---

DW Myatt c.1989

The Numinous Way of DW Myatt

Introduction: Mystic Philosophy of a Modern Gnostic

The Numinous Way was the name given, by Myatt himself, to his own particular Weltanschauung, his own perspective about life, which he developed, and continually refined, over a period of some ten or more years. This now completed Weltanschauung has been expounded in a recent (December, 2008 AD) collection of essays, issued under the imprint of The Numinous Way Foundation, entitled Empathy, Compassion, and Honour: The Numinous Way of Life, which essays, according to Myatt, “supersede and correct all other essays of mine about, or concerning, The Numinous Way, and what I, previously, called The Numinous Way of Folk Culture.” Thus, the majority of my references are to the chapters, and appendices, of this work (1).

Significantly, Myatt states that:

“As for The Numinous Way, I do now incline toward the view that this ethical Way of Life, which I have developed, is now independent of me, a complete philosophy of life, and can and should be judged as all such Ways, all such philosophies are judged, on their merits or their lack of them, independent of the life, and wanderings and mistakes, of those individuals who may have brought such Ways into being, or rather, who have presenced something of the numinous in the causal, just as the life of an artist, while it may or may not be interesting, does not or should not detract from or colour an artistic, aesthetic, judgement of his, or her, works of art.”

Myatt’s particular perspective, or philosophy of life – or apprehension, as Myatt himself calls it – is, in my view, fundamentally a mystical one. That is, it is based on a personal intuitive insight about, a personal awareness of, the nature of Reality. This personal insight is that “individual human beings, are a connexion to all other life, on this planet which is currently our home, and a connexion to the Cosmos itself.” (2)

According to Myatt, this awareness is that arising from empathy; more, precisely, from the faculty of empathy, which he explains is an awareness of, and a sympathy with, other living beings (3), and which he defines, in a somewhat technical way, as “a manifestation, an awareness, of our relation to acausality, and in particular as an awareness of the related and dependant nature of those beings which express or manifest or which presence acausal energy and which are thus described, in a causal way, as possessing life” (4). His other, more simple explanation, is of empathy, in relation to human beings, as “our ability to know, to be aware of, the feelings, the suffering, of others.” (5)

This mystical insight of Myatt’s led him, over a period of a decade, to develop and increasingly refine The Numinous Way, and this development and process of refinement was, according to him, inspired and aided by his own personal experiences and by his quest among, and experience of, the religions of the world. As he states (6), his conclusions are:

“The result of a four-decade long pathei mathos: the result of my many and diverse and practical (and, to many others, weird and strange) involvements (political, and otherwise), and my many and diverse and practical quests among the philosophies, Ways of Life, and religions, of the world. The Numinous Way is, in particular, the result of the often difficult process of acknowledging my many personal mistakes – many of which caused or contributed to suffering – and (hopefully) learning from these mistakes.”

These conclusions have led him to reject the political beliefs and views he formerly adhered to, and which he is publicly known for. Among the beliefs and views he has come to reject, as a result of what it is, I believe, accurate to describe as a life long gnostic search for knowledge, and wisdom (7), are National Socialism and its racialist policies, which politics he had practical experience of, and a personal involvement with, lasting many decades.

As Myatt himself claims, the philosophy of The Numinous Way is emphatically apolitical, rejects the dogma prevalent in established religions; rejects nationalism, racialism and racial prejudice; emphasizes and embraces tolerance, and is fundamentally an individual way of life centered on the virtues of empathy, compassion and personal honor (8).

As Myatt states:

“There has been, for me, a profound change of emphasis, a following of the cosmic ethic of empathy to its logical and honourable conclusion, and thus a rejection of all unethical abstractions.” (9)

A Complete Philosophy of Life

In order to qualify as a complete, and distinct, philosophy – in order to be a Weltanschauung – a particular philosophical viewpoint should possess the following:

1) A particular ontology, which describes and explains the concept of Being, and beings, and our relation to them;
2) A particular theory of ethics, defining and explaining what is good, and what is bad;
3) A particular theory of knowledge (an epistemology); of how truth and falsehood can be determined;

It should also be able to give particular answers to questions such as “the meaning and purpose of our lives”, and explain how the particular posited purpose may or could be attained.

What follows is a brief, and introductory, analysis of how Myatt’s The Numinous Way deals with each of the above topics.

Ontology

Myatt, in the essay Ontology, Ethics and The Numinous Way, states that, according to The Numinous Way, “there are two types of being, differentiated by whether or not they possess, or manifest, what is termed acausal energy”. That is, he introduces the concept of a causal Universe, and an acausal Universe, which together form “the Cosmos”, or Reality itself.

This causal Universe is the phenomenal world known to use via our five senses, and knowledge of this causal Universe is obtained through conventional sciences based upon practical observation (10). The acausal Universe is known to us via our faculty of empathy, since the acausal is the genesis of that particular type of energy which makes physical matter “alive” (11). That is, according to Myatt, all living beings are nexions, which are places – regions (or, one might say, “bodies”) – in the causal Universe where acausal energy is present, or manifests, or, to use Myatt’s term, is presenced. Hence, according to Myatt, “The Numinous Way adds empathy to the faculties by which we can perceive, know, and understand the Cosmos… Empathy is an essential means to knowing and understanding Life, which Life includes human beings…” (12)

In his earlier essay, Acausal Science: Life and The Nature of the Acausal, Myatt gives a little more detail as to the nature of acausal being, that is, the nature the acausal itself and of acausal energy.

Ethics

The ethics of Myatt’s Numinous Way derive from empathy, and in the section Ethics and the Dependant Nature of Being of the chapter Ontology, Ethics and The Numinous Way it is stated that:

“The faculty of empathy – and the conscious understanding of the nature of Reality – leads to a knowing, an understanding, of suffering. Part of suffering is that covering-up which occurs when a causal denoting is applied to living beings, and especially to human beings, which denoting implies a judgement (a pre-judgement) of such life according to some abstract construct or abstract value, so that the “worth” or “value” of a living-being is often incorrectly judged by such abstract constructs or abstract values.”

From a knowing and understanding of suffering, compassion arises, and:

“Empathy is thus, for The Numinous Way, the source of ethics, for what is good is considered to be that which manifests empathy and compassion and honour, and thus what alleviates, or what ceases to cause, suffering: for ourselves, for other human beings, and for the other life with which we share this planet. Hence, what is unethical, or wrong, is what causes or what contributes to or which continues such suffering.”

