Loading...

There Are Two Paths You Can Go Down? | Forum

Dark Enlightenment
The mindfuck is herein. There are two schools of LHP apprehension. And they don't really get along. Yet, they seem to carry elements of each other and be contradictory at the same time.

The RHP is grain.  Whatever that grain is. All LHP doers go against that grain in one form or another. 
But here is where I think they differ. 

The Ghandi vs. The Guerrilla 

The Ghandi

There are many whose grain is the wider behavior of society. Which one might see as backstabbing, hostile, cliquey, or any other of the personally abhored traits of social human behavior.. In mastering Satan you are mastering those behaviors, and "transcending their influence".  They fight by passively resistant example.

"My Satanism doesn't engage in your petty squabbles, which shows how plugged in you really are." 

 In this apprehension passive behavior (not caring) becomes their way to go against and oppose by being the change they want to see.

They are of the school: When you go against on point, you're still controlled by the opposition.


The Guerrilla

The person with the more confrontational approach does not care if they are motivated by the course of the other, as these are exclusively matters of personal satisfaction derived from fighting. These tend towards "trollish" behavior. They are more prone to purposely exhibiting obscenity as their version of transcendence. Instead of being apart they choose "whatever THEY are not".  Direct engagement of a death-wish prone variety trumps worrying about whether or not they are ubermensch enough in the eyes of anyone.  Which bizarrely carries elements of the other conception. 

The Guerrilla directly engages the status quo, not to change it, but for the personal satisfaction of fighting it.  Even if it's being racist because every when else wants YOU to hold hands.

They are of the school: Don't tread on me


That's my opinion on the same old topic. 


Is either one more authentic than the other? 


* Neither of these obstencibly hold any value to be true. 


The Forum post is edited by Dark Enlightenment May 8
Share:
AK Mod
AK May 8
I'm not wholly convinced that heterodoxy is the keystone of LHP many seem to make it out to be. In fact, I can make a pretty solid case that LHP in the vamachara sense of the word is not at all synonymous with the left hand path one encounters in Qabalah, or Victorian Hermeticism. It is via the lens of the syncretism that is Satanism that the two appear identical. While I'm not silly enough to delineate the two as "Eastern and Western" LHP, it is pretty apparent that the term connotes wildly different ends and methods in the Tantric context vs the Qabalistic context. Both contexts, being different though not wholly incompatible, are employed in Satanism which makes discrimination between the two that much trickier for those whose first (and often only) exposure to the term LHP comes via Satanism. 


*I'll likely elaborate on this at some point when I've summoned the necessary wherewithal.



To your point: on wikipedia, we find "vamachara is a Sanskrit term meaning 'left-handed attainment' and is synonymous with Left-Hand Path or Left-path  It is used to describe a particular mode of worship or spiritual practice that is not only heterodox to standard Vedic injunction, but extreme in comparison to prevailing cultural norms."


Which, due to its wording, gives the impression that participating in heterodoxy and defying cultural norms is in itself the method, but this is not so. It is simply that the methods employed (the 5 ms) happen to be described as such with respect to Vedic injunction. These same methods speak to mans animalistic guanas - eating drinking and sexual intercourse - which are, here in the U.S.A., the very definition of capitalistic societal norms. 


Capitulation to heterodoxy or orthodoxy is, in my mind, irrelevant. A method is a method and what others make of it is hardly any of my concern. To those ends I would qualify as the former of your two examples, but for reasons that stem from my thinking that whether or not these practices are heterodox or orthodox is peripheral to their efficacy - that is the attainment of the divine from base / animal / and mundane channels, thus usurping dualities such as: corporeal vs the spiritual (Abrahamic) / real vs ideal (Platonic) / flesh vs spirit (Gnostic) modalities.


Your guerrilla example speaks more toward the LHP in the Qabalistic sense: i.e. from the north - that which serves to divide and split asunder. The iconoclastic. Satan as Samael -> of mars of war. Blindness (see also Azathoth), poison, and even wrath of God. The angel of death, division and dissolution. 


Both of which are distinct, yet perfectly compatible when one's frame of reference pivots around the Satanic; but not so much when centered in the Tantric or Qabalistic. That is to say: Satan is the common thread between the two otherwise distinct meanings of LHP.



The Forum post is edited by AK May 8
Anna
Anna May 9
Passive resistance is nothing else than a variation of "Love thy enemy, turn another cheek" doctrine. It precludes any form of violence, even in self-defense. Basically, if the enemy attacks you, you should take the beating. If they kill you, rape your wife and burn your fucking house down, tough luck. But, at least you didn't give in to hatred.


Although passive resistance might work in democratic or mild authoritarian systems, it would for sure prove self-destructive in tough and rigid totalitarian regimes, where the dictators aim to totally eliminate the opposition. If the prevailing ideology is "You're either with us or against us", then refraining from supporting those in power automatically marks you as their enemy.


That's why it's bullshit. Any sort of compromise requires mutual agreement. You can't stay peaceful if your opponent aims for the confrontation unless you're willing to be a victim.


Now, going out of your way to pointlessly resist something for the mere sake of resisting something is a different cup of tea. I could sit down in the middle of the street and protest against the patriarchy forcing women to wear high-heeled shoes. Only... nobody is forcing me to wear high-heeled shoes. So what am I protesting against?


I fail to see what the examples you gave have in common with the LHP.

Dark Enlightenment

Well I have found I am alone when I say the core (in the case of the latter example) is represented by the Lucifer archetype, which centers around personal principle and will of the individual... How quick they are willing to be cast down regardless of where self interest resides..  But don't listen to me, you are probably right when you say:


"I fail to see what the examples you gave have in common with the LHP."



The Forum post is edited by Dark Enlightenment May 9
Certain features and pages can only be viewed by registered users.

Join Now

Donate

This site is largely funded by donations. You can show your support by donating. Thanks. Every dollar helps.

Like and Share