Breaking the "Gentleman's Code." LHP discussion. | Forum

Member
Aug 3 '14

What I find to be the most beautiful aspect of Satanism is that it is not a strict/rigid path.  LaVeyan Satanism, for example, has a list of guidelines.  At times, these guidelines can be bent or even broken depending on the circumstances or predicaments one happens to be in.  I would like to share with you a circumstance in which I “broke a few rules.”


“For all the centuries of shouting-down the Devil has received, he has never shouted back at his detractors.  He has remained the gentleman at all times, while those he supports rant and rave.  He has shown himself to be a model of deportment, but now he feels it is the time to shout back.” – The Book of Satan; The Satanic Bible by Anton LaVey


I strongly believe that a Satanist should be a gentleman.  However, every once in a while, there comes a time in which a Satanist should break the “gentlemen’s code.”  I found myself breaking this code recently because of a blatant violation of another particular “code” by one who claimed to be on the Left-Hand Path.


1. Stupidity

The top of the list for Satanic Sins. The Cardinal Sin of Satanism. It’s too bad that stupidity isn’t painful. Ignorance is one thing, but our society thrives increasingly on stupidity. It depends on people going along with whatever they are told. The media promotes a cultivated stupidity as a posture that is not only acceptable but laudable. Satanists must learn to see through the tricks and cannot afford to be stupid. – The Nine Satanic Sins by Anton LaVey (1987)


The incident took place on Facebook.  At one point I was disagreeing with someone (civilly) on the topic of The Satanic Temple and their monument.  A few comments later, someone chimed in on the conversation.  The conversation went off topic from the original post, and Anton LaVey was mentioned.  This individual proclaimed that he hated Anton LaVey and considered him to be “more of the right hand path walker...to become one with the ego and to degrade yourself. It's not about spirit or transcendence it's about fucking around in the mudd of the material world.”


I came to find out that this individual identified as a Gnostic Luciferian.  To give a quick paraphrase, the Gnostics (or Gnosticism) believe that salvation comes through direct knowledge or “gnosis” of the nature of God. Some sects had a specific, secret religious doctrine that had to be passed down to new initiates; others promoted attainment of an enlightened state in which the seeker reached gnosis by themselves.  There is an emphasis on meditation and religious practices (some considered to be unorthodox like sexual practices) in order to obtain this secret knowledge.


Now, I have a great deal of respect for the Gnostics; both as the heretics of their time as well as their influence on great people such as Madame Blavatsky and Aleister Crowley.  That being said, there needs to be a clear definition of what the right-hand path and the left-hand path are.  That is why I put a strong emphasis on the works of Stephen E. Flowers as well as on Joseph Campbell.  At the end of this article, I will post both of these definitions.


The definitions I take date back to two tantric paths in Hinduism; where the terms “right-hand path” and “left-hand path” originate.  In the dakshinachara (right way) one faces the rising sun.  There a natural energy that comes down from the north and passes through your body; entering from the right part of your body and exiting out the left side of your body.  In the vamachara (left way) one switches their position, causing the energy to pass into the left side of one’s body and exit out the right side of their body.  In the vamachara practice, one is going counter to the flow of the natural energy.  This is not only an exercise of Will, but also a form of rebellion against the natural order. 


Getting back to the topic at hand, I, the gentleman Satanist, lost my cool.  I don’t mind debating definitions and concepts with others.  However, the greatest offense I took was the blatant ignorance of proclaiming that Anton LaVey was more right-hand path.  If you compare Anton LaVey to where the terms “right-hand path” and “left-hand path” originated, LaVey CLEARLY comes out as left-hand path.  Did Anton LaVey go against an order during his time?  Absolutely.  There is so much more I could write on this subject.  Perhaps I’ll save them for the comments. ;)


Finally, the point as to why I am writing this article:  In my opinion, one should do their best at remaining the gentleman.  However, if ignorance gets way out of hand and is left to cocky know-it-all individuals I think it is necessary to put those individuals and their WILLFUL ignorance in check.