Furthermore, Myatt defines honor (or, more precisely, personal honor) as an ethical means to aid the cessation of suffering (13) and thus as “a practical manifestation of empathy: of how we can relate to other people, and other life, in an empathic and compassionate way”.

In addition, it is worth noting that Myatt views what he calls ‘abstractions’ as immoral, since abstraction obscures, or cover-ups, the essence, the being – the reality – of beings themselves. That is, such abstractions undermine, or replace, or distort, empathy, and thus distance us from life, from our true human nature, and lead us to identify with such abstractions instead of identifying with, sympathizing with, living beings. (14)

Epistemology

In Ontology, Ethics and The Numinous Way, Myatt writes:

“For The Numinous Way, truth begins with a knowing of the reality of being and Being – part of which is a knowing of the dependant nature of living beings.”

Furthermore,

“There is… a fundamental and important distinction made, by The Numinous Way, between how we can, and should, perceive and understand the causal, phenomenal, physical, universe, and how we can, and should, perceive and understand living beings. The physical world can be perceived and understood as: (1) existing external to ourselves, with (2) our limited understanding of this ‘external world’ depending for the most part upon what we can see, hear or touch: on what we can observe or come to know via our senses; with (3) logical argument, or reason, being a most important means to knowledge and understanding of and about this ‘external world’, and a means whereby we can make reasonable assumptions about it, which assumptions can be refuted or affirmed via observation and experiment; and (4) with the physical Cosmos being, of itself, a reasoned order subject to laws which are themselves understandable by reason. In this perception and understanding of the causal, phenomenal, inanimate universe, concepts, denoting, ideas, forms, abstractions, and such like, are useful and often necessary.” (15)

Hence, Myatt conceives of there being two distinct types of knowing. That of the causal Universe, which derives from our senses and from practical science, and that of living beings, which derives from our empathy with such living beings, from a knowing that we are not separate from those living beings, but only one manifestation of that acausal, living, energy which connects all living beings, sentient and otherwise. (16) This second type of knowing derives from empathy, and is one means whereby we can apprehend the acausal, which is the matrix, The Unity, of connexions which is all life, presenced as living-beings in the causal. (17)

According to Myatt:

“The error of conventional philosophies – the fundamental philosophical error behind abstractionism – is to apply causal perception and a causal denoting to living being(s).” (18)

Praxeology

The primary goal is seen as living in such a way that we, as individuals, cease to cause suffering to other life. This means us using, and developing empathy, and thus changing – reforming – ourselves.

“How can we develope this faculty [of empathy]? How can we reform ourselves and so evolve? The answer of The Numinous Way is that this is possible through compassion, empathy, gentleness, reason, and honour: through that gentle letting-be which is the real beginning of wisdom and a manifestation of our humanity. To presence, to be, what is good in the world – we need to change ourselves, through developing empathy and compassion, through letting-be, that is, ceasing to interfere, ceasing to view others (and “the world”) through the immorality of abstractions, and ceasing to strive to change or get involved with what goes beyond the limits determined by personal honour.” (19)

Why should we pursue such a goal? Myatt answers, in a rather mystical and gnostic way, that:

“Empathy, compassion, and a living by honour, are a means whereby we increase, or access for ourselves, acausal energy – where we presence such energy in the causal – and whereby we thus strengthen the matrix of Life, and, indeed, increase Life itself. Thus, when we live in such an ethical way we are not only aiding life here, now, in our world, in our lifetime, we are also aiding all future life, in the Cosmos, for the more acausal energy we presence, by our deeds, our living, the more will be available not only to other life, here – in our own small causal Time and causal Space – but also, on our mortal death, available to the Cosmos to bring-into-being more life. Thus will we aid – and indeed become part of – the very change, the very evolution of the life of the Cosmos itself.”

The Acausal and The Cosmic Being

Myatt’s concept of what he terms the acausal is central to understanding his philosophy of The Numinous Way. He conceives of this acausal as a natural part of the Cosmos, which Cosmos he defines as the unity of the physical, causal, Universe, and of the acausal Universe. This acausal Universe has an a-causal geometry and an a-causal time, and there exists, in this acausal Universe, a-causal energy of a type quite different from the physical energy of causal Space-Time, which causal energy is known to us and described by causal sciences such as Physics. (20)

This acausal energy is, according to Myatt, what animates physical matter and makes it alive, and thus he conceives as life in the causal, physical, Universe as a place – a nexion – where acausal energy is “presenced” (manifested) in causal Space-Time. Hence, all living beings are, for Myatt, a connection, a nexion, to the acausal itself, and thus all living beings are connected to each other. This connectively is felt, revealed to us, as human beings, through empathy (21). Compassion is knowing, and acting upon, this connectivity of life, since “our very individuality is a type of abstraction in itself, and thus something of an illusion, for it often obscures our relation to other life…” (22)

The acausal is thus the matrix of connectivity, where all life exists in the immediacy of the moment, and where causal abstractions, based on finite causal thinking, have no meaning and no value.

Myatt conceives of what he terms a Cosmic Being, which is regarded as the Cosmos in evolution, becoming sentient through the evolution of living beings. That is, the Cosmic Being is itself a type of living entity, manifest (or “incarnated”) in all living beings, including ourselves, and Nature. (23)

“The Cosmic Being….. is not perfect, nor omniscient, not God, not any human-manufactured abstraction. That is, it is instead a new kind of apprehension of Being: a Cosmic one, based upon empathy, and an apprehension which takes us far beyond conventional theology and ontology.” (24)

Thus, this Cosmic Being is not to be viewed in a religious, theological, way, as some kind of deity, for we are part of this Being, as this Being is us and all other life, changing, evolving, coming-into-consciousness (25).

Pathei Mathos

One phrase which frequently occurs in Myatt’s writings about his Numinous Way – and which he often uses in his private correspondence and his autobiographical essays – is the Greek term πάθει μάθος. Myatt, in his own translation of The Agamemnon by Aeschylus, translates this as learning from adversity. Pathei Mathos is how Myatt describes his own strange personal journey, his gnostic search for knowledge, wisdom and meaning, and his ultimate rejection of the various beliefs, ideologies, and religions, he studied and embraced in the course of this four decade long journey.

A large part of this learning from adversity is, for him, firstly an acknowledgment of his personal errors in adhering to and identifying with various “abstractions” – which he admits caused or contributed to suffering – and, secondly, the sometimes painful and difficult personal process of learning from these mistakes and thus changing one’s outlook and beliefs in an ethical way.

