3 D.M. Hutchins – Conversations, Commentaries, and Reviews

Conversations, Commentaries, and Reviews

Addressing the political correctness, and social acceptability,
of occult “traditions” counter intuitively dogmatic paradigms, and the alchemically unbecoming irresponsibility of social adherence whatsoever.

[NOTICE] This page is a work in progress. Upon completion this notice will be removed [NOTICE]

Reputations, however lordly, are vacuous unless tested by observers, and demonstrated by the claimants. The very grounds upon which it is essential to test internal confidence, by way of an external standard, lie in being reassured that one is not deceiving themselves, and likewise, those whose confidence so willfully reassures itself without just comparison to extrinsic standard, are themselves (and by themselves) deceived by circumstance of their inappropriate certitude, which often undermines the gravity of those positions they have allegedly assumed. One must be unmercifully judged, and also take upon themselves the role of pitiless Judge, for that moment when any and all are to be permitted to self promote by way of pomp and unquestionable claims, their remains no further line to be drawn between reality and speculation, and the discussion becomes therefore meaningless to anyone properly differentiating objective and subjective Numinocity. Thus it is my response to any and all of those making claims in any regard, to the nature of personal alchemical metamorphoses, the nature of being, their occult or de-occulting goals either “failing to live up to a particular tradition(s) tenants and/or valuations are, and for quite a myriad of rather obvious reasons, either non sequitur, red herring, or both, as all such passing of judgment is first hand, be it withstanding the accusations of others, or the practical application of information the verisimilitude of which one ought personally determine.

(1) As I have written some time ago in an essay titled “Ego and Expectation” everyone is born “mundane” (or into/unto mundanity) which fact is irrefutable.

(1a) There are those of us who possess a natural inclination towards maintaining our biology’s and consciousness natural evolution, despite the many invitations to abstraction with which we are barraged. (1b) There are others who at some later stage of personal development experience a satori or epiphany moment whereby recognition of indoctrination to dogmatic propaganda occurs, granting the conscious opportunity to do something about it. (1c) There are those who spend their whole lives in base consciousness, never self actualizing, and always adhering to one dogma or another in order to “know what to think and do”.

(1a) The born Magician, natural immunity to indoctrination, Agent of Natural Law, Primary Agency,

(1b) The born Sorcerer, natural immunity to indoctrination, Agent of Magian Hubriati, Primary Psychopath,

(1c) Those possessing the potential to become sub-magicians (Secondary Agency) and/or sub-sorcerer (Secondary Psychopathy), potential immunity and/or carrier to indoctrination,

(1d) The Mundane, the terminally infected, contagious advocates, of both nescience and ignorance,

What is also factual, and beyond mere opinion, is that all of those self attributed titles, memberships, and associations with traditions and/or practices, which traditions and practices allegedly lead to the purging of dogmatic programming and liberation from indoctrination, must themselves be therefore purged, lest the original mundanity remain in tact which dogmas and dictations are shuffled like so many decks of cards. The fallacy committed by any occult tradition scolding another for “doing it wrong” is that the deck being shuffled is being praised as a new deck, and for any offered challenge to returning to or regaining ones natural state which was (or can be) free from indoctrination of any sort, including the very tenets and valuations of supposedly “sinister” institutions making similar demands to their tradition(s) dogmatic propaganda. Thus while, certainly, all genuinely sinister paths are carved out for the explicit purpose of deconstructing the self, purging out indoctrination, regaining ones organic nature, and transcending limitations.

If genuine understanding, and maximum potential is not at the heart of ones pursuits, ones pursuits are therefor mundane, as those claiming to have maximized their potentials, were that true, would have no need for the development and gnosis gained along the sinister paths. Perhaps some are born with a natural edge, an inherent skeptical, inquisitive, and introspective manor, which leads to, and expedites, their progress along the sinister paths, though the paths themselves certainly exist for that exclusive purpose.

The Occult is not “The Occult”

Ninety nine percent of what is referred to as “Occultism” or “Satanism” is not genuinely occulted, or inherently satanic. The occult is in fact is quite widely discussed and openly debated, and Satanism is an entirely accepted subculture in several nationalities across the globe, with much of its watered down Western equivalent of Vamachara being primary expressed in the form of distributing unimaginative music, posters, and tee shirts, aimed of course at a youthful audience in one formative faze or another, with only the occasional gem meriting the attention of a studied adult of

Conclusion

Case and point, the only way to explore a given tradition “wrongly”, be that ONA or otherwise, is to explore that tradition unceasingly without eventually transcending it, or far worst yet, that all too common production of dogma and demands to adherence, born of that pitiful situation whereas both stagnation and certainty conglomerate so as to manifest a myriad of oxymoronic and alchemically stifling series of contradictions such as “Join our church to become independent from religion”, Join our political party to become independent from government”, and “Believe as we instruct you to believe to become independent of indoctrination.”

Footnotes

[1] Carrier – 1. an individual plant or animal that is infected with pathogenic organisms internally or externally without showing signs of disease, and which is capable of transferring them to others, thus causing disease. For example, typhoid carriers harbor bacteria in the gall bladder and these enter the gut in the bile and are excreted. 2. an individual with a GENOTYPE containing a deleterious recessive gene such as that for PHENYLKETONURIA, that does not show in the PHENOTYPE. Collins Dictionary of Biology, 3rd ed. © W. G. Hale, V. A. Saunders, J. P. Margham 2005