Thread dedicated to the debate of definitions of Right Hand path and Left Hand path

[Chester]

This thread is created such that folks can debate the actual meanings of the terms Right Hand path and Left Hand path.

Good Luck to all!

[shadowstalker]

This should prove interesting.... YES???

[Zanshin]

What - no opening salvo to stir the pot justone?

[Chester]

Zanshin, Thanks for asking since it appears no one else can (here) yet in the sister thread where I had hoped we could discuss the pros and cons of these two "paths" within the definitions I DID provide... that I asked be accepted for our ability to weigh the pros and cons of each, what happened was that several posters disagreed with the definitions.

My theory about that is based on simple, human psychology and note, this same underlying psychology is found in the foundations of witch hunts, inquisitions, crusades, etc. The need to be "right" becomes an imposition of "righteousness" which eventually becomes quite nasty for anyone who does not adopt the party line. I hope I have begun the stirring well.

So - to kick the ball off, I must point to two posts I wrote in the sister thread as those two posts clearly define these two paths as they are known to be defined from antiquity within the various branches of what is known as the Hermetic Traditions and have roots way back to India from the Vedic traditions.

Post # 2 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?76206-Where-did-justone-man--go-Well...-maybe-he-is-back-&p=891119&viewfull=1#post891119)

Post #24 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?76206-Where-did-justone-man--go-Well...-maybe-he-is-back-&p=892884&viewfull=1#post892884)

In addition, one can get a very clear understanding of these two terms via this video which was posted by another member on the sister thread in Post #33
(http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?76206-Where-did-justone-man--go-Well...-maybe-he-is-back-&p=893133&viewfull=1#post893133)

I hope this kicks the ball off!

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I always preferred the terms "service-to-others" and "service-to-self."

If there's really any formal way to define "good" and "evil," I think this would be the closest thing to it.

Even in science you see it: entropy on one hand, and what people call reverse-entropy (which isn't supposed to exist and yet must, and I think it is consciousness -- how else could the universe produce things like cars and blenders if everything is only becoming more chaotic and less ordered?). On one hand you have individual things coming together to work cooperatively, on the other hand you have things breaking down back into individual pieces and serving nothing but their own interests.

[Chester]

I always preferred the terms "service-to-others" and "service-to-self."

If there's really any formal way to define "good" and "evil," I think this would be the closest thing to it.

Even in science you see it: entropy on one hand, and what people call reverse-entropy (which isn't supposed to exist and yet must, and I think it is consciousness -- how else could the universe produce things like cars and blenders if everything is only becoming more chaotic and less ordered?). On one hand you have individual things coming together to work cooperatively, on the other hand you have things breaking down back into individual pieces and serving nothing but their own interests.

One can be Left hand path oriented and be of great service in positive ways to others.

One can promote a dogma and insist others follow that dogma and insist their dogma is "good for others" and then think they are being of service to others when they are only servicing themselves in avoiding facing their own fears.

As to the point regarding "more chaotic and less ordered" (which suggests two poles of a duality) does a Left Hand path paradigm promote chaos or order?

If so, please point out a Left Hand path tradition that pushes for chaos.

Point out a Left hand path tradition that imposes a dogmatic order?

I can create a lengthy list of Right Hand path religions that impose "order" on those they can subjugate (and go so far as to do this with horrific violence). You must agree to their dogma or face gruesome death. Here is a good (rather recent) example of such - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albigensian_Crusade

All done to enforce that all human beings within reach of the Roman Catholic Church adopt and accept the doctrines and practices of that Catholic Church or be exterminated.

A historical figure to consider (when considering who is "good" and who is "evil") is Vlad III, Prince of Wallachia commonly known is the legendary Dracula. With proper research, one will discover that Vlad Dracul resorted to the tactics he is now infamous for (mass impalement) as a tactic to protect his subjects from being forced to pay a tax to the Sultan imposed on non Muslims.

Was he good? Was he evil?

To me he was a hero to the people he was born to protect.

[Chester]

Here is an additional, clearly informed source for defining Left Hand path and Right Hand path -

https://www.facebook.com/TheChurchOfPaganFreedoms/posts/164199163757588

"There was a tendency in mahayana to bridge the gap of absolute separateness between nirvana and maya. One way was found in the doctrine of the boddhisattva, "one bound for awakening." A boddhisattva was a near perfected being who could effect the enlightenment or development of less awakened people through a kind of magical intervention from his ascended state. (This doctrine, as found in Tibetan Buddhism, is apparently the main source for later ideas of "unknown superiors," "secret chiefs," and mahatmas found in certain Masonic, quasi-masonic and Theosophical schools in the west.)"

and a bit further down -

"In Buddhism, as in Hinduism, the left-hand path ends not in the absorption or annihilation of individuality in moksha or nirvana [which is the end for Right Hand path] but in a perpetuation of that individuality on a more permanent plane of existence. Within Buddhist terminology, the practitioner of the left-hand path aims to attain only to the boddhisattvic state--and to remain there as a deity--"angelic" or "demonic." The final annihilation is resisted.

Note the critically important last sentence - "attain only to the boddhisattvic state--and to remain there as a deity--"angelic" or "demonic."

The notion that Left Hand path = evil is nothing but ignorance.

The choice as to how one wishes to apply their individuated "higher state" is no different than an unattained human being's choice to do good or evil.

Please, read the link posted above to get a clearer understanding of the origins (and thus actual meanings) of these two terms.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I guess this is why this thread exists, huh? The left-hand path you're talking about, justone, isn't the kind of idea I had in mind.

If you're talking left-hand path as opposed to a right-hand path, you already have a duality. So I'm just wondering what kind of duality we are creating here: good / evil, conventional / unconventional, dogmatic / undogmatic, mystical / rational . . .