As Myatt states:

“In essence, there was, for me, pathei mathos. Due to this pathei mathos, I have gone far beyond any and all politics, and beyond conventional religion and theology toward what I believe and feel is the essence of our humanity, manifest in empathy, compassion, personal love and personal honour. Hence, I cannot in truth be described by any political or by any religious label, or be fitted into any convenient category, just as no -ism or no -ology can correctly describe The Numinous Way itself, or even the essence of that Way. Therefore, I believe it is incorrect to judge me by my past associations, by my past involvements, by some of my former effusions, for all such things – all the many diverse such things – were peregrinations, part of sometimes painful often difficult decades-long process of learning and change, of personal development, of interior struggle and knowing, which has enabled me to understand my many errors, my multitude of mistakes, and – hopefully – learn from them.” (26)

In addition, he does not make any claims for his Numinous Way, other than it represents his own personal conclusions about life.

“The Numinous Way is but one answer to the questions about existence; it does not have some monopoly on truth, nor does it claim any prominence, accepting that all the diverse manifestations of the Numen, all the diverse answers, of the various numinous Ways and religions, have or may have their place, and all perhaps may serve the same ultimate purpose – that of bringing us closer to the ineffable beauty, the ineffable goodness, of life; that of transforming us, reminding us; that of giving us as individuals the chance to cease to cause suffering, to presence the good, to be part of the Numen itself.” (27)

Conclusion

This short overview of Myatt’s Numinous Way reveals it as a comprehensive and, in my view, rather original, moral philosophy with an ethics and a praxeology which, while having some resemblance to those of Buddhism, are quite distinct by reason of (a) how Myatt relates, and defines, empathy and honor, and how such honor allows for the employment, in certain situations, of reasonable (“honorable”) force (28), and (b) how Myatt views human life in terms of the acausal, and as a means for us to “reform and evolve” ourselves.

The goal of The Numinous Way is seen as us, as individuals, becoming aware of and having empathy with all life, and this involves us using and developing our faculty of empathy, being compassionate, and thus increasing the amount of life, of acausal energy, in the Cosmos, leading to not only the evolution of life, but also to a cosmic sentience, which we, when we are empathic, compassionate and honorable, are part of and which we can become aware of.

In addition, as his many autobiographical essays and his published letters reveal (29), The Numinous Way – as outlined in the recent compilation The Numinous Way of Life: Empathy, Compassion, and Honour – has no relation whatsoever to any of Myatt’s previously held views and beliefs, political, or religious. Indeed, Myatt is quite clear that he regards both race, and “the folk”, as abstractions which, like all abstractions, obscure and undermine the numinous and which are detrimental to empathy and compassion and, ultimately, unethical and therefore dishonorable. (30) Thus, and rather confusingly given the terminology, this new apolitical Numinous Way – with its emphasis on personal, ethical, change and the cessation of suffering – is completely distinct from his earlier, now rejected, philosophy which he first called “Folk Culture” and then called The Numinous Way of Folk Culture.

Thus, The Numinous Way, as expounded recently, and as developed by Myatt over a period of many years, is not only a rejection of all of those previously held political beliefs and views of his, but possibly also, as he himself has claimed, a new moral way founded on his own learning from his experiences and errors.

JR Wright
Oxford
December 27, 2008 AD

---

Notes:

1) This work (currently an e-text in both html and pdf formats and published by The Numinous Way Foundation) appears in some editions under the alternative title The Numinous Way of Life: Empathy, Compassion, and Honour. (pdf 465 Kb) This work is due to be published in book format late in 2009. In addition to citing this work, I have, on occasion, referred to recent private correspondence between Myatt and myself (both written, and e-mail) where he elucidates certain matters in response to a particular question, or questions, of mine.
2) An Overview of The Numinous Way of Life
3) In Compassion, Empathy and Honour: The Ethics of the Numinous Way
4) Ontology, Ethics and The Numinous Way
6) Introduction, Empathy, Compassion, and Honour: The Numinous Way of Life
7) A Gnostic is someone who seeks gnosis – wisdom and knowledge; someone involved in a life-long search,a quest, for understanding, and who more often than not views the world, or more especially ordinary routine life, as often mundane and often as a hindrance. In my view, this is a rather apt description of Myatt.
8) Refer to Frequently Asked Questions About The Numinous Way and An Overview of The Numinous Way of Life
9) Introduction, Empathy, Compassion, and Honour: The Numinous Way of Life
10) Refer to the section Ontology and The Numinous Way in the chapter A Brief Analysis of The Immorality of Abstraction, and also to Myatt’s earlier essay Acausal Science: Life and The Nature of the Acausal which is referenced in that chapter.
11) A Brief Analysis of The Immorality of Abstraction
12) A Brief Analysis of The Immorality of Abstraction
13) An Overview of The Numinous Way of Life
14) Refer to Myatt’s recent essay, A Change of Perspective, dated December 21, 2008
15) A Brief Analysis of The Immorality of Abstraction
16) Refer to An Overview of The Numinous Way of Life and Ontology, Ethics and The Numinous Way and also Presencing The Numen In The Moment
17) A Change of Perspective. Also, private e-mail from Myatt to JRW, December 22, 2008
18) A Brief Analysis of The Immorality of Abstraction
19) An Overview of The Numinous Way of Life
20) Acausal Science: Life and The Nature of the Acausal
21) Private e-mail from Myatt to JRW, December 21, 2008
22) An Overview of The Numinous Way of Life. See also The Numinous Way and Life Beyond Death
23) Ontology, Ethics and The Numinous Way. Also, private e-mail from Myatt to JRW, December 22, 2008
24) Ontology, Ethics and The Numinous Way
25) Private e-mail from Myatt to JRW, December 22, 2008 and private letter from Myatt to JRW, which he dated 9.xii.08 (CE)
26) Presencing The Numen In The Moment
27) The Empathic Essence
28) Refer to An Overview of The Numinous Way of Life and also The Principles of Numinous Law
29) Among his dozens of autobiographical essays are the following:

So Many Tears
Love, Deities and God: Redemption and The Numinous Way
An Allegory of Pride and Presumption
One Simple Numinous Answer
The Empathic Essence

I have collected some of his personal letters in The Private Letters of DW Myatt, Part 1.
30) Refer to Frequently Asked Questions About The Numinous Way, where Myatt writes that “such a concept as “the folk” now has no place in The Numinous Way…” See also The Development of The Numinous Way and Other Questions

---

Editorial Note, 01.10.09: The following article was originally published on the Rigorous Intuition blog in August 2005, and since it is, in my opinion, one of the most interesting articles written about Myatt, I reproduce it in full here, even though there are several factual errors, about Myatt, in the article. For instance, the Interview once in the Hexagon Archive was with Stephen Cox, not Myatt; Cox was never even a member of the ONA (let alone its leader); and his Occult group had no connection to either the ONA or Myatt .

