How about an Autotheism

[EtuMalku]

Forum for this category so we Left Hand pathers have a voice?

 

[Liu]

I agree, why not? While the admins are at it they can also move the Pantheism DIR to this sub-forum, as was mentioned in the thread on the new DIR rules recently.

Depending on what one understands by authotheism it's a concept in also some not necessarily LHP versions of Hinduism, so it would be open to not only us LHPers.

 

[crossfire]

I agree, why not? While the admins are at it they can also move the Pantheism DIR to this sub-forum, as was mentioned in the thread on the new DIR rules recently.

Depending on what one understands by authotheism it's a concept in also some not necessarily LHP versions of Hinduism, so it would be open to not only us LHPers.

Jainism.

 

[Liu]

Jainism.

I know pretty much zero about Jainism, would you care to elaborate?

It was rather Shaivism and Advaita Vedanta I was thinking of.

 

[crossfire]

I know pretty much zero about Jainism, would you care to elaborate?

It was rather Shaivism and Advaita Vedanta I was thinking of.

Jain moksha is done through one's own efforts. You separate the jiva (living being) from the ajiva (material world) (you separate yourself from the universe.) Karma is likened to a sticky type substance that keeps jivas stuck in the material world. When a jiva is liberated from its karma (moksha) this is what Jainism says happens:

A liberated soul dwell in Siddhashila with infinite faith, infinite knowledge, infinite perception, and infinite perfection. According to the Jain text, Puruşārthasiddhyupāya:

Having achieved the ultimate goal, knowing everything that needs to be known, and enjoying eternal and supreme bliss, the Omniscient, Effulgent Soul, rests permanently in the Highest State (of liberation).

— Puruşārthasiddhyupāya​

Moksha (Jainism) - Wikipedia

 

[crossfire]

Jain moksha is done through one's own efforts. You separate the jiva (living being) from the ajiva (material world) (you separate yourself from the universe.) Karma is likened to a sticky type substance that keeps jivas stuck in the material world. When a jiva is liberated from its karma (moksha) this is what Jainism says happens:

A liberated soul dwell in Siddhashila with infinite faith, infinite knowledge, infinite perception, and infinite perfection. According to the Jain text, Puruşārthasiddhyupāya:

Having achieved the ultimate goal, knowing everything that needs to be known, and enjoying eternal and supreme bliss, the Omniscient, Effulgent Soul, rests permanently in the Highest State (of liberation).

— Puruşārthasiddhyupāya​

Moksha (Jainism) - Wikipedia

Technically,Jain moksha involves going beyond the gods, and Jains believe that the gods must first be reborn as humans before they can be released to Siddhashila. So, it would depend upon exactly what your definition of and goal of autotheism is as to whether this would apply. Do you want to be one of the gods, or to transcend them?

 

[crossfire]

I know pretty much zero about Jainism, would you care to elaborate?

It was rather Shaivism and Advaita Vedanta I was thinking of.

I'm not sure how Advaita Vedanta could qualify as autotheism, either. Perhaps you could explain?

 

[Liu]

Technically,Jain moksha involves going beyond the gods, and Jains believe that the gods must first be reborn as humans before they can be released to Siddhashila. So, it would depend upon exactly what your definition of and goal of autotheism is as to whether this would apply. Do you want to be one of the gods, or to transcend them?

Thanks for the explanation. Jainism sounds to me like theistic forms of Buddhism (not like I knew much about that).

I'm not sure how Advaita Vedanta could qualify as autotheism, either. Perhaps you could explain?

Advaita is in so far autotheism as the self (and the rest of existence) are believed to be identical to the divine. There is no development to getting more divine, though, except for getting better at realizing this oneness.
It's actually the advaita version of Shaivism which I would consider Shaivism's kind of autotheism, so if you don't object to me considering Shaivism to be compatible with autotheism, I wonder why me mentioning advaita led to your questioning.

I only know of these Hinduistic paths from cursory reading, though, so it can be that what I wrote is basically bullsh*t.

 

[crossfire]

Thanks for the explanation. Jainism sounds to me like theistic forms of Buddhism (not like I knew much about that).

Buddhism and Jainism are both Shramanaic, and both are non-theistic. It appears that Buddha was involved in a form of Jainism before his enlightenment. Buddhism seems to be closer to Jainism than it is to Hinduism.

Advaita is in so far autotheism as the self (and the rest of existence) are believed to be identical to the divine. There is no development to getting more divine, though, except for getting better at realizing this oneness.
It's actually the advaita version of Shaivism which I would consider Shaivism's kind of autotheism, so if you don't object to me considering Shaivism to be compatible with autotheism, I wonder why me mentioning advaita led to your questioning.

Ahh, the Atman = Brahman angle. Now I understand why you mentioned it.

 

[Liu]

Buddhism and Jainism are both Shramanaic, and both are non-theistic. It appears that Buddha was involved in a form of Jainism before his enlightenment. Buddhism seems to be closer to Jainism than it is to Hinduism.