Some rules can be bent.  Others can be broken.


Two great definitions of the left-hand path:


“You follow the way of your own bliss.” – Joseph Campbell.


“The central question now becomes what is the way in which this conscious, free soul is going to relate to, or seek to interact with, the objective universe or the universe as a whole.  The right-hand path answers this question simply by saying that the subjective universe must harmonize itself with the laws of the objective universe – be that envisioned as God or nature.  Humanity is to seek knowledge of the law, and then apply itself to submitting to that law in order to gain ultimate union with the objective universe, with God, or nature.  The right-hand path is the path of union with universal reality (God or Nature).  When this union is completed the individual self will be annihilated, the individual will become one with the divine or natural cosmic order.  In this state the ego is destroyed as “heaven” is entered or the nirvanic existence/non-existence is “attained.”  This is clearly the goal of all orthodox Judaic/Chrsitain/Islamic or Buddhistic sects.


The left-hand path considers the position of humanity as it is; it takes into account the manifest and deep-seated desire to each human being to be a free, empowered, independent actor within his or her world.  The pleasure and pain made possible by independent existence are seen as something to be embraced and as the most reasonable signs of the highest, most noble destiny possible for humans to attain – a kind of independent existence on a level usually thought of as divine.


Just as most humans go through their natural, everyday lives seeking that which will give them maximal amounts of such things as knowledge, power, freedom, independence and distinction within their world, those who walk the left-hand path logically extend this to the non-natural realm.  They eschew right-hand path admonitions that such “spiritual behavior” is “evil” and that they should basically “get with the program” (of God, of Nature, etc.) and become good “company men.”  The self-awareness of independence is seen by man as the fundamental reality of the human condition – one can accept it and live, or reject it and die.  By accepting the internal, known reality of human consciousness and eternally dynamic – ever moving, ever changing – existence is embraced; by rejecting it and embracing an external, unknown reality of God/Nature, and eternally static – ever still and permanent – existence is accepted.  From a certain enlightened perspective, both paths are perfectly good, it is just a matter of the conscious exercise of the will to follow one of these paths in an aware state without self-delusion.


Essentially, the left-hand path is then the path of non-union with the objective universe.  It is the way of isolating consciousness within the subjective universe and, in a state of self-imposed psychic solitude, refining the soul or psyche to ever more perfect levels.  The objective universe is then made to harmonize itself with the will of the individual psyche instead of the other way around.  Where the right-hand path is THEOcentric (or certainly alleocentric – “other-centered”), the left-hand path is psychecentric, or soul/self-centered.  Those within the left-hand path may argue over the nature of this self/ego/soul, but that the individual is the epicenter of the path itself seems undisputed.  An eternal separation of the individual intelligence from the objective universe is sought in the left-hand path.  This amounts to an immorality of the independent self-consciousness moving within the objective universe and interacting with it at will.”  -Lords of the Left Hand Path by Stephen E. Flowers

The Forum post is edited by Aug 3 '14
Share:
Khandnalie Member
Khandnalie Aug 7 '14

Quote from James Whitlock The writing style of Anton LaVey certainly "broke some guidelines."


The man had a special affinity for ending sentences in prepositions.


I always found it ironic that the Pentagonal Revisionism paper, with "stratification" as its first point of interest, starts out with three sentences ending in prepositions in the first paragraph. Who proof read that thing?

Does this count?  :)

If Shakespeare did it, so can we.
Mar 14 '20
Very well said, I have met plenty of ignorant people in my life to those that have been close to me. Its tempting to act un gentlemanly by screaming their wrongs at their face.


But at the same time I have my "Satanic mask" put over me, which can be perhaps good for a reason.

Satanic International Network was created by Zach Black in 2009.
Certain features and pages can only be viewed by registered users.

Join Now

Spread the Word. Help Us Grow

Share:

Donate - PayPal

This site is largely funded by donations. You can show your support by donating. Thanks. Every dollar helps. You need not a PayPal to donate either just a debit or credit card.