Nine Angles of Separation

“ In the mid-90s, in an essay entitled “Death Before Dishonour,” British neo-Nazi political philosopher David Myatt wrote:

To live and act like an Aryan – that is, with nobility of character – means upholding and living by this principle of Death Before Dishonour. Nothing else is more important – not personal happiness, not personal love, not personal comfort and wealth. This principle expresses the spirit, or ethos, of the Aryan warrior, and to be Aryan means to live like such a warrior, for however short a time.

Also, in “The Divine Revelation of Adolf Hitler”:

Quintessentially, the revelation of Adolf Hitler has rendered all other religions obsolete. For this is the first and most important revelation of the cosmic Being – of the purpose of the cosmic Being. Other religions now belong to the past; they are historical curiosities…. All these religions are earth-bound; they do not seek to fulfil a Destiny among the stars, bringing more life, more consciousness.

At about the same time, Anton Long, Grandmaster of the British-based “traditional” Satanic group the Order of Nine Angles, wrote:

We uphold human culling as beneficial, for both the individual who does the culling (it being a character-building experience) and for our species in general, since culling by its nature removes the worthless and thus improves the stock. Naturally, there are proper ways to choose who is to be culled – each victim is chosen because they have shown themselves to be suitable. They are never chosen at random, as they are never “innocent.”

Two years ago, in “The Perspective of Islam,” radical theoretician and al Qaeda apologist Abdul Aziz wrote:

The majority of Westerners condemn martyrdom operations on the basis of the Western perspective, using Western criteria, failing to understand the Muslim belief that this life of ours is only a means, a test, and thus failing to understand that many Muslims are willing to give up their own lives in order to do their Islamic duty, trusting as these Muslims do in the judgement of Allah…. Our life here on this planet we call Earth is only an opportunity – never to return – to gain entry into Jannah and that one of the best means to gain such entry is to strive, and if necessary die, in the Cause of Allah.

What do these people have in common? Everything. They – and many more, besides – are the same person. Let’s call him, for simplicity’s sake, David Myatt. But what he is, there’s nothing simple about that.

Combat 18 is a neo-Nazi org formed in 1991 to provide hooligan muscle for the racist British National Party. (Its “18” numerically represents “AH,” the initials of Adolph Hitler.) Myatt has described himself as its political philosopher.

There’s much suspicion, on the both the left and right, that Combat 18 “was created by Britain’s internal security service MI5 to discredit the BNP while acting as a honey trap, or sting operation, designed to attract the most violent neo-Nazis in Britain into a single organization, where they could be monitored more easily.” Its leader, Charlie Sargent, who was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1997 for the murder of another member, was also an alleged Special Branch informant.

Combat 18 splintered, with Myatt founding the most radical faction, the National Socialist Movement, which remained loyal to purported informant Sargent.

In 1999 NSM member David Copeland conducted a racist nail-bombing campaign which killed three people and injured 129. Myatt’s “A Practical Guide to Aryan Revolution” was particularly formative to Copeland’s thinking. In a profile of Copeland, BBC’s Panorama determined:

…the man whose ideas had more influence than most on Copeland was David Myatt from Worcestershire, founder member of the NSM and its first leader. He once said the Nazi movement needed people “prepared to fight, prepared to get their hands dirty, and perhaps spill some blood.”

And though Combat 18 splintered under suspicion of members’ motives and loyalties, it isn’t quite finished yet being a bloody nuisance. A headline yesterday from Northern Ireland (where Combat 18 is reputed to be used by MI5 to infiltrate Loyalist paramilitaries): Neo-Nazis have threatened me, says Ulster assembly member John Dallat, who has received threats from Combat 18 to burn down his house and torch his office.

The Hexagon archives records an encounter with the unnamed leader of the “Order of Nine Angles” – apparently Myatt [ See Editorial Note, above] – who supposedly co-authored a book with associate “Christos Beest” which likened the ONA “to a modern equivalent of the German Thule Society, precursor of the Nazi Party and responsible for a number of assassinations of dissenters…the reader is lead to believe that the group are busy ‘culling human dross.'”

Hexagon, while refusing to disclose the name of the leader, found “a nucleus of four middle aged men surrounded by up to ten younger aspiring acolytes, again all male. The group [ See Editorial Note, above] uses homosexual rites and although they may well have contact with the far right are highly unlikely to be capable of carrying out numerous murders as darkly hinted at.”

In The Song of a Satanist, “Stephen Brown” – yet another Myatt pseudonym – writes:

Most Satanists cannot publish an autobiography, or even have a biography which relates their life in detail while they still live, for the simple reason that it would probably render them liable to prosecution by those asinine guardians of the even more stupid system of ‘Law’. (Plus the fact that most wish to continue their sinister esoteric work in secret, to aid the sinister dialectic.) If this threat does not exist, then their life has not been Satanic enough.

Another demonstration of the convergence of fascism and occultism is found in the ONA’s Temple 88, which is described as an instantiation of the “aryanist and national-socialist ideas/ideals of the Order of Nine Angles.” The writings of “Temple 88” are recommended for higher initiates, having “reached the seventh stage (Saturn) of the septenary Tree of Wyrd,” who are “assumed to be able to judge and understand why the usage of national-socialism and aryanism is implemented in the Order of Nine Angles ideological structure.”

And what are the Nine Angles? A ceremonial means to manifest the “Dark Gods.” And perhaps not surprisingly, here’s where things get Lovecraftian:

The details that Lovecraft gives regarding ‘calls’ and rites are mostly fanciful and only in a few places does he inadvertently reveal the truth – for example, in his mention of the trapezohedron and ‘Azathoth’. The key to travel along the passages between the star nexions is the Nine Angles and the key to the Nine Angles is the crystal tetrahedron which is activated by voice vibration. ‘Azathoth’ as described by Lovecraft, is a symbolic and distorted re-presentation of the intersection, in acausal space-time, of these astral star passages: a kind of galactic vortex or node. Those who journey there never return the same. Along the star passages the shells of long dead civilizations lie strewn. The Nine Angles (the key to contact both physical and astral) are re-presented in the septenary Star Game and it is through this symbolic re-presentation that the magick of the Dark Gods is made manifest. The rest, to the uninitiated, is sheer terror.