Honestly when I hear "left-hand path," the only people I hear use that term are either gothic-type ceremonial magicians or Satanists, so if you're talking about "left-hand path" according to Eastern traditions then I'm not sure where the comparison comes in.


If this thread is about some complex theological or philosophical system, I like to simplify ideas, between cultures for example, to basic ideas that they have in common, more than tease out nuances between different ways of looking at things. So maybe I had a wrong idea of the discussion. :)

[Zanshin]

Well thanks for the links to the other thread justone - there are so many that one just slipped by me.

I have nothing to add to this high level discourse - happy to observe and reflect.

One query - can anyone speak to right brain/ left brain dominant in correlation to this subject?

[Chester]

Hi bsbray

Here is simplified

RHP = eventual absorption into or a "merging" with source resulting in eventual self-anihilation

LHP = solidification of the self such that one might achieve continuance beyond death of the body as that same self (with as full memory as possible) and for as many experiences as possible, in fact for eternity if one so desires unless one gets tired and perhaps decides to go RHP.

I understand why you have developed the views you have as this is what the ignorant believe and what the willful deceivers want you to believe. The ignorant follow the shepherd which is either a 'dogooder' wanna be or a disguised wolf.

Those who live independent, sovereign and take personal responsibility for their lives fit in the Left Hand category. Can some of those Left Handers take things further and use magic upon others or abuse others, etc. Of Course.

Can someone live independent, sovereign and take personal responsibility for their lives while seeking the goal of RHP? Yes... though if they are successful at achieving independence, knowledge, meaningful experience, sovereignty and discover the fruits of taking true, full personal responsibility they are more likely to change their mind along the way regarding wishing to merge with source.

If they think they are RHP but retain their individuation in any form (ie. soul, etc.) then they are misunderstanding the definition.

Did you read the link provided? Did you read the quote I highlighted?

If someone takes terms that have held a solid meaning for thousands of years and only in the last hundred those terms have been reinterpreted by a few loons or intentional disinfo agents, which set of definitions would have greater validity?

[Chester]

Well thanks for the links to the other thread justone - there are so many that one just slipped by me.

I have nothing to add to this high level discourse - happy to observe and reflect.

One query - can anyone speak to right brain/ left brain dominant in correlation to this subject?

It is my opinion that both left brain (read logic, read metaphorical masculine) and right brain (read intuitive, read metaphorical feminine) are equally important tools. In my personal experience, I sometimes ask Wisdom to recommend an action when within myself (using both logic and any personally filtered intuition falls short). In many cases, when the answer comes from Wisdom, it seems illogical. Yet, because I have gained much trust (through positive experiences with these recommendations) I usually follow these recommendations. Note, a healthy neocortex is vital to the smooth and balanced operation of these two components of the brain.

I see Wisdom metaphorically as The Goddess. Any true study of the Goddess traditions reveals a view these traditions as left Hand path. In fact, in Hinduism there is the worship of a woman by what is known as 'vamacharins' and vama in Sanskrit means left and also means woman or Goddess. The Goddess and woman are seen as the embodiment of Shakti (power). Even further, the vamacharin seeks to become a woman meaning god-like and super-human.

Woman also symbolizes carer, nurturer and thus is the highest metaphorical personification of love for me. Woman is the first physical contact for any child. In most cases at birth the child is placed in the arms of the child's mother. If there be a hierarchy (which I do not see) then it seems logical the woman is #1. I prefer a balanced sacred feminine / sacred masculine but because I am male and because of the external imbalanced patriarchy (which I see diminishing) I reactively put woman first and If I am unsure I always choose intuition over logic as only through the intuitive side of the brain can Wisdom beyond myself flow into me.

as an aside - Just the other day my son accused me of 'worshiping women' after I had spoken to him with regards to his girlfriends satisfaction with an evangelical preacher spouting off as to how God intended man to be the master of woman and I had gone berserk upon hearing about it! I do so hope he abandons that view for the sake of my daughter in law to be and the child they have on the way.

[Chester]

I guess this is why this thread exists, huh? The left-hand path you're talking about, justone, isn't the kind of idea I had in mind.

If you're talking left-hand path as opposed to a right-hand path, you already have a duality. So I'm just wondering what kind of duality we are creating here: good / evil, conventional / unconventional, dogmatic / undogmatic, mystical / rational . . .

Honestly when I hear "left-hand path," the only people I hear use that term are either gothic-type ceremonial magicians or Satanists, so if you're talking about "left-hand path" according to Eastern traditions then I'm not sure where the comparison comes in.


If this thread is about some complex theological or philosophical system, I like to simplify ideas, between cultures for example, to basic ideas that they have in common, more than tease out nuances between different ways of looking at things. So maybe I had a wrong idea of the discussion. :)

Let me add this too. You didn't have the wrong idea. Yet, if one comes here only to state what their definition is and not consider the possibility their definition might not be the essentials of definition that have been passed through consistently by multiple cultures for centuries... and that perhaps to look at the more historically accepted definitions and consider their validity might actually shed new light and raise one's level of awareness.

One of the ways those who seek power over others is to generate illusions which the unsuspecting and unwitting will swallow. Left Hand path presents a way to empowerment. There are those who do not wish anyone else is empowered.

[kirolak]

Great thread! Right now I am in an odd state of mind that seems to block verbal expression, so I too will be in IO (Interested Observer)

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Let me add this too. You didn't have the wrong idea. Yet, if one comes here only to state what their definition is and not consider the possibility their definition might not be the essentials of definition that have been passed through consistently by multiple cultures for centuries... and that perhaps to look at the more historically accepted definitions and consider their validity might actually shed new light and raise one's level of awareness.

