Page 4 of 7 « First<23456>Last »
Topic Options
#54185 - 05/09/11 12:32 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: Morgan]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1640
Loc: Orlando, FL
 Quote:

What the fuck are you doing here posting on a site which YOUR BELIEFS and IDEAS rail against?


I see nothing wrong with it overall. 600C isn't some exclusive LaVeyan-only treehouse club with "no giRlz alLow3d!" scrawled on the door. (I for one am not LaVeyan and disagree with many here on a variety of issues, although I do not like using such labels.) There are enough similarities between the ONA and ideas of members here that a decent platform of discussion and debate can occur.

Besides, Fist made the whole thread in the first place, which was in effect an invitation for ONA participants to pitch in their two cents.

 Quote:
These are all available... so why?


http://www.o9a.org/ ... http://www.nineangles.info/ ...and numerous others. Personally I think it would be horrendously tacky for the ONA to have an 'official forum' (their wordpress blogs and facebook pages nonwithstanding).

I respect the Sepentary Path as a solitary method of individual self-evolution, but in regards to collectivism, the ONA has not proved itself exempt from the same leader-worship, hypocrisy, groupthink, e-drama, and us-versus-them myopia that plagues every other group out there.

The occult element is one instance. They rail against the supposed impurity of "Magian"-tainted occultism, when their own "Sinister Chants" are themselves Catholic hymns with a few words changed. (And with glaring Greek and Latin grammatical errors to boot! Shame on you, Dave! What would your abbot say?) In addition, while the idea of Septenary spheres is more purely Western in origin, its organization into a glyph of nodes and interconnected pathways associated with tarot cards is plainly derived from Qabalah.

The communal aspect is another. For example, while the ONA prides itself on its refined manners and air of elitism, this has not stopped its ranks from engaging in juvenile shit-smearing-fights with Tom Raspotnik. I don't think I have to name names, but certain ONA participants of this forum have not proven themselves above such puerile behavior, despite otherwise conducting themselves in a civil and intelligent manner regarding other areas of discussion.

And I do not think it requires a great depth of wisdom to judge the inherent hubris of a fringe-of-a-fringe sect who sincerely believe they are the heralds of a new dawn of human evolution that will eventually overthrow modern society and manifest a Galactic Empire powered by psychic "acausal technology".

Yet despite all these apparent flaws, I am not ready to simply dismiss the ONA outright because they still provide a certain level of discourse that I find engaging. Whether this is enough for some people, is not my call.

So what do the ONA do? In these matters, personal experience cannot be substituted with vague references to a group collectively, as opposed to practical intimations from a single individual.

But in the end I would really only care about "what those crazy kids are up to these days" if I sought to join them myself, or if one of their participants made some sort of claim to me.

By their fruits shall you know them.


Edited by The Zebu (05/09/11 12:54 PM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#54186 - 05/09/11 12:40 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: The Zebu]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I agree Zebu, it's open to all here.

I'm here too and you know, if Laveyan Satanism was a horse, I'd scream "Mercy please, have pity and put the poor thing out of it's misery!" but my difference in these views doesn't make me too dysfunctional. At least not at these levels.

Diversity is good, conflicting ideas aren't bad either.

D.

Top
#54188 - 05/09/11 12:44 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: Jake999]
MindFux Offline
member


Registered: 12/27/10
Posts: 174
I have to agree. Promoting ONA doctrine here is like pissing up a wall. That's not a fault in the doctrine, or the Club, but it's just how it is. Though it is noteworthy that it was not an ONA affiliated individual that started this thread in the first place. The only potential answer I can offer Morgan is that people, of all propensities are equally provoked by a post aimed in their direction. That might be why Sinister Moon was drawn into the discussion.

The discussion, which has come up fairly regularly here at the Club, rapidly becomes, 'I was in the army and killed people, what are you going to do when the shootings starts?' vs. 'the only reason anyone in the ONA would join the army would be if they were Traditional and wanted to insight role, beyond that it's counter the doctrine'. Then of course you get a run of total fantasists making outrageous claims on both sides of the discussion that require equally extraordinary evidence, which is never forthcoming so it becomes a 'my dick is bigger than yours maybe', or 'your dick is imaginary vs. my dick is real but has nothing to do with Satanism'.

To simplify this right down to the core of it all, the ONA is a philosophy. A Way. Sure it has manifested in Traditional Satanism, Fascism, Radical Feminism, Radical Islam, even in one case extreme Christianity, but that's just the hats worn by the meme to appeal to individuals. The hat wearer is a LHP life philosophy focused on self development and self betterment through initially putting yourself in direct, physical and real conflict with the current Aeon, not for any higher end necessarily than measuring the effect it has on your psyche.

