|
Post by sin on Sept 29, 2011 10:19:59 GMT -6
Right-hand-path
Left-hand path
[Taken from Wikipedia for simplicity]
Robert Beér's Encyclopedia of Tibetan symbols and motifs clarifies widespread taboos and deprecation which associate the left hand as dark, female, inferior and 'not right':
"In Buddhist tantra, the right hand symbolises the male aspect of compassion or skilful 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 symbolising meditation on emptiness or wisdom."
See also my paper: The Left-hand-path Tantra www.scribd.com/doc/40202251/The-Left-Hand-Path-Tantra
**I'm adding these here to kick off, as it relates directly to the Buddhism in use, in the cult paradigm.
I'd like to open the floor for discussion. It seems to me, there is going to be a constant focus on this dichotomy and I'm not entirely sure where most folks get their information from, as to how these things are defined in an occult context. It will be a subject of discussion for my Friday pod-cast, 9/30/11 7pm, and it is my open that it will be a continued dialogue.
My show page: www.blogtalkradio.com/poisonappleradio
Before I jump in here, guns blazing with an elaboration on my own ideas - I'd like to first ask a set of questions for open discussion:
1. How do you personally define RHP/LHP?
2. What sources would you consider to be authoritive works on the subject?
3. How does that compare to other personal definitions you have run into, when conversing with fellow occultists?
4. Do you consider yourself to be RHP, LHP both or neither?
5. In what way is this dichotomy useful? In other words, what does it do for you? What you get out of it? What do you put into it?
6. Are the RHP/LHP absolute or flexible?
relevant topics: cultofcthulhu.wall.fm/blogs/105
cultofcthulhu.wall.fm/forum/topic/129
cultofcthulhu.wall.fm/forum/topic/162
cultofcthulhu.wall.fm/forum/topic/163
cultofcthulhu.wall.fm/forum/topic/156
Wiki page (for simplicity): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-hand_path_and_right-hand_path
**See specifically, Buddhist idealism on the RHP/LHP dichotomy
Resource: books.google.com/books/about/The_encyclopedia_of_Tibetan_symbols_and.html?id=XlqeS3WjSWIC
The Encyclopedia of Tibetan Symbols and Motifs ADDED for relevance: Left-handed The Right of Way: www.paganspace.net/forum/topics/lefthanded-the-right-of-way
Hand amulets and gestures: www.paganspace.net/forum/topics/hand-amulets-gestures
The Evil Eye: www.paganspace.net/forum/topics/the-evil-eye-1
Sinister: www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=sinister
Augry: www.paganspace.net/forum/topics/augry-1
|
|
|
Post by dudetyson on Sept 29, 2011 18:27:43 GMT -6
1. I'm flexible on this one, but the main traits are (1) a self-centered ethical system, and this next one is more optional, but important to me: (2) serious, serious effort to accomplish or become something, some higher task which comes from within you.
2. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_hand_path
3. I guess I don't really think it has to be theistic, the way Venger does. I also am not entirely down with the ToS' view of the RHP as essentially being "nature"/"natural" since I'm not really anti-body or anti-matter, and in fact they may be part of myself. Then again, it seems technically possible to be LHP with just my (1) and without my (2) but I don't respect it nearly as much, and I don't really feel any community with ambitionless hedonists.
4. LHP all the way. Hoo rah.
5. I think it is very liberating, very revolutionary, to not feel obligated to anything but myself. It's rare that anyone openly stands up for this idea, but it's also common to the entire LHP. That is why I feel it doesn't make sense to write it off as just some hang-up category that doesn't matter (though I'd be happy to discuss it less). I think there is an omnipresent, almost subliminal ideology in our society that says "But isn't it just more meaningful to sacrifice yourself to something? Isn't that really the key to everything?" and to that my answer would be NO, NO, NO.
6. Absolute. Or perhaps, absolute in core principles, and flexible in tactics.
|
|
|
Post by sin on Sept 30, 2011 7:47:01 GMT -6
I'm just going to address this portion, as I want to get as much feedback on this topic as possible. I did not create this discussion to debate personal opinion, but I feel that this needs a reply.