So tell me what I have to subscribe to, to raise my consciousness levels. :P


One of the ways those who seek power over others is to generate illusions which the unsuspecting and unwitting will swallow. Left Hand path presents a way to empowerment. There are those who do not wish anyone else is empowered.

Yes, the ones who don't want anyone else empowered are who I meant by "service-to-self"; their primary objective is to do what's best for themselves, even when it puts others at a disadvantage, instead of trying to work simultaneously for the good of all.

[Chester]

Let me add this too. You didn't have the wrong idea. Yet, if one comes here only to state what their definition is and not consider the possibility their definition might not be the essentials of definition that have been passed through consistently by multiple cultures for centuries... and that perhaps to look at the more historically accepted definitions and consider their validity might actually shed new light and raise one's level of awareness.

So tell me what I have to subscribe to, to raise my consciousness levels. :P


One of the ways those who seek power over others is to generate illusions which the unsuspecting and unwitting will swallow. Left Hand path presents a way to empowerment. There are those who do not wish anyone else is empowered.

Yes, the ones who don't want anyone else empowered are who I meant by "service-to-self"; their primary objective is to do what's best for themselves, even when it puts others at a disadvantage, instead of trying to work simultaneously for the good of all.

I can't speak for others but for me, to use higher knowledge as you just described is abusive and also (Edit 2014-11-1 - adding the un as originally meant ) unfulfilling. I suspect some Satanists and what Passio describes as Dark Luciferions use Black Magic in that way.

Yet, it doesn't make sense to me because the more I learn, the more I find myself becoming more of a service to all type being.

[Chester]

I have drawn a current conclusion.

Perhaps this is premature (which would be wonderful).

There is something known as "the thought police." What a "thought policeman" does is they monitor dissemination of thought such that if thoughts come forth through words or symbols (such as art) which they fear and which they wish to suppress, they will use any measure available to them so to do.

They may feel (on the surface) that they are "good" for others (and perhaps for everyone) and that this gives them the right and authority to block any form of dialogue which might lead to new ideas and new understandings which threaten their own views and threaten their security which is dependent upon the experiential world remaining as it is. So they do anything they can to control thought and often they do so by derailing open conversation or imposing their own (always filled with dogma) paradigms.

A week back I created a thread which had the intention of discussing and analyzing the good and/or bad of what are known as The Right Hand path and the Left Hand path and that to do so, both of these paths had to be defined so that the discussion could come forth.

There was a request to accept the definitions supplied so that an intelligent and insightful discussion could occur. What happened was that the thread was immediately pounced upon by emulators of "thought police" and so I then created this thread so that folks who had opinions that differed as to the meanings of these two terms could ping-pong the definition debate.

Strangely though.... none of those thought policemen showed up here.

And so I had to draw the sad conclusion I stated above. There is still a portion of humanity that wants to control how you think. When they discover someone wiggling free, they pounce and this can be seen by the emotional responses and the dogmatic, authoritarian responses.

I am in no way immune from the former... emotional responses. I am pretty good at avoiding dogmatic, authoritative responses as my style is simply to share my own experience and then put forth thoughts as ideas and not as holy writ.

Soon I will attempt once again to generate what may be a difficult discussion to have based on much a.) lack of knowledge/understanding b.) willful ignorance (self imposed stupidity) c.) fear of the unknown that might unfold such that current conceptions become threatening to one's sense of security.

Many here on Avalon complain about the way this world is today yet many of these same complainers also block thought that might move this world forward. Go figure.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I can't speak for others but for me, to use higher knowledge as you just described is abusive and also fulfilling. I suspect some Satanists and what Passio describes as Dark Luciferions use Black Magic in that way.

Abusive, I would agree with. Fulfilling, only for some people. For me personally if I do something that I know is abusive or hurtful to someone else, it actually makes me feel badly too, so I can't really feel fulfilled because of that. I know someone from these perspectives might say that my conscience is weak because of this and I shouldn't care if I hurt others to get what I want, etc.

But also I see this issue from a different perspective. Whether it's an ant hive, human community, a corporate business, or a physical body (there are many examples), these structures always do better as a whole when they cooperate with a common goal to benefit the whole unit. So if I'm a human cell, and I want what I want and I don't care about the other cells in the body, I would essentially become a cancer cell and "steal" resources from the surrounding environment without giving much back. Now in the long run this not only puts the body in general at a disadvantage, but also myself, for two reasons: 1) I would actually benefit more if the body were working healthily and provided me with everything I needed in a natural and healthy way, and 2) the rest of the body wouldn't be pissed at me and keep trying to kill me with white blood cells and various herbs and spices that the person starts eating to "treat" me.

So for me, trying to empower everyone else isn't just a "moral" idea, it actually makes good sense and is better for me also. Especially if there are ET races out there, some of which are very cooperative amongst each other (especially if they have "hive minds" as described), then we have a lot of re-organization to do, to be able to secure our own place without having to worry about being vulnerable to manipulation or exploitation without our even knowing of it. But then not everyone believes in ETs either. :D

[TargeT]

Since this is all really just an illusion/game

can't we define it simply as:

Good = stuff you like

Evil = Stuff you don't like

yeah?

[A Voice from the Mountains]

You could, Targe.

But then say that someone would like a girlfriend, so it'd be good to have a girlfriend so this person gets one. And she's beautiful and he likes her a lot. But then she likes doing something that he doesn't like to do. So now he's faced with a choice: do something he doesn't really like in order to keep his girlfriend, or else not do it, because he doesn't like it and it's evil to him, and make his girlfriend mad, which is also evil to him.