What you mentioned above sounded theistic, though, and reminded me of certain kinds of theism common in popular forms of Buddhism, which I had heard of.
The term Shramana is new to me, but I take it you mean to say that both religions are derived from the same tradition?

Ahh, the Atman = Brahman angle. Now I understand why you mentioned it.

Exactly. Which aspect of Shaivism was it that you thought about instead?

 

[1137]

Forum for this category so we Left Hand pathers have a voice?

There is a LHP DIR. What exactly do you mean by the term "auto theism?

 

[EtuMalku]

There is a LHP DIR. What exactly do you mean by the term "auto theism?

A voice 'here' among the Theological Concepts . . . the other Theologies also have their own DIR's.
Autotheism goes hand in hand with Apotheosis, it being the main goal of many Western LHP's, both being forms of Self deification.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

A voice 'here' among the Theological Concepts . . . the other Theologies also have their own DIR's.
Autotheism goes hand in hand with Apotheosis, it being the main goal of many Western LHP's, both being forms of Self deification.

Ironically, forms of apotheosis are found in Greco-Roman religion and also in Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity (theosis).

 

[1137]

A voice 'here' among the Theological Concepts . . . the other Theologies also have their own DIR's.
Autotheism goes hand in hand with Apotheosis, it being the main goal of many Western LHP's, both being forms of Self deification.

But can you elaborate on the specifics of this term? How do the two differ?

 

[Liu]

There still remains a need of clarification of terms.

Autotheism would be the assumption that one is already divine, while apotheosis would be the path towards becoming divine (be it by own effort or divine grace - the combination of which is what is found in Graeco-Roman and Christian traditions, as @Saint Frankenstein just mentioned).

One would assume that self deification then only refers to apotheosis by own effort, but I would agree with @EtuMalku that it can also refer to autotheism, as the act of acknowledging oneself as divine is a form of self deification as well.

Autotheism seems to have two forms to me: Either the one of stagnant acknowledgment, or the one of making the acknowledgment the basis of further actions. The western LHP seems to stress the latter form a lot, but I would assume that even RHP-traditions wouldn't completely shy away from it.

Also, there is the question of what does divine even mean, and autotheism can vary a lot on that point.

 

[EtuMalku]

But can you elaborate on the specifics of this term? How do the two differ?

Apotheosis seems to mean the elevation of someone to divine status; deification. Which is usually done by another, such as the case of Yeshua the Nazarene, Greek Heracles, and Roman Eneas and Romulus. While Egyptian pharaohs could be seen as autotheists in that they elevated themselves to that of gods.

 

[1137]

There still remains a need of clarification of terms.

Autotheism would be the assumption that one is already divine, while apotheosis would be the path towards becoming divine (be it by own effort or divine grace - the combination of which is what is found in Graeco-Roman and Christian traditions, as @Saint Frankenstein just mentioned).

One would assume that self deification then only refers to apotheosis by own effort, but I would agree with @EtuMalku that it can also refer to autotheism, as the act of acknowledging oneself as divine is a form of self deification as well.

Autotheism seems to have two forms to me: Either the one of stagnant acknowledgment, or the one of making the acknowledgment the basis of further actions. The western LHP seems to stress the latter form a lot, but I would assume that even RHP-traditions wouldn't completely shy away from it.

Also, there is the question of what does divine even mean, and autotheism can vary a lot on that point.

Apotheosis seems to mean the elevation of someone to divine status; deification. Which is usually done by another, such as the case of Yeshua the Nazarene, Greek Heracles, and Roman Eneas and Romulus. While Egyptian pharaohs could be seen as autotheists in that they elevated themselves to that of gods.

These definitions seem to disagree. Liu seems to be saying that in autotheism one is already divine. Etu seems to be saying that autotheism is deification through effort, rather than being bestowed godhood.

 

[EtuMalku]

These definitions seem to disagree. Liu seems to be saying that in autotheism one is already divine. Etu seems to be saying that autotheism is deification through effort, rather than being bestowed godhood.

No, I think we are saying the same thing. As lower beings we are to discover, experience and bring our higher Self into our mundane existence. Our higher Self IS the GodSelf but our lower self must ascend to this divine height.

 

[Liu]

No, I think we are saying the same thing. As lower beings we are to discover, experience and bring our higher Self into our mundane existence. Our higher Self IS the GodSelf but our lower self must ascend to this divine height.

That is one of the things I meant by there being different definitions of divine (and also different definitions of being it seems).

Therefore, I would say that even if one doesn't distinguish between a higher and lower self (or, as for example I do, distinguishes between different parts of self, but considers them all aspects of the divine), one still can both be an autotheist and strive for apotheosis.
Seems quite contradictory, I know. But there's a difference in believing/perceiving that one is a part of the divine, and working on getting better at using that in this life.

So, autotheism is to me the more passive/stagnant thing, whereas apotheosis is the process attached, which can come both from oneself or from outside. Apotheosis with no own effort seems to belong to myths, though, and even there it's normally a combination.

 

[VioletVortex]

Autodiesm isn't really a religion, it's more of a theological concept that could be related to the Left Hand Path.