(Lt Col Michael Aquino has authored the Lovecraftian “Ceremony of the Nine Angles” for the Temple of Set, but disavows Myatt and the ONA’s public embrace of human sacrifice.)

And since we’ve come this far, let’s remind ourselves: according to the ONA, where do these “Dark Gods” reside?

The acausal universe itself may be described as that aspect of the cosmos bounded by acausal time and possessing more than three spatial dimenions; the causal universe may be described as that aspect of the cosmos bounded by causal, or linear, time and possessing three spatial dimensions at right angles to each other. The entities known to esoteric tradition as the Dark Gods are beings which exist in the acausal universe. Other such beings probably exist in the acausal realm, but the Dark Gods are known to us through having, at various times in our evolution, ‘intruded’ into our spatial universe.

As I’ve noted in an earlier post, the “acausal universe” recalls Michio Kaku’s Parallel Worlds, in which he writes that “anyone who can tap into the fourth spatial dimension (or what is today called the fifth dimension, with time being the fourth) can indeed become invisible, and can even assume the powers normally ascribed to ghosts and gods.” And interestingly, one of the things David Myatt may be said to be with some assurance is a student of physics.

In 2000 Myatt reputedly converted to Islam, and quickly became an advocate for al Qaeda “martyrdom operations.” Though as he had often done, Myatt hid his previous associations by assuming an alias. He became “Abdul Aziz.”

This story from February 16, 2003, entitled “Midland Nazi turns to Islam,” was one of the first to make the connection between the “Koranic scholar,” the neo-Nazi and the occultist:

A “Satanic Fuhrer” who urged neo-Nazis to fight a race war has turned full circle to become an Islamic fundamentalist.

Midland-based David Myatt, 51, was the political guru behind white supremacist group Combat 18 and has been the leading hardline Nazi intellectual in Britain since the 1960s.

Now the self-confessed Pagan and Adolf Hitler worshipper hails al Qaida leader Osama bin Laden as his inspiration and praises the World Trade Center attacks as acts of heroism…supporting suicide missions and urging young Muslims to take up Jihad.

“Turning full circle” always sounded to me like a lot of fuss to create the appearance of motion, while returning to one’s starting point.

Is Myatt an agent provocateur, a shit-disturber who can’t settle upon a radical philosophy, something more, or something less? It’s difficult to assess motive, but consider that he has been arrested numerous times for such things as writing and disseminating “practical terrorist guides” on suspicion of conspiracy to murder. These cases have always been dropped due to “lack of evidence.” Does he enjoy protection? The record is suggestive that he does. And if it appears so, then we should ask the next question: Why?

One Muslim internet user told the Sunday Mercury that Myatt, who has an IQ of 187, had convinced other users he was an Islamic scholar with his eloquent arguments backed with Koranic verses. He said: “After September 11 Abdul Aziz’s messages started to become more extreme.

“But because he wrote with authority, many less-knowledgeable Muslims thought he was a holy man and began supporting his fundamentalist views. When his true identity was revealed by other users on the site, he changed his online name to Abdul bin Aziz and then al Haqq.”

Myatt may seem to have flitted from one politico-religious philosophy to another, but there is a terrible thread of continuity and rigour through his life and writings that suggests he is much more than a disingenuous provocateur. Naziism and Islamicism have served, in turn, as modalities of disruption for what remains at core an occult working to sow general chaos and division – the necessary passage of “Helter Skelter” to break down the Old Order, before the founding of the New.

So again: whose interests are served by there being a David Myatt? Is he is own man – or men – or does he belong to someone else? Or is it something else – an intelligence service perhaps, or something, say, acausal? ”

Abdul Aziz Myatt tahun 1989

Sebagai seorang aktivis kelompok sayap kiri dan pendukung Neo-Nazi, lelaki asal Inggris ini menempuh perjalanan panjang dan berliku sebelum akhirnya memutuskan untuk memeluk agama Islam. Ego sebagai bagian dari masyarakat Barat yang modern dan maju, menghalanginya untuk menemukan cahaya Islam. Namun ia yakin Allah swt telah membimbing dan memberikannya hidayah, hingga ia masuk ke sebuah masjid, mengucapkan dua kalimat syahadat dan menjadi seorang Muslim dengan nama Abdul Aziz Myatt.

Perkenalan Myatt dengan Islam berawal ketika ia berlibur ke Mesir. Di negeri Piramida itu ia berkunjung ke sebuah masjid dan hatinya tersentuh dengan keindahan suara adzan yang dilantunkan dari masjid itu meski ia belum mengerti apa itu adzan. Sejak itu, Myatt mulai ingin tahu tentang Islam dan setiap berlibur ke Mesir, ia mencari kesempatan untuk berbincang-bincang dengan Muslim Mesir dan menanyakan tentang agama mereka. Myatt juga membeli sebuah al-Quran, membacanya sedikit demi sedikit hingga ia berkesimpulan ajaran al-Quran adalah ajaran yang masuk akal dan makin membuatnya kagum dengan Islam dan umat Islam.

“Semakin banyak saya bertemu dengan Muslim, saya semakin mengagumi mereka,” kata Myatt.

Ketika itu, Myatt tidak langsung berpikiran untuk masuk Islam. Ia masih dikuasai oleh egonya, cara hidupnya sebagai orang Barat dan dua hal yang membuatnya menahan diri untuk tidak mengapresiasi Islam secara penuh dan mempelajarinya lebih jauh lagi.

Dua hal itu adalah, pertama, karena keyakinannya yang tertanam sejak lama pada alam semesta. Keyakinan bahwa umat manusia adalah milik dari seorang “ibu” yaitu “bumi”. Kedua, karena budaya bangsanya yang membuatnya merasa lebih mulia dan superior dibandingkan bangsa lainnya. Selama puluhan tahu, Myatt terombang-ambing dalam keyakinan itu, yang ia pikir sebagai sumber dari zat yang suci. Belum lagi posisinya sebagai aktivis kelompok sayap kiri dan Neo-Nazi yang membuat banyak orang termasuk para wartawan yang menilainya sebagai politisi yang jahat.

“Ketika itu saya masih bersikap arogan, yang hanya percaya dengan keyakinan saya sendiri dan dalam memahami apa yang telah saya raih,” imbuh Myatt.

Hatinya tergerak kembali untuk mulai serius mempelajari Islam ketika ia beralih profesi, mengelola sebuah peternakan. Ia bisa bekerja selama berjam-jam seorang diri. Kedekatannya dengan alam, mengetuk jiwa dan rasa kemanusiaannya. Ia mulai menyadari kesatuan alam semesta dan bagaimana ia menjadi bagian dari semua itu yang ciptakan oleh Tuhan.