So then things can get more complicated in cases like this. :P

[TargeT]

You could, Targe.

But then say that someone would like a girlfriend, so it'd be good to have a girlfriend so this person gets one. And she's beautiful and he likes her a lot. But then she likes doing something that he doesn't like to do. So now he's faced with a choice: do something he doesn't really like in order to keep his girlfriend, or else not do it, because he doesn't like it and it's evil to him, and make his girlfriend mad, which is also evil to him.

So then things can get more complicated in cases like this. :P


well yes, dissonance is a part of the illusion so I think the definitions would still fit.

You see, since we are all that is/was/ever will be we are ALSO "good" and "evil" so these type of dissonance based situations will arise and only the unbalanced will take issue with it (which is the vast majority of us who are not in touch with our "shadow" self etc..)

[Shezbeth]

I can understand that/why individuals may have reservations against the concept of the LHP, but there is one thing that has been glaringly overlooked that can brilliantly illustrate the ideas that are being posited positively (ha!).

Alchemy is LHP.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Alchemy is LHP.

So this is what I'm still missing from this thread, as somebody who only knows this term "left-hand path" from Satanists.

What is the one definition you guys are taking "left-hand path" to mean, if you could write its dictionary entry, and how are you categorizing things like alchemy under it?

[Shezbeth]

Left Hand Path is a term used to designate a self-motivated process and pursuit of emergence; physically, spiritually, and mentally. This emergence comes in spite of and counter to any establishments, hierarchies, organizations, or presumed 'authorities', as well as in defiance of any prohibitions, taboos, or preconceptions. The individual in question assumes/takes possession of the authority (read: creative propensity) by which to direct and guide their own independent and individual progression by whatever means they feel is apt.

The principal distinction between the LHP and the RHP is how one approaches and/or perceives the matter of source, authority, etc. RHP traditions involve the ultimate authority residing solely in the hands/purview of (a) deities, gods, entities, etc. and that one's 'progress' involves increasingly submitting to, appealing to, and following/accommodating the traditions of the organization, religion, deity et al. Among the LHP the source, authority, and even the deific presence is within the individual seeking/waiting to be expressed, and the progress that occurs is along the lines of one's individual capabilities, potential, and overall individual growth.

Additionally - or perhaps consequently - the LHP and the RHP differ in their perception of what occurs to the individual at the experience of physiological death. As the source, authority, etc. resides in the deities, the RHP teaches (assuming one keeps with it) that as one grows and develops they fall more in line with the guidelines, will, and dictates of said deities, and at the point of death all the non-material elements (everything but the body) rejoin, combine, or otherwise merge with said deities/source resulting in the aforementioned 'self-annihilation'.

The LHP suggests that as one continues to emerge and increasingly develop their 3-fold faculties, (body, mind, spirit) that at the point of death the identity (not the John Smith or Jane Doe aspect, but the individuated consciousness) will continue to operate and exist beyond the threshold of physiological death.

[Anchor]

I dont relate to the terms LHP or RHP.

So working assumption:
LHP = Service to self, Negative polarity, Loves self, "Evil"
RHP = Service to others, Positive Polarity, Loves others, "Good"

Confusion about how to classify where in the spectrum one lies is almost a certainty!

Here is a nice definition I read (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?72867-LLResearch-Service--L-Leema-channeled-talk-on-service-to-others-):

"Those of the positive polarity are of service when by action or thought or even intention, another entity or the self is freer to seek his or her own path than before the intended service was performed. The seeker who loves others wishes them to be free. When that seeker is intimately associated with others, that desire can become so far misted and confused by the glassy illusion of societal demands, of shoulds and oughts, that it is often beyond any conscious understanding to reason out how to be of service. Often, in order to grant another freedom, the greatest service is to remain anonymously and impersonally compassionate and supportive. In other words, to pull the point of view backwards, to remove oneself from the microcosm of the relationship to the macrocosm of the perfection of all that is conscious and of the infinity of time that each conscious being has to choose freely, first this path, then this one, and then another."

[Chester]

Let me add this too. You didn't have the wrong idea. Yet, if one comes here only to state what their definition is and not consider the possibility their definition might not be the essentials of definition that have been passed through consistently by multiple cultures for centuries... and that perhaps to look at the more historically accepted definitions and consider their validity might actually shed new light and raise one's level of awareness.

So tell me what I have to subscribe to, to raise my consciousness levels. :P


One of the ways those who seek power over others is to generate illusions which the unsuspecting and unwitting will swallow. Left Hand path presents a way to empowerment. There are those who do not wish anyone else is empowered.

Yes, the ones who don't want anyone else empowered are who I meant by "service-to-self"; their primary objective is to do what's best for themselves, even when it puts others at a disadvantage, instead of trying to work simultaneously for the good of all.

I can only say what I do - I subscribe to nothing. I simply allowed my desire to emerge more and more individuated such that if I achieve my goal, I am individuated beyond the grave with knowledge of who I am. Those who would call themselves LHP oriented say that is done "your own way."

...as to your last statement, I understood that was what you meant and I have found LHPers at the extreme of STS and I have found LHPers who take responsibility for themselves in part as an example to others which suggests STO intentions are there in balance with STS.

In my cosmology, I am you ad thus harming you harms me. At the same time I must draw the line when I feel I might be enabling irresponsibility in another "thinking I am trying to help them" and instead preventing another from learning how to help themselves...

There is no magic line there and so i follow this one rule. When attempting to help another, it is better to go too far, see I went to far and then pull back than to wonder if I ever went far enough... but this is simply my own, personal rule and I am simply sharing it.

[Chester]

Since this is all really just an illusion/game

can't we define it simply as:

Good = stuff you like

Evil = Stuff you don't like

yeah?