That conflict with the 'System' is an inherent and important part of the 'Way', and leads to the 'amoral mindset' over a period of years of practice where a kind of 'special pragmatism' becomes available to an individual. There are other routes to and other names for similar states.

Like attempting to live the 'Way of the Samurai' now (which many Japanese business men do) it has to be modified from its base form for cultural and individual purposes, which is why it'll never be pinned down as an 'Order'. Any more than calling someone a 'Postmodernist' means they have to cast aside Baudrillard and accept only Barthes.

Are there are a group of members of the ONA running marathons over hilly terrain in excess of the 6mph average speeds and carrying heavier weight than required in SAS selection for longer distances? I doubt it. Does that even matter to the ONA as a Way? Not really. Those 'standards' mutated over the years to a 'hard physical goal' in more resent documents. Alternate paths were opened to people because running in the fields isn't really promoting any kind of social change at all.

That's the point that often gets missed or glossed over as people mistake woods for trees. It's a philosophy, a living meme that has adapted and changed to promote a 'Sinister Character' and a 'Type of Person'. This assumption that carrying signs around and beating people, or protesting, or random and ultimately pointless nail bombings was the 'hay day' of the ONA is absurd. It achieved and amounted to nearly nothing. There is a new breed now that live in colleges, schools, universities, offices, working inside the system. I'd argue that one good instance of serious corporate sabotage has a higher dollar value impact than a nail bombing, but that's a side issue.

MF.





Edited by MindFux (05/09/11 12:46 PM)
Edit Reason: stupidity.

Top
#54191 - 05/09/11 01:03 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: MindFux]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
"What the fuck are you doing here posting on a site which YOUR BELIEFS and IDEAS rail against?"

I know its an open source place.
I was just curious about this specific person.

How this specific person feels and why that specific person is posting.

Does that help?

M
_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear
Fuck em if they can't take a joke
Don't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass



Top
#54194 - 05/09/11 01:13 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: Fist]
SinisterMoon Offline
member


Registered: 07/24/10
Posts: 157
Loc: Florida
I agree that the ONA is -

 Originally Posted By: MindFux
a philosophy, a living meme that has adapted and changed to promote a 'Sinister Character' and a 'Type of Person'.


Yes, a philosophy, a way, that's changing and will continue to change because it's now a collective.

As someone wrote recently, it's a way, a means - not the end,

The ONA uses causal forms as a means. To try and encourage a type of person. What particular means that person uses is up to them.

I also agree that the ONA -

 Originally Posted By: The Zebu
still provide a certain level of discourse that I find engaging


Discourse, dialectic, adversarial. Perhaps therefore challenging, or even inspiring to a few.

The point really is that no one now controls the ONA - no one lays down rules or says you can't do that or this, like for instance that you can't slag off someone on a forum or make fun of Tubby Woodentop. If someone wants to do such things - great, for them. Maybe they'll learn something from the effort and experience, or just have some fun.

The amorality of the ONA extends to everything.

To conclude - the ONA is only a guide, possibly an inspiration for some. Probably an annoyance for many and irrelevant for some others. Take it, or leave it, or change it by using what you find interesting or useful and then developing your own way or group or whatever.

There's not much more to be said is there?

EOT??

Top
#54195 - 05/09/11 01:16 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: MindFux]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: MindFux
I have to agree. Promoting ONA doctrine here is like pissing up a wall. That's not a fault in the doctrine, or the Club, but it's just how it is.


Although ONA sure does provide its necessary heresies, one of the problems is age. We old-timers tend to think our way was way better. You know, in our days we, each day, had to crawl through snow up to our ears and wrestle a grizzly just to get our dinner. But times change and approaches change and some that worked for us, don't do it any longer. But it's hard you know, keeping up and adapting with change.

Now, did I tell you about the day I...

D.

Top
#54198 - 05/09/11 01:33 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: Diavolo]
SinisterMoon Offline
member


Registered: 07/24/10
Posts: 157
Loc: Florida
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
in our days we, each day, had to crawl through snow up to our ears and wrestle a grizzly just to get our dinner.


Oh come on now you had it easy - we really old timers had to free climb up part of Mount Kilimanjaro then go find and shoot a Rhino with bows and arrows and then stalk and kill a Zebra all before breakfast.

We had to go hunt our breakfast too, and lunch and dinner...