I feel that in lieu of the Work we do, the influence and programming can certainly be a hang up and it does matter (it matters a lot). It can often be the source of great strife for the individual. When you say you would like to discuss it less, it begs to examine - why it's discussed as much as it is. Wouldn't you agree?
|
|
|
Post by dudetyson on Sept 30, 2011 22:34:02 GMT -6
Yeah, definitely, it is curious. I think people who focus 100% on just making sure everything conforms to the LHP don't have much constructive to say, they just sort of seem like mechanical flagellants patrolling the land insisting on a strict literal interpretation of the True Word.
I'm more concerned with elaborating HOW ones lives the LHP life, which is something various satan-bots often don't even begin to have something to say about. I just co-wrote something with Venger which to me seemed tediously basic, but after he pointed out that it was maybe tricky for "noobs," I realized what a desert of material really does exist in terms of actually elaborating the LHP life (at least, among LHP websites).
So I guess I'd prefer the LHP to be a usually invisible and unmentioned, but still present, baseline assumption in the conversations I'm in.[/color]
|
|
|
Post by talek on Oct 1, 2011 0:54:23 GMT -6
1. How do you personally define RHP/LHP? For me personally, I do-not like either of these terms, and I have had problems in the past defining just exactly what they are and how one differed from the other, until I read Demons of the Flesh, authored by Nikolas & Zeena Schreck, I am not trying to show my ignorance on the subject, but which particular path just does-not register on my radar, for I am not looking to see which path a certain enmity belongs to, but to it's contents, it's subject matter, it's soul, it's modus operandi. I am very unconventional with the use of these terms. Is a system, just a mechanical machine, a product of civilization, of society, does it come about because of environmental factors, happenstance, etc, and does this system have consciousness? Recently I read a book authored by Jordan Maxwell, The Priesthood of ILLES, which more or less defined the RHP as the system designed by the priesthood of the EL gods, sun worshipers, Hebrews, Babylonians, Egyptians, etc, which mankind is now in, and the LHP being the Old Serpentine Religion which predates the sun worship civilizations. Basically two ends of the same stick, both working toward the middle which is Godhood, just depends where one is on that stick, but to me that stick is a mechanical stick, unless it has consciousness or has the beginning of the evolution of man, as defined in the fourth way system, as it's modus operandi. 2. What sources would you consider to be authoritive works on the subject? Again I do not want to show my ignorance, but I just do not look to see if a book, system, or group is RHP or LHP, now the key word is authoritative, how does one define this? in conventional terms or unconventional terms. Today my ruling "I", is reading A New Model of the Universe, authored by P D Ouspensky; The Priesthood of the ILLEs, authored by Jordan Maxwell, and the Lion Sleeps no more by David Icke, so I can go from conventional ideology to very unconventional. I understand maybe you are looking for a conversation on the comparisons and contrast of the RHP and LHP, but I am just not there, if this would have been several, several years ago, for me maybe. 3. How does that compare to other personal definitions you have run into, when conversing with fellow occultists? Well it has opened and shut doors with fellow occultist, because I am just not conventional, and I do not like the world defining my terms, I mean sure, standard definitions are fine, but let me be the judge of my own terms, but, I can come to a mutual agreement with fellow cultist. My Religion is the Cult of Cthulhu, a paradigm of expanding Consciousness, By His loathsome tentacles! 4. Do you consider yourself to be RHP, LHP both or neither? I am not trying to be indifferent here, but just give my point of view, and I think you and others will understand when I say, I am just a MACHINE, food for the universe, willing myself to have a conscious experience; RHP or LHP, both, either??? 5. In what way is this dichotomy useful? In other words, what does it do for you? What you get out of it? What do you put into it? Exceptionally great if this terminology went away, I would be satisfied. The only reason I even use this terminology, is because people identify, and this terminology is easily recognizable, I know I used this terminology in another post on unification with my suggestions, but the term was used in context and content with the thread, my bottom line was, it would be great if the leaders of the LHP and RHP came to together and dissolve this two defining paradigms, but at the same time, PD Ouspensky says one must know the right terminology of words, and how those words are to be used in relation to the proper use of language, man does not speak properly for he does-not know himself, nor does he know his whole language and how to properly speak this language. This is an excellent question for me what do I put into it, because I don't have an answer, but I did read all of the recommended essays and videos that you have listed, most Excellent and this thread certainly has made me think again about the Occult pertaining to the fourth way system. The fourth way system is my center, from my center I can hopefully study, practice, and move my being further along in the "Great Work" with in my Religion of The Cult of Cthulhu. 6. Are the RHP/LHP absolute or flexible? Again my unconventional ideology combined with the fourth way system with in my Religion of the Cult of Cthulhu would in conventional terms, defines me. Absolute or Flexible, I just don't believe in the identification and labeling of these terms of RHP or LHP, for some may say, ok, for conventional wisdom then how is one going to define this?, and this is my argument, it is conventional terminology, it is conventional wisdom, it is mechanical thinking and processes, but this is just the tip, I do not want to be defined, I do not like definitions, I want to know myself. Remember yourself, for the Emerald Kingdom is at hand! Talek Esoteric Herald of the Old Gods Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by boksmutant on Oct 1, 2011 3:39:41 GMT -6
The Left Hand Path might end up less to do with principles & more to do with "A holding on to individuality". I associate the RHP to a domineering & totalitarian way of view, when the LHP might have more too do with an open forum view that's more connected to the people. It might be more socialistic in a sense compared to one emperor deciding everything. A LHP person wants to include all things & capture the whole, where as the RHP person feels themselves supreme & defined as it is. So I think of it in political terms when I think of the two.