Love it!!! and what many LHPers would say is quite an LHP view!

[Chester]

I can't speak for others but for me, to use higher knowledge as you just described is abusive and also fulfilling. I suspect some Satanists and what Passio describes as Dark Luciferions use Black Magic in that way.

Abusive, I would agree with. Fulfilling, only for some people. For me personally if I do something that I know is abusive or hurtful to someone else, it actually makes me feel badly too, so I can't really feel fulfilled because of that. I know someone from these perspectives might say that my conscience is weak because of this and I shouldn't care if I hurt others to get what I want, etc.

But also I see this issue from a different perspective. Whether it's an ant hive, human community, a corporate business, or a physical body (there are many examples), these structures always do better as a whole when they cooperate with a common goal to benefit the whole unit. So if I'm a human cell, and I want what I want and I don't care about the other cells in the body, I would essentially become a cancer cell and "steal" resources from the surrounding environment without giving much back. Now in the long run this not only puts the body in general at a disadvantage, but also myself, for two reasons: 1) I would actually benefit more if the body were working healthily and provided me with everything I needed in a natural and healthy way, and 2) the rest of the body wouldn't be pissed at me and keep trying to kill me with white blood cells and various herbs and spices that the person starts eating to "treat" me.

So for me, trying to empower everyone else isn't just a "moral" idea, it actually makes good sense and is better for me also. Especially if there are ET races out there, some of which are very cooperative amongst each other (especially if they have "hive minds" as described), then we have a lot of re-organization to do, to be able to secure our own place without having to worry about being vulnerable to manipulation or exploitation without our even knowing of it. But then not everyone believes in ETs either. :D

Thanks you caught a typo - as I meant to write unfulfilling (at least I suspect it might be for me - I never tried intentional Black Magic).

I love your post here... a being who is Left Hand path oriented can be the very being your are describing in this post. It is sad there is so much misunderstanding in the world today regarding these two terms.

One can be a rebel and not be a bad guy as seen by Wisdom, Herself. (metaphorical speak)

[Chester]

You could, Targe.

But then say that someone would like a girlfriend, so it'd be good to have a girlfriend so this person gets one. And she's beautiful and he likes her a lot. But then she likes doing something that he doesn't like to do. So now he's faced with a choice: do something he doesn't really like in order to keep his girlfriend, or else not do it, because he doesn't like it and it's evil to him, and make his girlfriend mad, which is also evil to him.

So then things can get more complicated in cases like this. :P

Which makes Life the incredible "game" that it is (and far more)! For me... at the end of the day, all that really matters is that I did my best for the highest good. That may change... but that is me today.

It was a good friend I met through this forum that pointed out the difference between the highest good and the greatest good.

¤=[Post Update]=¤



You could, Targe.

But then say that someone would like a girlfriend, so it'd be good to have a girlfriend so this person gets one. And she's beautiful and he likes her a lot. But then she likes doing something that he doesn't like to do. So now he's faced with a choice: do something he doesn't really like in order to keep his girlfriend, or else not do it, because he doesn't like it and it's evil to him, and make his girlfriend mad, which is also evil to him.

So then things can get more complicated in cases like this. :P


well yes, dissonance is a part of the illusion so I think the definitions would still fit.

You see, since we are all that is/was/ever will be we are ALSO "good" and "evil" so these type of dissonance based situations will arise and only the unbalanced will take issue with it (which is the vast majority of us who are not in touch with our "shadow" self etc..)

All Left Hand pathers I know would agree with your point here completely, TargeT.

[Chester]

Left Hand Path is a term used to designate a self-motivated process and pursuit of emergence; physically, spiritually, and mentally. This emergence comes in spite of and counter to any establishments, hierarchies, organizations, or presumed 'authorities', as well as in defiance of any prohibitions, taboos, or preconceptions. The individual in question assumes/takes possession of the authority (read: creative propensity) by which to direct and guide their own independent and individual progression by whatever means they feel is apt.

The principal distinction between the LHP and the RHP is how one approaches and/or perceives the matter of source, authority, etc. RHP traditions involve the ultimate authority residing solely in the hands/purview of (a) deities, gods, entities, etc. and that one's 'progress' involves increasingly submitting to, appealing to, and following/accommodating the traditions of the organization, religion, deity et al. Among the LHP the source, authority, and even the deific presence is within the individual seeking/waiting to be expressed, and the progress that occurs is along the lines of one's individual capabilities, potential, and overall individual growth.

Additionally - or perhaps consequently - the LHP and the RHP differ in their perception of what occurs to the individual at the experience of physiological death. As the source, authority, etc. resides in the deities, the RHP teaches (assuming one keeps with it) that as one grows and develops they fall more in line with the guidelines, will, and dictates of said deities, and at the point of death all the non-material elements (everything but the body) rejoin, combine, or otherwise merge with said deities/source resulting in the aforementioned 'self-annihilation'.

The LHP suggests that as one continues to emerge and increasingly develop their 3-fold faculties, (body, mind, spirit) that at the point of death the identity (not the John Smith or Jane Doe aspect, but the individuated consciousness) will continue to operate and exist beyond the threshold of physiological death.

This is perhaps the single best post I ever read on this forum... wait... the single best few paragraphs I ever read anywhere.

Note: these were Shezbeth's own words... to be able to articulate these two paths so precisely (and IMO accurately) demonstrates mature understanding. Thanks, Shezbeth.

[Chester]

I dont relate to the terms LHP or RHP.

So working assumption:
LHP = Service to self, Negative polarity, Loves self, "Evil"
RHP = Service to others, Positive Polarity, Loves others, "Good"

Confusion about how to classify where in the spectrum one lies is almost a certainty!