Jauh di dasar hatinya, Myatt mengakui bahwa alam semesta ini tidak terjadi secara kebetulan tapi memang diciptakan. Terkadang keyakinan dan ego lamanya muncul. Ia merasakannya seperti berperang dengan godaan setan. Namun ia makin meyakini di dalam hatinya tentang satu-satunya Sang Maha Pencipta.

“Untuk pertama kalinya saya merasa diri saya begitu kecil. Kemudian tanpa sengaja saya mengambil al-Quran dari rak buku, al-Quran yang saya beli waktu berkunjung ke Mesir. Saya mulai membacanya dengan seksama. Sebelumnya, saya hanya membolak-balik lembarannya dan membaca sepintas lalu beberapa ayat,” tutur Myatt.

“Apa yang saya temukan di al-Quran adalah hal-hal yang logis, alasan, kebenaran, keadilan, kemanusiaan dan keindahan,” sambungnya.

Myatt makin tertarik untuk lebih mendalami agama Islam. Ia pun mencari informasi tentang Islam lewat internet dan membaca banyak artikel tentang agama Islam di situs-situs Islam. Dengan melepaskan semua prasangka dan arogansinya, Myatt harus mengakui kalau agama Islam adalah agama yang mulia.

“Saya merasakan menemukan ajaran tentang kemuliaan, rasa hormat, rasa saling percaya, keadilan, kebenaran, kemasyarakatan, mengingat Tuhan setiap hari, disiplin diri, penyikapan terhadap materi dari sisi spiritual dan pengakuan bahwa kita adalah hamba yang harus mengabdi pada Tuhan,” papar Myatt.

Ia juga mempelajari sosok Nabi Muhammad saw dan kehidupannya. Bagaimana Rasulullah menyebarkan agama Islam dan membentuk sebuah peradaban manusia, yang membuat Myatt terkagum-kagum. “Bagi saya, ia (Rasulullah) adalah manusia sempurna dan contoh sempurna yang harus kita tiru,” tukas Myatt.

Ia melanjutkan, “Semakin banyak saya tahu tentang Islam, semakin banyak keraguan dan pertanyaan dalam diri saya yang terjawab selama hampir 13 tahun belakangan ini. Saya benar-benar merasa bahwa saya akhirnya ‘pulang ke rumah’, menemukan jati diri saya. Rasanya seperti ketika saya pertama kali tiba di Mesir dan berkeliling kota Kairo dengan menara-menara masjid dan suara adzannya.”

Myatt merasa bahwa hijrahnya ke agama Islam bukan sebuah pertanyaan lagi, tapi sebuah tugas yang harus dilakukan. Karena saya telah menemukan kebenaran bahwa Tiada Tuhan Selain Allah dan Nabi Muhammad adalah utusanNYa.

Myatt kemudian mendatangi sebuah masjid dan menyatakan ingin menjadi seorang Muslim. Ia diterima oleh jamaah masjid dengan hangat dan penuh rasa persaudaraan, yang membuatnya terharu dan meneteskan air mata. Ia bersyukur Allah swt telah menunjukannya jalan yang benar.

http://swaramuslim.com/islam/more.php?id=5596_0_4_0_M

Honour:
The Practical Foundation of The Numinous Way,

and of The Way of The Warrior

The Meaning of Honour

Honour, according to The Numinous Way, is a specific code of personal behaviour and conduct, and the practical means whereby we can live in an empathic way, consistent with the Cosmic perspective of The Numinous Way. It is thus a means for us to cease to cause, and to alleviate, suffering to the other life which exists in the Cosmos. Honour is how we can change, and control, ourselves in a moral way, and it is the moral basis for giving personal loyalty (or allegiance) and undertaking obligations relating to one’s personal duty, which duty we pledge (or swear) to do on our honour. One of the most obvious outward expressions of living by honour is the possession of personal manners.

As mentioned elsewhere:

“Honour means we respect people – we are well-mannered toward them; we treat them as we ourselves would wish to be treated, and are aware of them, as unique individuals, as fellow human beings, who feel pain, anguish; who love, and who can know joy, sorrow and happiness. That is, we have empathy toward them, and this empathy – this awareness of their humanity – should incline us toward compassion, which is an expression of our very humanity, of our ability to know, to be aware of, the feelings, the suffering, of others. In effect, compassion and empathy provide that supra-personal perspective which makes us truely human and civilized.

Thus, honour, empathy and compassion are all related. Honour means we know, we feel, what true justice is – it is individuals being fair, being reasonable. Honour also means what we strive to do what is right, and are prepared to act, in an honourable way, if we see some injustice, some dishonour, being done.” Compassion, Empathy and Honour: The Ethics of the Numinous Way

Honour, in essence, is a manifestation of the numen of our human life, and when we act or strive to act with honour we are presencing the numen: we being a natural, human, nexion to the numinous itself, and thus re-present the qualities and virtues of what is numinous.

Understood thus, honour is only and ever personal: that is, one can only have honour, and be honourable, toward, living-beings. Thus, for us as social human beings, honour means and implies one has certain duties and obligations toward other human beings, and that we can only give our loyalty to individuals – to a living being – whom we personally know, and not to some abstraction, or to some human manufactured causal form, or to some perceived or assumed ideal. Similarly, we can only have a duty – given by our obligation of loyalty – toward another human being whom we personally know, and not toward some abstraction, or to some human manufactured causal form, or to some perceived or assumed ideal.

Hence, while honour in general beholdens us to act in an ethical, well-mannered, way toward others with whom we come into contact, whether or not we personally know them, loyalty and duty – according to The Numinous Way – are personal, and require a personal knowledge of, a personal contact with, the person or persons to whom one pledges loyalty and to whom one has an honourable duty. This is so because honour depends on empathy – on a personal knowing, on direct personal experience. All abstractions, all categories, all ideals, all human manufactured causal forms and concepts, all separate us from empathy: from that natural perception of – and that feeling for – other living beings. Thus, in a quite important sense, empathy and honour express, and can return us to, our natural human nature, and enable us to know – to be – that natural connexion to the Cosmos which we are and which we have the potential to evolve. Abstractions, ideals, categories, causal forms – all such constructs – conceal, undermine, or destroy, this connexion.