One stays connected to the people & hopes to evolve with it, where as the other has decided the others must evolve with it with out compromise. It might have everything to do with how we view politics all together. Which explains why we strugle between the two as time goes on.
One side of me wants to lead, the other wants to learn, & there in lye's the problem. Or so it might be. Both seem to have a great place with in or society & we would some times vote for either depending on the circumstances. This might be the difference that's defines a LHP vs a RHP person. RHP want to destroy other views & make something solid, while the LHP wants to keep things open to have a better view. I'm not totally, sure but this did come to mind.
I know it's deeper than that, but that was the first thing that came to mind. RHP people are looking for that next totalitarian view that blocks out the rest. Something solid, something sure that locks it all in to place & leaves no room to question. Where as the LHP person wants a society that includes the masses & all there crazy ideas so it can come up with something better/changeable/evolutionary.
Another thing that comes to mind is "The Weather UnderGround", were they a LHP organization. Sure alot of us might think so, but at what point do the ideals of the free, push into the ideals of the individual. The difference might be to whether you want to be apart of the controlling process, or be controlled by it. This is me thinking deep but perhaps it could do with that as well. Could it really be that simple, that it comes down to a people who are controlled by the system verses the people hoping to control it. Maybe it's a political mindset?
That's where I've gone with it so far in regards to the RHP vs the LHP. Like I said, it was the first thing that came to mind.
Awake!
|
|
|
Post by sin on Oct 3, 2011 7:41:47 GMT -6
Agreed, and perhaps Venger has a good point. It may very well be that the Noobs focus on it the most, and its hardly an invisible topic in the meat of a conversation.
Is a LHP living cultivated, or is it a natural Modus operandi?
In my personal observations, a person who was once living a rather heavy RHP life, who tries to jump the fence, rarely accomplishes this. They are living much of the same, with new language. You see it all the time with people claiming to be this or that, but living to the contrary. It may very well be the source of most strife within occult circles.
When Anton LaVey wrote about the 'Born not made' axiom, I think this gets to the heart of the matter. If man's 'nature' is to be [fill in the blank] then, what precisely will change his nature? What compels a slave to become a master? A master to become a slave? As Venger (among others) often writes, nature is against us. We should seek to exceed our own humanity. To become more than just an average man. The average man may be content to be food for the universe. I think the most profound evolution of the RHP/LHP dichotomy in the West, is that it is symbolic for changing perception, reality, and thus the self.
HOW, should be elaborated on as much as we possibly can to demonstrate A WAY.
|
|
|
Post by talek on Oct 3, 2011 19:02:55 GMT -6
Priestess of R'lyeh, thank you for providing feedback, your comments woke me up. I read this Part from To be a Cultist.
quote: Yes. Conscious and willful programming which liberates him from the unconscious influence which causes him to make unwillful acts. Suspending his preconceived beliefs, he may discover his harmful programming which makes him nothing more than a machine being run by a manufacturer. This willful programming will be transcended through initiation; and he will become what he has meant to become. A destiny manifested by conscious Work. unquote.