Here is a nice definition I read (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?72867-LLResearch-Service--L-Leema-channeled-talk-on-service-to-others-):

"Those of the positive polarity are of service when by action or thought or even intention, another entity or the self is freer to seek his or her own path than before the intended service was performed. The seeker who loves others wishes them to be free. When that seeker is intimately associated with others, that desire can become so far misted and confused by the glassy illusion of societal demands, of shoulds and oughts, that it is often beyond any conscious understanding to reason out how to be of service. Often, in order to grant another freedom, the greatest service is to remain anonymously and impersonally compassionate and supportive. In other words, to pull the point of view backwards, to remove oneself from the microcosm of the relationship to the macrocosm of the perfection of all that is conscious and of the infinity of time that each conscious being has to choose freely, first this path, then this one, and then another."

What you stated at the beginning is the classic mistake made by most of us today. I thought the same until I actually did the research. When I did the research, I discovered that I was not anywhere near desiring self-annihilation any time soon and found much of my own thinking reflected within the core principles found disseminated by those who saw themselves as Left Hand pathers.

I also recognized there were plenty who I perceived took things too far. But the beauty of the LHP is that each of us emerge in our own, personal way. I don't have to be evil to be LHP. I don't have to be selfish to be LHP. I don't have to (more often than not) put myself first to be LHP. I do have to accept personal responsibility to be LHP.

Positive and Negative polarity have nothing to do with what is pointed to (historically) by the terms Left Hand path and Right Hand path

[chocolate]

In Buddhist tantra, the right hand symbolizes the male aspect of compassion or skillful means, and the left hand represents the female aspect of wisdom or emptiness. Ritual hand-held attributes, such as the vajra and bell, vajra and lotus, damaru and bell, damaru and khatvanga, arrow and bow, curved knife and skull-cup, sword and shield, hook and rope snare, etc., placed in the right and left hands respectively, symbolise the union of the active male aspect of skilful means with the contemplative female aspect of wisdom.

In both Hinduism and Buddhism the goddess is always placed on the left side of the male deity, where she 'sits on his left thigh, while her lord places his left arm over her left shoulder and dallies with her left breast'.

In representations of the Buddha image, the right hand often makes an active mudra of skilful means - the earth-touching, protection, fearlessness, wish-granting or teaching mudra; whilst the left hand often remains in the passive mudra of meditative equipoise, resting in the lap and symbolizing meditation on emptiness or wisdom."


I guess that is a bit further down the WIKI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-hand_path_and_right-hand_path) page.

---

True, internal alchemy is a middle path. It melts left and right to produce an entirely new substance.

[Chester]

I can understand that/why individuals may have reservations against the concept of the LHP, but there is one thing that has been glaringly overlooked that can brilliantly illustrate the ideas that are being posited positively (ha!).

Alchemy is LHP.

For completely different reasons I was led to watch this video today...

It ends with Alchemy (at 47:45 onward) but the entire video is well worth watching.

C_mjrcsFlc4

[Shezbeth]

Let's get a little etymological here.

Negative does not mean bad nor does positive mean good.

Negative is the adjective form of 'Negate'. Positive is the adjective form of 'Posit'.

If someone were to approach and start theorizing that the Government was engaged in financial collusion with the banks to the detriment of the masses - as just one example - they would be being positive; they would be positing an idea, thoughtform, etc; expressing a position.

If a person was to hear about the wonders of Common Core and were to refute it with veritas, they would be being negative; their actions would negate the previous position.

That's it. There is no morality to 'positive' or 'negative'. They do not implicitly or directly correlate to any STS or STO ideology, and any attempt to make them do so is entirely subjective (read: biased).

One of the core impetus' by which this (and the other) thread were created is in direct observance of the degree of bad publicity that the LHP has received by association with particularly buzz-worthy organizations who identify with the LHP.

In short, it is guilt by association that many aren't even aware of what the LHP is and is not.

The 'Black Lodge' that Ray so doggedly refers to (in the other thread noticably,... apparently there's no peanut gallery for this thread?) is particularly damning to a novice inquiry to the LHP. They engage in metaphysical/magical practices and workings, but operate from a position that is want to suppress essentially everyone else.

Ironically, this is more 'middle path' than any semantic games I would play, as it is all the less desirable aspects of the LHP coupled with all the less desirable aspects of the RHP.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The LHP is about individual, self-motivated and directed emergence.

Suppression of others - direct or indirect - does not cause emergence in the individual. Potentiation does not occur by obstructing the potentiation of others. In fact, others need not be considered when one is emerging.

A person can't climb a ladder by standing on and weighing another person down.

Ha, post #33 @ 13:11!

[animovado]

justone, apart from posting my last question to you in the wrong place and that I've chosen not the right words (partly a language issue, i'm a german), my intention was not to call into question if it's wrong or right how you've chosen, it was about finding out why you did it.
If you remove the "believe" in my last question and replace it with the proper "assume" and the question still remains as a "thought-police-statement", it would be better for me we leave it at that.
But anyway, I thank you for the two threads.

[Anchor]

I dont relate to the terms LHP or RHP.

So working assumption:
LHP = Service to self, Negative polarity, Loves self, "Evil"
RHP = Service to others, Positive Polarity, Loves others, "Good"

Confusion about how to classify where in the spectrum one lies is almost a certainty!