What this means in practical terms, is that honour commands us to act, toward other people, in a polite, fair, well-mannered, unprejudiced way, and that – initially – we give individuals “the benefit of the doubt”. Thus do we strive to view individuals as individuals, and our judgement of them is based upon a direct interaction with them; on a personal knowledge and experience of them. That is, we do not project onto them any abstract category; do not judge them according to some “label” or some concept or some term – whether political, social or religious (or whatever). Instead, our judgement is based upon empathy, upon a direct connexion to another human being, a connexion which – as mentioned above – any and all abstractions, ideals, categories, and causal forms, at best interfere with and at worst disrupt or destroy or are the genesis of, or a manifestation of, prejudice.

The discernment of empathy means that we do not judge an individual by their outward appearance, or by some category which others, or even they themselves, may have appended to their being. Thus, and for example, their known or stated or assumed “political” views and opinions are irrelevant to an empathic knowing and understanding of them, just as their known, stated or assumed “religion”, or their known, stated or assumed ethnicity, culture or social “class, are all irrelevant to an empathic knowing and understanding of them. Similarly, whatever is known, stated or assumed by others to have been done, by them, in the past is also irrelevant, for we judge them – interact with them – as they are now, in the moment of that personal contact, that immediate personal knowing, and not on the basis of rumour, or allegations, or even on deeds done, by them, or alleged to have been done by them, in their past.

The Numinous Way: Way of the Individual Warrior

Honour is the Way of Reason, Culture, and of Warriors, for a code of honour specifies how we can behave in a reasonable, fair, human way, and such a reasonable, fair and human way is the genesis of all human culture, and of all honourable human communities which such culture arises from and depends upon.

In addition – and expressed simply – a warrior is someone who strives to live by a specific Code of Honour; someone who values honour, loyalty and duty, and, most importantly, is prepared to die rather than be dishonoured, or be disloyal, or shirk a duty they have pledged to do. That is, they value honour above their own lives.

What is both interesting and important about the Code of Honour of The Numinous Way is that it expresses the fair, and human, attribute that tolerance, and compassion, have certain ethical limits, and it is these setting of human, and ethical limits, which in one way serves to distinguish and separate The Numinous Way from other ethical philosophies, such as Buddhism, based upon compassion and upon a desire to cease to cause suffering.

Thus, while honour demands that we are fair and tolerant and unprejudiced toward others, it also allows for not only self-defence, but also for the employment, if required, of the use of violent force (including lethal force) to defend one’s self and those to whom the individual has given a personal pledge of loyalty and who thus come under the honourable protection of that individual. Hence, if one is attacked, it is honourable to defend one’s self, and if the circumstances require it, ethical to use such force as is necessary, even if this means that the attackers or attackers are injured or killed.

Some simple examples will serve to illustrate this most honourable of ethical principles and also the attitude, the nature, of the warrior. Consider that an individual is threatened with robbery: if the robber cannot be reasoned with, then the individual has an honourable duty to use whatever force is required to rout, and if necessary, disable, the robber. To accede to the demands of the robber would be a dishonourable act. Consider that a person demands that you do whatever that person says, and is prepared to use, for example, force or some threat to get their own way; then the honourable thing is to refuse such a dishonourable demand and to, whatever the risk, attack or otherwise rout such a dishonourable person. This applies for instance in the case of unarmed individual threatened by someone with, for example, a gun who demands that the unarmed individual do certain things; the honourable individual refuses, and – even if it means their death – tries to attack the armed individual, for to “give in” would be an act of dishonour, and the honourable individual would prefer death to such dishonour. Consider that a person encounters an individual (or several individuals) attacking a lady; the person comes to her defence, and uses whatever force required to rout the attacker (or attackers). Similarly, if a person of honour sees several individuals attack one individual, man or woman, then the honourable thing to do is to aid such an attacked individual.

As should be obvious from the foregoing examples, the individual of honour – the man, of woman, of honour, the individual warrior – would be trained and prepared for such situations, and either carry a weapon to defend themselves (and others, if necessary) and/or know how to disable and rout an armed attacker. In addition, the individual of honour uses their own judgement – and honour itself – to decide how to act and react.  That is, they rely on themselves, on their honour, and not upon some external authority or upon some abstract un-living “law” or some abstract un-living concept of “justice”. For true, human, law and justice resides in – and can only ever reside in – honourable individuals, and to extract it out from such individuals (from that-which-lives) into some abstraction is the beginning of, and the practical implementation of, tyranny, however many fine sounding words may be used to justify such an abstraction and to obscure the true nature of honour. For individuals of honour understand – often instinctively – that honour is living while words are not; that honour lives in individuals, while words  thrive in and through dishonourable individuals in thrall to either their own emotions and desires or to some abstraction.

Furthermore, the individual warrior of The Numinous Way is quite different from the soldier, for the warrior of The Numinous Way is a new, yet ancient, type of human being whose only loyalty and duty is to individuals known to them personally. That is, such warriors fight only if necessary in defence of their own honour; or in defence of someone attacked in an unfair situation by a dishonourable person or by dishonourable others; or in defence of and as a duty to another individual to whom they have given a personal pledge of loyalty and whom they personally know and respect and regard as honourable. Such a warrior would consider it dishonourable to be part of any modern army or armed force, who and which fight on behalf of some political abstraction (such as a State or a nation) or in perceived loyalty and duty to some “leader” or President (or whatever) whom they have never personally met and whom thus they have never been able to judge for themselves as being worthy of such loyalty.

Thus, The Numinous Way is the Way of the thinking, honourable, individual warrior: of the individual human being who has perceived the abstractions of the past for the unethical hindrances that they are, and considers such abstractions – and all that derive from them – as not only restrictive of that true freedom which is our human nature but also as greatly detrimental to our evolution, as human beings. These abstractions include such things as The State, the nation, “race”, social “status” (or class), all political -isms and theories, all religious dogma and theology, and all social doctrines, theories, isms and categories. It even includes many – if not most – of the philosophical and metaphysical doctrines, theories, isms and categories which have been posited in an attempt to explain and “understand” the world, and ourselves, but which, in truth, have been manufactured and them projected onto – interposed between – ourselves, others and “the world”, thus obscuring the numinous and thus distancing us from our faculty of empathy.

However, the only ethical, honourable way – consistent with The Numinous way – to counter such social, political or religious abstractions, is to live in an honourable manner; to be part of, to strive to create, new communities based only upon the law and ethics of honour. By so living, we are using, and developing, our natural faculty of empathy, and thus living as human beings, and striving, in an honourable, empathic, compassionate way, to develope and further evolve ourselves.