This made me realize that my comments on this thread, and my wanton desire to redefine terms in my own way is nonsense. Now I understand, this is not moving forward but just reprogramming the still asleep Machine. I wasn't doing anything but just spinning my thoughts around to satisfy the same old man inside to boast up my ego, thinking this is progress. This statement says it all "Suspending his preconceived beliefs, he may discover his harmful programming which makes him nothing more than a machine being run by a manufacturer". I am still manufacturing the same old googly gook just in a different format. Time to start getting real and with the program so to speak, self reflect on all and in all. An absolute wake up moment. Outstanding ! Thanks !
The ground is on fire upon which you stand!
Hail Cthulhu !
Talek Esoteric Herald of the Old Gods Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by sin on Oct 4, 2011 7:21:14 GMT -6
I'm glad you were able to use it as a shock.
I think that is one of the more difficult challenges, to suspend belief, so that you can see things in a new way. It's not always comfortable, and man does need his comfort. Realizing the uneasiness (Dukkha), is recognizing the attachment. Perhaps then, you see your machine rather than building another outer shell to protect it.
Disrupt the system. Tear down the machine. Transcend it. That's progress!
CS
|
|
|
Post by talek on Oct 4, 2011 8:07:43 GMT -6
I am starting to understand about the Intellectual Center, and the need to self observe this center, the work does come slow, because I am attached to my own mind and way of thinking. I am a bookworm, there is nearly 50 years of reading inside of me. Now I am starting to understand. I have to physically tear down that whole machine, before any progression can be made, when I was practicing other "ways", I didn't understand the meaning of a new self or how to actually go about this, other than change of thinking, same machine, just change my emotional and Intellectual ways without observing.
In this Cult, one can not set on the sidelines, and expect something to happen, it is more than a self house cleaning, because I can not clean up that house, for me I am going to have to tear the whole damn thing down, and that takes work, but the beauty of that work in my wake up "moment" is freedom.
The God We Worship is our Future Selves!
Talek Esoteric Herald of the Old Gods Cult of Cthulhu!
|
|
|
Post by sin on Oct 4, 2011 10:13:29 GMT -6
It is tough work on your own, that is one of the perks of having the fellowship of a social platform such as a forum, or the in-person benefit of a grotto. Observing each other enough, we can recognize when a person has lulled themselves back to sleep and set the stage for a Fight Club scenario. Even in doing that for others, you are offering benefits to yourself in the process.
|
|
|
Post by Nyrlthtp on Oct 27, 2011 23:05:34 GMT -6
Right-hand-path Left-hand path I'd like to open the floor for discussion. ... I'd like to first ask a set of questions for open discussion: 1. How do you personally define RHP/LHP? The heart of the problem surrounding the Wrong Way is that definition cements or tries to freeze into stability a flurry of vying ideas with which any particular term might be associated for purposes of expression, and the authors or speakers employing it may intend by it myriad meanings. This sets out the practical limitations of doctrine and tradition, identifying orthodoxy as the death knell of personal empowerment and blasphemy as the disrupting influence of innovation.
In the neo-tantra that I know, derived as it is from my God and guru, doing things wrong is only meaningful in terms of a contextual directive. For this reason, the LHP so called has no meaning without a RHP against which to prop or contrast itself. The size and importance allotted to a RHP are the primary variables, therefore, in determining the significance of any LHP which may become its eddy.
The largest RHP manifestations stifle and crush LHP potentia, enhancing the personal power derivable from straying from it or subjecting it to travesty while making precious little opportunity to practice or enhance it. This is almost always corporate, institutionalized, and will at some point become overtly identified as 'orthodox' (the correct path). In hegemonic and imperialistic forms, this combines with martial and leveraged force aspiring to totalitarian and pervasive ends, overtly taking up identifiers such as 'universal' (or 'catholic').
The smallest manifestation of LHP play against an individual's own discipline and projects. Insofar as this discipline exists, has directives, enduring movement, standards of operation, and structured momentum, so will intermittent or occasional breaks, 'reverse spins' or counter-discipline indulgence bring ecstasy, revitalization, insight, and consciousness to what might otherwise become a moribund and lifeless drudgery.