Here is a nice definition I read (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?72867-LLResearch-Service--L-Leema-channeled-talk-on-service-to-others-):

"Those of the positive polarity are of service when by action or thought or even intention, another entity or the self is freer to seek his or her own path than before the intended service was performed. The seeker who loves others wishes them to be free. When that seeker is intimately associated with others, that desire can become so far misted and confused by the glassy illusion of societal demands, of shoulds and oughts, that it is often beyond any conscious understanding to reason out how to be of service. Often, in order to grant another freedom, the greatest service is to remain anonymously and impersonally compassionate and supportive. In other words, to pull the point of view backwards, to remove oneself from the microcosm of the relationship to the macrocosm of the perfection of all that is conscious and of the infinity of time that each conscious being has to choose freely, first this path, then this one, and then another."

What you stated at the beginning is the classic mistake made by most of us today. I thought the same until I actually did the research. When I did the research, I discovered that I was not anywhere near desiring self-annihilation any time soon and found much of my own thinking reflected within the core principles found disseminated by those who saw themselves as Left Hand pathers.

I also recognized there were plenty who I perceived took things too far. But the beauty of the LHP is that each of us emerge in our own, personal way. I don't have to be evil to be LHP. I don't have to be selfish to be LHP. I don't have to (more often than not) put myself first to be LHP. I do have to accept personal responsibility to be LHP.

Positive and Negative polarity have nothing to do with what is pointed to (historically) by the terms Left Hand path and Right Hand path

Fair enough.

I understand what you and Shezbeth have said is meant by the terms meant by LHP & RHP and I see why that does not work in the way I had taken them to mean.

It is probably just as well then that I don't relate to (or more accurately do not use the terms) LHP or RHP as then I would have been wrong :)

/thread

(for me)

[Shezbeth]

One final note/aspect to my attempt to characterize the LHP.

In observance of the multitude of perceptions, theories, and otherwise subjective truths which are observed by the aggregate population which are want to include LHP perceptions as: blasphemous, incorrect, sinful, damning, foolish, base, false, etc ad nauseum, allow me a qualifier.

IF other perceptions are in some manner more objectively 'true' than those illustrated, meaning that if the perception of outside authority is correct and the LHP is in some way to be 'legitimately' said to be in opposition to this allegorical 'truth', THEN one who practices the LHP would find it a matter of integrity to stand in defiance and opposition regardless of consequence or subsequent experience.

On a personal note.

I imagine that this aspect of the pursuit of the LHP which is viewed by many/most of the active pursuers as something of a 'gateway perception'. When one recognizes that they are in opposition to the overwhelming/overall perceptions of the greater majority, less personally responsible individuals will be want to engage in extremes.

Simply, when everyone sees you as the villain, it becomes easier in the less resolved to engage in villainy. This would particularly account for the phenomenon of the Black Lodge, et al who can be observed (in a manner of speaking) to regularly/wantonly engage in all manner of villainy including suppression of others.

Edit:

All in all, the LHP finds that the movie Spider Man has it backward;

With great responsibility comes great power.

[Chester]

justone, apart from posting my last question to you in the wrong place and that I've chosen not the right words (partly a language issue, i'm a german), my intention was not to call into question if it's wrong or right how you've chosen, it was about finding out why you did it.
If you remove the "believe" in my last question and replace it with the proper "assume" and the question still remains as a "thought-police-statement", it would be better for me we leave it at that.
But anyway, I thank you for the two threads.

It seems your question is best asked and answered in the other thread -

Here is my response -

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?76206-Where-did-justone-man--go-Well...-maybe-he-is-back-&p=896378&viewfull=1#post896378

[chocolate]

This is one good thread, if approached (w)holistically, with a ... confused message, IMHO.
At the start I expected a bit more, but why not, at least now I would know not to get in between...

I would expected at this point for us to start using our own interpretations, and points of view, to start loosing the desire to stick to already defined paths and opinions, semantics and the like, but apparently it will take a bit more time, so I'll wait.

[Chester]

This is one good thread, if approached (w)holistically, with a ... confused message, IMHO.
At the start I expected a bit more, but why not, at least now I would know not to get in between...

I would expected at this point for us to start using our own interpretations, and points of view, to start loosing the desire to stick to already defined paths and opinions, semantics and the like, but apparently it will take a bit more time, so I'll wait.

Well - didn't you do this a few posts above?

The thing is... if we start calling everything we see, because we like to - "a chair" for example... even though most of the objects we might call a chair cannot be sat on, then language (spoken or written) no longer functions.

I read your post, Chocolate and appreciate that you see those terms to mean what you stated. If seeing them this way furthers your experience in good ways then im my opinion - GOOD!

In addition, I realized I had been confused about these two terms my entire life when I recently began an in depth investigation as to how these terms historically developed to be what they mean today. And what they mean today to most folks is, in most cases, a convenient amalgamation of what individuals wish these terms to mean. This was plainly demonstrated in the sister thread to this thread. It is what Blavatsky did and also (believe it or not) what Crowley did.

For me... the LHP practitioners within the ancient Vedic tradition(s), the Setian cults and then later on what can be found by in the Germanic tradition of Odinism demonstrate a consistency in the expression of Left Hand path and thus the implied definitions of those expressions are what I base my own views upon.

[chocolate]

The simple way I see it, justone, is neither good nor bad.
My point of view sees the two as an esoteric spirituality would sees it.

So let me word it this way:



Everything is dual;
Everything has poles;
Everything has its pair of opposites;
Like and unlike are the same:
Opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree;
Extremes meet;
All truths, are but half-truths;
All paradoxes may be reconciled.”
~The Kybalion


Or like the left wing and the right wing in politics. Or the left wing and the right wing of the bird flying up above.
or the black and white squares on the 'masonic' flooring, or did I mean on the checkerboard.
So instead of seeing just the black or the white I see all the shades of grey in between.