Thus, as stated elsewhere:

“In respect of change, what is required, by the ethics of The Numinous Way, is a self-transformation, an inner change – a living according to the ethics of The Numinous Way. That is, compassion, empathy, honour, reason – the cessation of suffering, and the gradual evolution, development, of the individual…This is a personal change, and a slow, social change. The social change arises, for example, when groups of people who follow such a Way freely decide to live in a certain manner through, for example, being part of, or creating, a small rural community. The social change also arises when others are inspired by the ethical example of others.

All this takes us very far away from political or violent revolution – very far away from politics at all. So no, a violent revolution, the overthrow of some State or some government, is not the answer; instead, inner personal development and ethical social change are answers.” A Numinous Future – Beyond The State and The Nation

David Myatt

---

The Code of Honour of The Numinous Way

The word of a man or woman of honour is their bond – for when a man or woman of honour gives their word (“On my word of honour…”) they mean it, since to break one’s word is a dishonourable act. An oath of loyalty or allegiance to someone, once sworn by a man or woman of honour (“I swear by my honour that I shall…”) can only be ended either: (i) by the man or woman of honour formally asking the person to whom the oath was sworn to release them from that oath, and that person agreeing so to release them; or (ii) by the death of the person to whom the oath was sworn. Anything else is dishonourable.

A man or woman of honour is prepared to do their honourable duty by challenging to a duel anyone who impugns their honour or who makes dishonourable accusations against them. Anyone so challenged to a duel who, refusing to publicly and unreservedly apologize, refuses also to accept such a challenge to a duel for whatever reason, is acting dishonourably, and it is right to call such a person a coward and to dismiss as untruthful any accusations such a coward has made. Honour is only satisfied – for the person so accused – if they challenge their accuser to a duel and fight it; the honour of the person who so makes such accusations or who so impugns another person’s honour, is only satisfied if they either unreservedly apologize or accept such a challenge and fights such a duel according to the etiquette of duelling. A man or woman of honour may also challenge to a duel and fight in such a duel, a person who has acted dishonourably toward someone whom the man or woman of honour has sworn loyalty or allegiance to or whom they honourably champion.

A man or woman of honour always does the duty they have sworn to do, however inconvenient it may be and however dangerous, because it is honourable to do one’s duty and dishonourable not to do one’s duty. A man or woman of honour is prepared to die – if necessary by their own hand – rather than suffer the indignity of having to do anything dishonourable. A man or woman of honour can only surrender to or admit to defeat by someone who is as dignified and as honourable as they themselves are – that is, they can only entrust themselves under such circumstances to another man or woman of honour who swears to treat their defeated enemy with dignity and honour. A man or woman of honour would prefer to die fighting, or die by their own hand, rather than subject themselves to the indignity of being defeated by someone who is not a man or woman of honour.

A man or woman of honour treats others courteously, regardless of their culture, religion, status, and race, and is only disdainful and contemptuous of those who, by their attitude, actions and behaviour, treat they themselves with disrespect or try to personally harm them, or who treat with disrespect or try to harm those whom the individual man or woman of honour have personally sworn loyalty to or whom they champion.

A man or woman of honour, when called upon to act, or when honour bids them act, acts without hesitation provided always that honour is satisfied.

A man or woman of honour, in public, is somewhat reserved and controlled and not given to displays of emotion, nor to boasting, preferring as they do deeds to words.

A man or woman of honour does not lie, once having sworn on oath (“I swear on my honour that I shall speak the truth…”) as they do not steal from others or cheat others for such conduct is dishonourable. A man or woman of honour may use guile or cunning to deceive sworn enemies, and sworn enemies only, provided always that they do not personally benefit from such guile or cunning and provided always that honour is satisfied.

Duelling

The most acceptable and civilized form of duel is by pistol, and those abiding by the Code of Honour are expected to use this form as and when necessary.

A formal challenge to a duel must be personally issued, by one party to the other, at which a date, time and place are specified (Dawn is traditionally favoured). Each duellist must be accompanied by a Second, to ensure fair play and an honourable outcome, as there must be a referee.

At the appointed time and in the appointed place, two revolvers, pistols or duelling pistols, as similar as possible, are checked and prepared by the referee, (ideally a man of honour should keep or have access to a matched pair of pistols specifically made for duelling, capable of firing one round and one round only). These revolvers or pistols, and the bullets, are also checked by the duellists and their seconds. [Note: whatever pistol is used it should be loaded or so adapted that one round and only round can be discharged from it when the trigger is pulled.]

The referee then allows the duellists to choose a weapon. The duellists stand back to back. At a sign or word from the referee they then walk a set number of paces agreed beforehand (ten being usual) before turning to face each other. The referee then says: “Take aim!” at which they take aim. The referee then says: “Fire!” at which they discharge the weapon. It is considered dishonourable conduct to aim and/or fire before the referee gives the signal to so do.

Should one person fire and miss, or hit and injure, the other duellist before that duellist has also fired, then the person who has so fired must wait, without moving, until his fellow duellist has also fired, if he is capable of so firing.

Honour is satisfied if the duel is undertaken in the above manner.

Some Notes On Duelling

There are four things which need to be understood about personal duels of honour.

(1) The etiquette, or rules, of duelling must be followed, for it is these rules which make this encounter between two individuals a civilized and thus an honourable encounter. A duel of honour is not a brawl, or merely a fight between two individuals – it is a dispassionate meeting of two individuals who use their own will, their own strength of character, to fight in a particular way.

The rules, the etiquette, of duelling make it such a dispassionate encounter – for a duel is a test of courage, of nerve, of character, of personal honour itself. Any and all conduct which is against the rules is dishonourable, and as such the person who does not abide by the rules is not an honourable person, and thus forfeits their honour and their honourable reputation.

If the rules are not followed, it is thus not a duel of honour.

(2) In a duel of honour, deadly weapons must be used. It is the deadly nature of the weapons used, with the possibility of death, which makes the encounter an honourable one. Deadly weapons include pistols, swords and long-bladed fighting knives of the Bowie type.

(3) The duel is a private affair between the two individuals concerned. As such, only the nominated Seconds, and a referee – acceptable by both sides – must be present. It is against the etiquette of duelling for any other people to be present.

(4) A person challenged to a duel must either personally accept the challenge, or decline the challenge. It is dishonourable and cowardly conduct to ignore a challenge once it has been formally issued. If a person who is challenged declines the challenge, then they must issue a personal apology, and if necessary, or called upon to do so, a public apology.

A man of honour will only challenge to a duel those individuals whom he believes can physically defend themselves and their honour with deadly weapons. Thus, it is dishonourable and cowardly if someone who is challenged to a duel tries to get someone else to fight the duel on their behalf.

---