The most important aspect to understand is that the solvency or dynamic of any LHP is dependent not only upon the existence of a RHP for the initial drive involved, but also on its limitation so as not to decimate or overwhelm said LHP action. Secondarily, once these roles are swapped out in some way with regard to process (the activities previously acting in transgressive reaction to a RHP becoming their own form of orthodoxy within a delimited context), that proportion applies specifically to the context of operation. What had previously been a sizable transgressive system operating as an eddy to a large social system, when institutionalized or regimented to its own system may become a crushing resistance to any individualistic and transgressive action within its sphere (establishing a hegemonic RHP dominion under an LHP banner). 2. What sources would you consider to be authoritive works on the subject? I consider those sources to be authoritative on the subject of the LHP which are polar in their character (rather than dualistic), those which do not stridently take a stand with respect to any particular system or terminology (thus themselves never attempting to establish an 'orthodoxy' termset), those which redirect the locus genius of authority and innovation to the individual rather than to the group, to counter-culture rather than to culture or subculture. 3. How does that compare to other personal definitions you have run into, when conversing with fellow occultists? Most esoteric sources (mystical, religious, arcane) espousing opinions on this pair of phrases (Left-Hand Path, Right-Hand Path) which I have seen embraced a type of dualism by demonizing or mischaracterizing one at the expense of the other. Some sought to demonize the LHP by associating it with their other dualistic calumnies (identifying reactive and transgressive activities as malignant, immoral, malefic, etc.). Some tried to legitimate the LHP by white-washing it (removing the transgressive and antinomian aspects in pursuit of emphasizing insight). Still others attempted to legitimate the LHP by completely separating it out and denigrating the institutions against which it had arisen. With some few mystics I found commonality in understanding these two terms as polar and interdependent, in associating the term 'tantra' with an activity of weaving, and as part of an interplay between the individual and society, between blasphemy and orthodoxy. 4. Do you consider yourself to be RHP, LHP both or neither? I am a neo-tantric Shaktiist. I embrace both poles of dyadic systems, or try to, and use this dynamic for personal and social benefit at the expense of corporate and orthodox impetus. I tend to see RHP and LHP as modes of behaviour in association with groups, systems, or my own disciplines (the latter of which have varied through time in composition and intensity). Therefore, in terms of identification or character, I may be said to be 'LHP with respect to Christian culture' (Satanist) and 'RHP with respect to projects and orgs of which I am the director and primary dynamo' (Magus). 5. In what way is this dichotomy useful? In other words, what does it do for you? What you get out of it? What do you put into it? I don't use the two phrases as part of a dichotomy so much as different modes of behaviour which cannot be seen as mutually-exclusive and retain their essential qualities of combined utility. What they do for me is to emphasize appropriately both individual sovereignty and substantiating drive. Instead of demonizing polar energies or forces within a context, I can reframe them using this conceptual lattice so as to embrace the whole of participative contributions, even when it may seem disruptive or antagonistic. This applies not only to projects which I control or drive myself (seeing those who oppose me as acting within a certain valence), but also to an evaluation of my own activities in estimation of their participative value. In observing this about my usage and my interests, I am contributing to their enshrinement and downfall should my interests be taken up and become a new orthodoxy in ubiquitous popularization. My general mode of pleasant criticism and iconoclasm will ensure that this is unlikely. 6. Are the RHP/LHP absolute or flexible? As character-shrouds or appliques of relative merit and role, they are absolutely relative! Moreover, the LHP cannot exist without the RHP, and attempting to effect its extraction will merely result in transforming whatever was LHP in respect of a broader RHP construct into an RHP system. This is not true in reverse, and the epitome of RHP inclinations is dictatorial fascism.
|
|
|
Post by sin on Dec 5, 2011 9:13:16 GMT -6
Thank you for your responses Troll, they never disappoint.
I appreciate your feedback on this subject. You and I share similar ideas.
CS
|
|
|
Post by cortwilliams on Aug 15, 2012 20:40:30 GMT -6
1. How do you personally define RHP/LHP?
I see the RHP as an ideology in which the individual seeks to harmonize his/her will with and/or achieve union with a deity or cosmos. The "will" of said deity or conception of the cosmic whole is typically communicated via a posited system of universal morality, with an ultimate arbiter(god or gods, karma) deciding the individual's position in regards to said code of morality.
