Honour:
The Practical Foundation of The Numinous Way, and 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
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.