:)



Human knowledge ( let's call this the right hand, or the male, or the spiritual ) and human power ( the left hand or the female, or matter ) -- but in reality I would swap the right for material and the left for spiritual -- meet in one; for where the cause is not known the effect cannot be produced. Nature to be commanded must be obeyed; and that which in contemplation is as the cause is in operation as the rule.
~Sir Francis Bacon

PS. Lacking in spiritual 'human-made' knowledge can be really an advantage, as it comes to be ( for me ) right now.

I think that the Vedic true tantra tradition never used only the material side of the path. It is not obvious, and by reading all sorts of texts and observing their imagery (some quite explicit I might add) one might start thinking that all they did was ... the material expression of love. But if you look deeper you will understand that their imagery and their texts are allegorical, and not literal.

What we, late humans, have created out of those traditions is just a representation of where we stand in our current understanding on the path.
That is why the yig-yang symbol has been created -- to be used as a more easily accessible 'language' for the (otherwise logical) mind.

http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2012/202/7/f/unicorn_yin_yang_symbol_by_novak2037-d585ek0.png

[Chester]

To chocolate - Thanks for posting about one of the seven Hermetic principles - the law of Opposites.

I am about to leave my home and I have a list in my hand with several goals on that list I wish to accomplish. One of them is to take my son's girlfriend to the Texas Department of Public Safety so she could have them resend her the ID that has never arrived. Another task on my list is to go make a small deposit at my bank so that I can pay a few bills. Depending on which of these two tasks I wish to tackle first will determine the path I take when I leave my home. So the goal I desire determines the way I wish to go. This is why there are the two terms RHP and LHP. It is because the goals are not the same if one uses the classic definitions.

If you wish to see different definitions for these two terms where, at the end of the day, you end up at the same goal (which is implied in the law of opposites - completeness) I would say your goal is self-annihilation and thus the goal of RHP and a finality is achieved. If instead you said you wish to retain your individuality while understanding these laws, I would say your goal is to become a master via the LHP and is an ever emerging process.

RHP succumbs to God or Nature, LHP represents an individual's opportunity to become god-like and thus determine what they wish to harmonize with (which can be Nature) and what they wish to oppose within Nature.

Humans are not the only ones who do this (at times to oppose Nature). But humans on earth at this time are the known beings who are most equipped to oppose the course set by nature. Look at beavers. They take a river and dam it up. This then effects the ecosystem downstream and sometimes this effect is perceived as harmful to other manifestations of life within nature. Yet fingers are pointed at humans by other humans who think they are righteously defending nature when the former develops technology. Try living without plumbing and toilets. Where is the magic line between "good tech" and "evil tech?"

[Chester]

It is funny that I have to do the following... which is to present views which suggest something (call it a path... call it an opinion, a goal... whatever you like) other than the strict definitions for LHP or RHP I supplied in the sister thread. Here is an excellent discussion between Rich Archer and Rupert Spira. Spira posits that "one" can shed their sense of separateness while simultaneously retaining their apparent individuation. I say - why not! Spira happens to call achieving this - "the direct path." I am happy he has placed a label upon this and I accept his label and definition especially so that the pros and cons might be discussed.

It is my guess that it is this very "goal" that many wish to achieve and that they want to call this RHP. It is my opinion that if someone wants to call this RHP, then they should surely have that right as well. I would say that calling this RHP is like calling a table a chair but this is simply my own view.

I wonder if I had started the discussion on the sister thread with two terms - the red path and the blue path and assigned the definition I supplied for LHP to one of these two colors and the definition I had supplied for RHP to the other color if the discussion would have attracted such emotionally charged reaction?

Anyways - I recommend watching this entire video (Archer interviewing Spira) yet for the less patient start around 36:00. Rupert (by his own admission) started out heavy LHP by the way and this comes out at 37:15. Archer asks a wonderful question... is his "shift" exclusive? Or is there the Tim Freke view - "both/and?" which Archer states in his own way. "Or is it all the other pole of the spectrum now? (Archer’s question to Spira)" In my view, Rupert attempts to wiggle out of the conundrum but does not do so successfully in my opinion. And then they both descend into sharing divergent opinions.

It is my opinion that as long as this dynamic occurs, there is at least a tiny degree of "separateness" and of "separate self." If we look at the dynamic implied by the word "form" and are honest, form cannot exist without "this and not this." In other words, the expression of the all that is – you and each of us... could not be!

stdMWPtZwnM

Note Eckhart Tolle calls attaining this state insinuated by “the Direct Path” - "The deathless dimension" (at 1:40 ish) - But this happens to be the goal desired by some LHP practitioners (retaining individuation)! if understood within the definitions I have supplied in the sister thread.

4rFs1sx8CNo

All I am saying is that perception of any form of individuated expression of the One cannot avoid the reality there is expression A which “something” call it Sam in this case can manifest in a way Sam can directly make it manifest and yet there is also expression B where Sam can only indirectly make it do Sam’s bidding. Forget if this is right or wrong to do... focus on the obvious difference.

So where we have many folks clamoring that we “return to source” as opposed to remaining in this state of ego driven insane way so many express today... is it possible we take the best of both worlds and become a third evolution of human expression? One that retains the good of “source” while retaining the good of individuation and that a being carries their individuated self intact and beyond the grave? Based on the classic definitions of RHP, this cannot be done in an RHP paradigm... but based on the classic definition of LHP, this can be done in an LHP paradigm.

Eckhart Tolle and Human 3.0

bImdyQn43s8

[Chester]

For those who have retained the right to "think for themselves" and have the manifest courage to consider alternative views outside of the constraints of RHP authoritarian structures and systems -

Here is an excellent discussion of an expression of the Left Hand Path -

Lg778Sg92-s