Top
#54201 - 05/09/11 02:41 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: SinisterMoon]
mabon2010 Offline
member


Registered: 09/29/10
Posts: 259
Loc: The Commonwealth of Great Brit...
I helped two police officers to rescue a hedgehog in the middle of a busy road, and wrestled with a little old lady for the last packet of kippers on special offer in the local supermarket, and won. So mundane but you make of life what you find in it. Tomorrow I will do something more exciting like finish a crossword puzzle.
_________________________
Monadic Luciferianism is a philosophy of life centered on self.

Top
#54202 - 05/09/11 02:41 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: The Zebu]
SinisterMoon Offline
member


Registered: 07/24/10
Posts: 157
Loc: Florida
 Originally Posted By: The Zebu
And with glaring Greek and Latin grammatical errors to boot! Shame on you, Dave!

Here's the stock, off the shelf, ONA answer to such errors and msitakes, taken from something Dave - sorry, I meant Anton Long - wrote - some two years ago. Yeah I know it's long, but what the heck.

BTW I've highlighted in bold the important bit - at least for.

 Quote:
Someone has brought to my attention what appears to be a basic grammatical mistake in the chant Agios o Baphomet, since Baphomet is female. Is it a mistake?

Although this question of alleged “mistakes” in some ONA MSS, or in some ONA traditions, has been mentioned several times before, in some other mostly older ONA MSS, it does perhaps merit some further explanation, particularly since the ONA mythos and the ONA methodology has now seeded itself among thousands and thousands of people worldwide, some of who may well be pouring over various ONS MSS in the hope of sinister enlightenment.

In this matter, one must apply the fundamental esoteric principle of there possibly being an outer, exoteric (or dhir) meaning and/or intent, and there being an inner, esoteric (or batin) meaning and/or intent.

Thus, is what is first perceived as a mistake or an error, really so? Is it a real error, or a typo in the MS; or might it be a test designed to (1) encourage those possessed of our character, our ethos, to reflect further upon the matter and/or to research further, or (2) to encourage the mundanes the make the mistaken conclusion they make by virtue of their mundane personal character? Or, might it indeed be a mistake?

Our ethos is that of the individual of strong personal character who strives to learn by experience, by doing. Such a person questions; they seek to find their own answers; they challenge everything, and do not merely accept something just because it is in some MS or in some book or because someone has told them something.

The author of a particular MS may indeed have made an error – no human entity is infallible, and no one in the ONA claims to be so infallible, or claims their work is divinely or diabolically inspired by some “higher entity”. I, personally, have made many mistakes, and some of my MSS may indeed contain contain some undeliberate errors.

Thus, it is for each individual to ascertain, if they can, where the truth may (or may not) lie. If a particular matter concerns them and they cannot be bothered to so ascertain the direction in which “the truth” (or the error) may lie, then they are not “of us”; but rather more akin to a mundane. Several ONA MSS – especially some “older” ones – may have some traps for the unwary; may lead some mundane who reads them to make certain false conclusions; and may, just may, inspire a few individuals of sinister character to discover certain matters for themselves.

Thus, and in respect of the particular example you cite, someone possessed of our sinister character, our ethos, might – after reflexion upon and/or further research into the matter – conclude that it is not an error because the entities being mentioned and “invoked” by such a vibration/chant are beyond the limited causal category – our limited dichotomy – of male and female. That is, our rather limited classification of sentient beings into just two categories, male and female, is or may not be strictly applicable to such acausal entities. A really talented individual might go even further, and be inspired to seek to invent some type of language – or some collocation of symbols – which goes beyond such limited causal categories. And so on.


The source for this is -

http://antonlong.wordpress.com/2009/08/27/some-notes-on-mythos-and-methodology/

Top
#54203 - 05/09/11 03:07 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: SinisterMoon]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: SinisterMoon

Oh come on now you had it easy - we really old timers had to free climb up part of Mount Kilimanjaro then go find and shoot a Rhino with bows and arrows and then stalk and kill a Zebra all before breakfast.

We had to go hunt our breakfast too, and lunch and dinner...




41... huh.

When I was a youngster, Killimanjaro was just a hill out back of town that we had to pass to get to the dinosaur steaks.

(Aquino will be snorkeling for amoeba in the primordial ooze in the next post. He's got me beat by a couple of years.)
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#54204 - 05/09/11 03:11 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: MindFux]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: MindFux
Are there are a group of members of the ONA running marathons over hilly terrain in excess of the 6mph average speeds and carrying heavier weight than required in SAS selection for longer distances? I doubt it. Does that even matter to the ONA as a Way? Not really. Those 'standards' mutated over the years to a 'hard physical goal' in more resent documents. Alternate paths were opened to people because running in the fields isn't really promoting any kind of social change at all.