I see the LHP as an ideology which incorporates the following aspects: Self-deification, non-union with the cosmos, and antinomianism. The first and second criteria are to be understood as a striving towards a state of individual divinity in which one is neither subject to the will of a greater godform nor an externally derived code of morality. The latter is to be understood as "going against the grain" of cultural norms as part of the process of individuation(or adversarial self-becoming, as I term it).
2. What sources would you consider to be authoritive works on the subject?
I would cite "Black Magic" by Michael Aquino and "Lords of the Left-Hand Path" by Stephen Flowers as the source of my conception of the LHP, modified somewhat in practice by my own adversarial Gnostic wackiness.
3. How does that compare to other personal definitions you have run into, when conversing with fellow occultists?
I would say that many of the occultists I interact with use a similar definition to the one I have provided, though there are certainly a number of exceptions.
4. Do you consider yourself to be RHP, LHP both or neither?
Rabidly LHP, in my own neo-Gnostic Satanic fashion.
5. In what way is this dichotomy useful? In other words, what does it do for you? What you get out of it? What do you put into it?
The dichotomy is on one level useful to me personally as a means of explaining "what I am for", in terms of my spiritual aims, by contrasting it with "what I am not for". As I am a Gnostic at heart, the dichotomy plays rather well into a paradigm in which the spiritual essence of the Black Adept is seen as both alien and inimical to the objective universe, and vice versa.
6. Are the RHP/LHP absolute or flexible?
My conception of the RHP and LHP are not especially flexible.
Hail Satanis! Cort
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Aug 16, 2012 8:47:06 GMT -6
Striving to be in harmony with anti-cosmic forces is also Left Hand Path. The Great Old Ones guide us, show us the way. These Dark Gods are against their own exile from Universe A, as well as, human imprisonment and needless suffering. We align with them for a definite purpose.
Awake!
VS
|
|
|
Post by cortwilliams on Aug 16, 2012 8:55:47 GMT -6
Hail Lord Satanis! Indeed, anti-cosmic forces can facilitate the liberation/transcendence of the left-hand path adept, as I see it. The distinction I would draw is this: The LHP adept ultimately seeks to become a dark god, not just to serve one-But that does not mean that alliances with and allegiance to sinister godforms, especially of an adversarial/anti-cosmic nature, are not part of the process of self-deification.
Hail Satanis! Cort
|
|
|
Post by cortwilliams on Aug 16, 2012 13:48:37 GMT -6
(this is a brief conversation between Lord Satanis and myself from fb chat, re-posted here at the request of Lord Satanis)
Cort: Yes, I saw your reply and agree completely-The anti-cosmic forces represented by adversarial godforms can facilitate the liberation/transcendence of the LHP adept.
Lord Satanis wrote: Pretty much. It's a slightly different way of looking at the same thing.
Cort: Yeah-that aspect wasn't really clear in my initial definition of the LHP, which was based on the Setian model(self-deification, non-union, antinomianism), but work with adversarial gods is definitely part of my path as I understand it.
Lord Satanis: I think most LHPers neglect that aspect. Mostly because they don't want to even consider the idea of being subordinate to an external force or being. But hey, humans aren't the be all, end all. We're flawed representations of something greater.
Cort: Agreed-I think humans have the potential to reach towards the horizon of self-deification, but it's a long road, and in order to progress on it, it is invaluable to have allies in the form of dark gods, and of course it is important to treat these gods with respect and deference. A difference between the LHP and RHP adept, perhaps, being that the LHP adept eventually wants to become a god, whereas the RHP adept is content in serving one.
Hail Satanis!
|
|
|
Post by lokidreaming on Aug 16, 2012 19:16:07 GMT -6
These sets of questions you have posed is a set of questions which is excellent to answer every once in a while to measures ones growth and progress on this path.
At this point in time of my development my answer is that labels are just labels at the end of the day.
|
|
|
Post by sin on Aug 17, 2012 19:50:41 GMT -6
Striving to be in harmony with anti-cosmic forces is also Left Hand Path. The Great Old Ones guide us, show us the way. These Dark Gods are against their own exile from Universe A, as well as, human imprisonment and needless suffering. We align with them for a definite purpose.
Awake!
VS
Exalt!
|
|