Pathei-Mathos and The Initiatory Occult Quest

[3] The Nine Angles - Beyond the Causal Continuum

[4] Fenrir - Volume IV, Number I

[5] A Glossary of Order of Nine Angles Terms

[6] Some Notes Concerning Language, Abstraction, and Nexions

[7] Some Notes Concerning Language, Chants, and Acausal Entities

[8] A Short History and Ontology of Satan

[9] Alchemical Seasons and The Fluxions of Time

The erotic and spiritual dimensions of androgyny are widely recognised in pre-modern eras, especially in the form of youthful male effeminacy. In Greek religion alone, Hermaphroditus (derived from the earlier Aphroditus) exists as one of the Erotes, and while he is often flattened to being a god merely of intersexual conditions, he is more accurately also a god of male effeminacy/androgyny, as well as fertility and the Moon. His rites involved cross-dressing of the men and women involved, and it was believed that his dual-sexed nature gave him extensive powers over fertility and marriage, whether said nature was innate or later gained through Salmacis.

It is also then, perhaps noteworthy that Dionysus and Adonis are both titled with the epithet Ἀνδρόγυνος, Androgynos, due to their taking of both the active and passive sexual roles depending on if they were intimate with a woman or a man. Dionysus, similarly to Hermaphroditus, is also linked to ritualistic cross-dressing but via myth, as seen when he encourages Pentheus to dress as a woman to infiltrate the Maenads and their sacred rites. Adonis, as a classical ideal of male beauty, being described as Androgynos is especially interesting, as it seems to suggest that a degree of femaleness/femininity is desirable in males for the sake of beauty.

While it might seem natural to also mention here Attis and his priests in the Galli, and indeed many modern scholars seem keen to reinterpret Attis and the Galli (sometimes Hermaphroditus and Dionysus too) as ‘transgender’, the closer truth seems to instead be that Attis and the Galli represent a negation of the male, rather than a coexistence of male and female as exists in the prior figures. As the castration of Ouranos was a de-masculinisation of the god, so too does the castration of Attis and the Galli follow the same vein. 

Rather than the Galli being outcasts for being ‘transgender’, or violating Greek or Roman gender norms, their status as foreigners and the shame implicit in harming male genitals (as seen via Greco-Roman views on the circumcisions of Jews, and the outlawing of castration by Hadrian) seems the larger component here. Indeed, effeminacy in young males subjected to pederasty was usually viewed as a positive, erotically appealing trait, as seen in the descriptions of the boys as “puer delicatus” (delicate boys), and “deliciae” (delights).

Later on, such hermaphroditism would become a very significant goal within alchemy. Traditionally, the prima materia (or chaos) where the elements merged into an indistinguishable mass was separated with nigredo (putrefaction), and was further purified with albedo. During the albedo process, the White Queen and the Red King would emerge, representative of the feminine forces of the Moon, and the masculine forces of the Sun respectively. Then, in the final alchemical stage (rubedo, with citrinitas being a later development), these two forces would merge (coincidentia oppositorum) into Rebis, the divine hermaphrodite, or more directly, the Sun-Moon Child (infans solaris lunaris). Hermaphroditism is, then, quite literally the ultimate goal of alchemy, the point where the magnum opus/Great Work is fully realised.

This alchemical thought process would also heavily influence Carl Jung, who was known to study alchemy. In his psychological theories of archetypes and the establishment of the self, part of the development of individuation is the cultivation of the anima/animus, representative of the inner feminine for men, and the inner masculine for women. The faculties are held to be beneficial in of themselves, that a man developing his femininity and a woman developing her masculinity impart important traits, so long as they do not usurp the ego, but both of which necessitate some degree of psychic androgyny.

With all of these examples, it appears fairly overwhelming that the coincidence of male and female in one person is deeply important as a spiritual goal. The major legitimate exceptions seem to be spiritual paths that revolve around ‘fertility’, or ‘polarity’. Rather than the hermaphrodite being viewed as a symbol of fertility and polarity as in Hermaphroditus, such paths (such as some forms of Wicca/Neopaganism) will sometimes view transsexualism/hermaphroditism as a violation of these central concepts, as well as homosexuality for similar reasons. 

However, most spiritual paths do not have such reasoning. Transsexualism is discounted wholesale, argued to violate some ideological delineation, or some supposed ‘natural’ order. The reason for this, esoterically, seems to be that transsexualism is itself a manifestation of Chaos, of that pre-divided potential from which everything comes. It is redolent of the dangerous, the unknowable, and also the erotic, and thus threatens the neat abstractions that their systems seek to build.

This is because transsexualism is, intrinsically, a category violation. The lines between man and woman are fundamentally blurred when someone exhibits traits of both sexes, and it results in a violation of categories that most believe to be innate and unchanging, that of sex.  In the modern day, some handwave it as not existing, a transsexual is merely their natal sex after all, yet their behaviour towards transsexuals, viewing them as somehow uniquely decadent or deplorable, reveals a more hidden knowing. Transition marks them in some way, they are indeed not merely a typical member of their natal sex, they are changed and observers know it, if they will consciously recognise this or not.

At the same time, it seems many transsexuals themselves are eager to deny this very font of power. They are merely women in men’s bodies or vice versa, and physical transition is simply a way to fulfil this ‘inner’ reality, or a way for them to ‘treat’ their ‘condition’ of gender dysphoria. Much as homosexuals seek to domesticate their more radical forms to appease heteronormative institutions, seeking assimilation into heterosexual structures via such things as gay marriage, so too do transsexuals seek to assimilate into cisnormativity. Bodies that align with sex stereotypes with sexual reassignment surgeries, legal recognition of a ‘sex change’, seeking heterosexual or homosexual partners to validate their gender identity.

Most transsexuals, however, who aren’t lying to themselves recognise that they are not simply the opposite sex. The wrong body approach is a simplification, while there is an otherness that’s felt as an internal incongruence, transition changes the landscape entirely. For those who medically transition, and don’t become a statistic in the process, there is a an understanding that unfolds. The discomfort towards your natal sex fades, yet your trans identity persists. Rather than being based on negation (I am not male/female), or even change (I will become a female/woman/male/man), it becomes based on differentiation (I am trans, my experiences as trans are valuable themselves).

It is that very otherness, the separation from mundane maleness and femaleness, where the esoteric power of transsexualism lies. Males and females must seek each other to be fertile, fecund, yet the transsexual or androgyne need only consort with themselves. To be a hermaphrodite, born or constructed, is to become the Rebis. The hieros gamos sans gamos, Azoth overflowing, where male and female coexist, or more accurately merge into unity. To be as virile as a man, as delicate as a woman, and to manifest Chaos with your very being.

Vonixa Tiresia

ZLD, C.2364