The physical goals of the ONA, although admirable, aren't what I'd call important. Of course if you got the body type of a hippopotamus and your heartbeat climbs to 180 when lifting that slice of pizza, you're not going to be too competent trying anything which involves action. As such it is preferable to have a body which doesn't collapse too easy. A functioning brain wouldn't be bad either. But running? I've been in the army for some years, first as recon, then as a drill sarg and I've been running that much, that after I left, it wasn't any longer included in my “top ten of things I like to do”. Shaving neither.

If you want to accomplish anything out there, running around in the woods isn't going to have much effect indeed. There's that which you personally undertake to “become” and there's that which requires participation. You don't really need to be Rambo and split a cow's skull in one blow to accomplish things. Often it requires something quite different, something more subtle.

The days we got things done by painting our face blue and clubbing each other are gone. Of course such might still be a handy skill if needed but when you prefer to see things go your way, you have to go in there, not hang out somewhere.

D.

Top
#54205 - 05/09/11 03:14 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: Jake999]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
(Aquino will be snorkeling for amoeba in the primordial ooze in the next post. He's got me beat by a couple of years.)


Wasn't he the one mentioned in Genesis?

D.

Top
#54208 - 05/09/11 03:38 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: Diavolo]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
He probably WROTE Genesis. Autobiography is his specialty! \:\)
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#54213 - 05/09/11 06:00 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: SinisterMoon]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1640
Loc: Orlando, FL
The 'Agios o Baphomet' issue is a bit sketchy and open to interpretation, but there is also the matter of 'Agios o Kabeiri'-- Kabeiri is a plural noun, and likewise should be the corresponding adjective, which would result in 'Agioi o Kabeiri'. I also mention the rather odd fact that no ONA writer has ever bothered to decline the latin 'Satanas' at all. For instance-- "Ad Satanas qui laetificat iuventutem meam" should read "Ad Satanam...", the accusative case being proper. Likewise, "Suscipe, Satanas, munus quad tibi offerimus" stands corrected as "Suscipe, Satana...". The list goes on.

At the same time, it doesn't really matter in the big picture, or invalidate the ONA's overall method. I only bring these issues to light because as a former traditionalist Catholic, I have a soft spot for Latin. (And also because I am a gigantic nerd obsessed with detail.)


Edited by The Zebu (05/09/11 06:04 PM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#54220 - 05/09/11 07:38 PM Re: The Current State of the ONA? [Re: The Zebu]
SinisterMoon Offline
member


Registered: 07/24/10
Posts: 157
Loc: Florida
 Originally Posted By: The Zebu
The 'Agios o Baphomet' issue is a bit sketchy and open to interpretation, but there is also the matter of 'Agios o Kabeiri'-- Kabeiri is a plural noun, and likewise should be the corresponding adjective, which would result in 'Agioi o Kabeiri'. I also mention the rather odd fact that no ONA writer has ever bothered to decline the latin 'Satanas' at all. For instance-- "Ad Satanas qui laetificat iuventutem meam" should read "Ad Satanam...", the accusative case being proper. Likewise, "Suscipe, Satanas, munus quad tibi offerimus" stands corrected as "Suscipe, Satana...". The list goes on.

Very interesting. Maybe this brings up something that occured to me while reading the *E&OE* dislcaimer I posted in a previous reply which is hinted at in other texts about such matters.

What is a name, and do our gender, and singular and plural, apply to such entities as mentioned in the chants? Like singular and plural imply causality, like gender does imply our causal realm. But what about the acausal and acausal entities like Satan or Satanas is supposed to be (according to the ONA)? Can they be both singular and plural - at the same time, in acausal space/time? Shapeshifting not only in form but in gender and from singular to what we term plurality?

Is our language by definition suited only to describing causal entities? If so, is there a difference when a name is simply said, written, or when it's chanted and vibrated in an specific way in some ritual, like in the ONA's esoteric chant, with two or more people singing not in unison but in parallel intervals (like an octave and a fifth apart)? Does such a method of chanting *a name* then make it more than a name we read or speak?

I don't know. But it seems to hint at strange things. To a world we don't really know at all.

But maybe after all these errors were merely a test, a provocation perhaps to get people to think the above?

Or as most seem to believe they're just sloppy mistakes from someone who didn't know Latin or Greek and was just making it up as he went along. Or even silly mind games of some sort.

For you know the were a few times years back when I was reading some older ONA stuff, mostly from the 80's, when I had a sort of intuition of someone laughing at me, at others, studiously pouring over texts, and that those texts I was reading were some kind of *a jolly jape".

Like you say -

 Originally Posted By: The Zebu
it doesn't really matter in the big picture, or invalidate the ONA's overall method

Top
Page 4 of 7 « First<23456>Last »


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.031 seconds of which 0.004 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.