Mercuraen?

[Thomas]

I'd like to say that, my intention of the LHP Subforum is not to discuss/debate what the RHP is or is not, but what the LHP is and is not.

OK ... I cannot speak for the LHP, but I am of the opinion that having made certain assumptive errors about the RHP, I would not rely on it to inform me of the LHP, is all.

I think your posts so far have been more enlightening and, again a personal opinion, informative and reliable.

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

OK. You asked ...


For me, the path is The Middle Way, in which left and right are held in balance.

In Buddhist terms, too great an emphasis on the RHP leads to an overt asceticism, whilst the LHP is its contrary, sensualism.

In Christianity, much the same. The RHP leads to dogmatism for its own sake, the LHP to heterodoxy for the same reason.

You cannot be doing the bidding of both the Right Hand Path and the Left Hand Path, you are either on one or the other.
Why?
The Right Hand Path involves the intentional effort to dissolve or merge the self into some form of Absolute/Supreme Being
The Left-Hand Path involves the conscious attempt to preserve and strengthen one’s isolate consciousness 'against' an Absolute. To absolve one's self into an Absolute is antithetic to the LHP goals. Perhaps a third 'path' exists, but it would be in the form of atheism.

 

[seattlegal]

You cannot be doing the bidding of both the Right Hand Path and the Left Hand Path, you are either on one or the other.
Why?
The Right Hand Path involves the intentional effort to dissolve or merge the self into some form of Absolute/Supreme Being
The Left-Hand Path involves the conscious attempt to preserve and strengthen one’s isolate consciousness 'against' an Absolute. To absolve one's self into an Absolute is antithetic to the LHP goals. Perhaps a third 'path' exists, but it would be in the form of atheism.

Or just not believing in Absolute. One does not need to be atheistic for that. (Taoism's the only constant is Change.)

 

[RJM]

The Left-Hand Path involves the conscious attempt to preserve and strengthen one’s isolate consciousness 'against' an Absolute

From where do the 'majik powers' sought after by the LHP adherent originate? Are they purely of natural origin? Does the LHP deny the higher dimension (house) of Spirit that surrounds and contains and permeates the lower dimension (room) of nature, or does the LHP reject or fail to acknowledge the greater wheel of Spirit that turns the lesser wheel of nature, but is not turned by it?

 

[RJM]

Does the LHP set itself up as nature in opposition to Spirit?

 

[RJM]

Or just not believing in Absolute. One does not need to be atheistic for that. (Taoism's the only constant is Change.)

But is this constant flux not caused by the interweaving between Heaven and earth -- between timeless Spirit and transient nature?

 

[seattlegal]

Or just not believing in Absolute. One does not need to be atheistic for that. (Taoism's the only constant is Change.)

Another possibility would involve the nature of sentience. Sentience is possessing a subjective mind. Any sentient being is vulnerable to delusion via confusing subjective content for objective content. If God is sentient, then God is also subject to delusion. If one wants to help a deluded God, one would have to separate from it and create something that couldn't possibly be a product of "God's all powerful mind."

 

[seattlegal]

Does the LHP set itself up as nature in opposition to Spirit?

not necessarily

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

From where do the 'majik powers' sought after by the LHP adherent originate? Are they purely of natural origin?

Majiqal powers are not considered supernatural powers. There is Lesser Majiq (the influencing of beings, processes) and Greater Majiq (causing of change to occur in the subjective universe in accordance with the Will).

Does the LHP deny the higher dimension (house) of Spirit that surrounds and contains and permeates the lower dimension (room) of nature, or does the LHP reject or fail to acknowledge the greater wheel of Spirit that turns the lesser wheel of nature, but is not turned by it?

We have what is referred to as a Greater self/Godself. However, mythology may have a place in many LHP adherents' work.

 

[seattlegal]

But is this constant flux not caused by the interweaving between Heaven and earth -- between timeless Spirit and transient nature?

Would that would be Samkhya's purusa and prakrti?

 

[RJM]

Would that be Samkhya's purusa and prakrti?

Could be. I'm not very familiar with Buddhism terms.

not necessarily

It would seem unwise to do so? A bit like the flea setting itself up in opposition against the dog it's on?

 

[seattlegal]

Could be. I'm not very familiar with Buddhism terms.

That's not Buddhist. Samkhya is one of the Astika schools of Hinduism. (Buddhism is considered Nastika by Hindus)

It would seem unwise to do so? A bit like the flea setting itself up in opposition against the dog it's on?

Is it wise to make such assumptions that would then lead to such possibly erroneous models?

 

[seattlegal]

OK. You asked ...


For me, the path is The Middle Way, in which left and right are held in balance.

In Buddhist terms, too great an emphasis on the RHP leads to an overt asceticism, whilst the LHP is its contrary, sensualism.

In Christianity, much the same. The RHP leads to dogmatism for its own sake, the LHP to heterodoxy for the same reason.

This would be not losing one's ego (reality principle) to superego's perfecting principle or id's pleasure principle. One is maintaining one's own individual mind here. (Which would be a goal of Western LHP)

 

[RJM]

That's not Buddhist. Samkhya is one of the Astika schools of Hinduism. (Buddhism is considered Nastika by Hindus)

I thought it might be Hindu. Same applies.

Is it wise to make such assumptions that would then lead to such possibly erroneous models?

I think nature provides valuable analogies, not always perfect. I also think Spiritual law can often seem to contradict natural law.

 

[seattlegal]

I thought it might be Hindu. Same applies.

You can trust me that that is the gist of Samkhya or you can check it out for yourself.

I think nature provides valuable analogies, not always perfect. I also think Spiritual law can often seem to contradict natural law.

In this case, which came first? The assumption or the analogy? Did the flea on the back of the dog give rise to "Eureka! everything is dependent upon Spirit!"

 

[RJM]

You can trust me that that is the gist of Samkhya or you can check it out for yourself.

I trust you, lol

In this case, which came first? The assumption or the analogy?

So it's back to asking?

 

[seattlegal]

I trust you, lol
So it's back to asking?

I'm saying that I don't necessarily agree with your original premise, and was asking if it is indeed wise to hold such a premise. (Since your original question was about wisdom in regard to the premise.)

 

[RJM]

I'm saying that I don't necessarily agree with your original premise, and was asking if it is indeed wise to hold such a premise. (Since your original question was about wisdom in regard to the premise.)

Ok. I accept that.

 

[RJM]

I'm asking whether the LHP denies the existence of a 'higher power' beyond nature -- of Spirit -- or whether it accepts such a Spirit power but refuses to 'submit to its authority' -- whether because that Spirit power is judged incompetent or evil, or limited, or for whatever reason?

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

I'm asking whether the LHP denies the existence of a 'higher power' beyond nature -- of Spirit -- or whether it accepts such a Spirit power but refuses to 'submit' -- whether because that Spirit power is judged incompetent or evil, or limited, or for whatever reason?

Personally, I don't believe in any higher power other than my Greater Self/GodSelf. Others on the LHP may disagree.