Shuddhasattva
Well-Known Member
Continuation of debate in the 'Symbol of Darkness' thread, regarding how the Eastern LHP traditions view and work with the ego.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
[LHP] Eastern LHP view and method of the ego
- Thread starter Shuddhasattva
- Start date
Shuddhasattva
Well-Known Member
Whatever you'd like to call it, it seems to rest on mistaken notions of what the LHP in tantric traditions consists.
I think it depends on which direction the development is headed. We can head towards pre-rational narcissism, rationally motivated self interest, or trans-rational compassion. The eastern concept of an underlying unity or Self isn't bad. The problem with the eastern approaches is that they ultimately lose the ego. The LHP approach would be more about desiring to keep the ego, appreciating and nurturing its desires, and seeing the ego as the ultimate essential to any spiritual approach. That means, if we wish to develop into trans-rational states and even approach the innermost Self we do it through the mature ego, not disentangling it or abusing it to beat it out of the way so we can more clearly see the Self. You can't ever see the Self without the ego anyway.
LHP and RHP are short-hands for two distinctly different spiritual approaches. The RHP seeks to achieve non-duality, to merge the Atman with the Brahman, to extinguish desires and the illusion of the self, to seek reunion with God through submission, et cetera. The LHP wants to keep the separate sense of self, nurture its desires, and ultimately focuses exclusively on that ego.
They aren't mutually exclusive. The LHP realizes this, the RHP does not. Also, it seems you hardly understand Thelema.
They indeed are exclusive. One is anti-individual, the other is pro-individual.
Reductionism amd holism are not mutually exclusive.
Example: I can view myself as a part of the whole that is reality, a rather small part. Or I can view myself as nothing but a bunch of physical processes that create "me". Both are correct.
Keeping the Thelema example, this is talked about as well. "I am divided for love's sake". Without separation you cannot be aware of connection. We are separated in ways and connected in ways.
Getting into the hocusy pocusy nonsense, even as an individual we would be part of the same divine reality, sensing separation and experiencing connection at times. We can gratify the ego all we want, jerk that thing off. This does not make us separate, just self absorbed (after a certain point). I don't hold doors to masturbate my ego, thinking I'm a fantastic demi god. I hold doors becausd it's nice. We're all in this together, and to ignore that is to doom yourself.
The LHP does things their own way, the RHP is communal and guided. This is thhe difference. If you find your own way to self absorbtion, gnosis, whatever then you are LHP in my books.
Infinitum
Possessed Bookworm
I happened to read up on Buddhism today and I got the impression that enlightenment in itself works just as well the Left-Handed and the Right-Handed way. The purpose is said to be to free yourself from rebirth or reincarnation, which is an idea that many of us would disagree on. There's talk within LHP about retaining one's self as a kind of demigod in the afterlife, separate from the rest of the universe (or, to put in Eastern terms, Brahman). It would actually be interesting to hear Shuddha's take on the idea.
Doors, there is a good case for the interconnection idea you touched on, the idea of an inner witness Self, the two sides of reductionism and holism, and other related ideas. However the eastern/RHP approach is to give up the ego and elevate only the Atman, or Buddha-mind, or nothingness, or God, or whatever you want to call it -- essentially elevating one side of the coin.
At the core of eastern/western mysticism is seeking to create an experience of oneness/non-duality (disabling the brain's "object association areas"), whether by using (often abusing) the ego (left-handed methods) or supressing it with rigid taboos (right-handed methods). The contemporary LHP wants to keep the individuated self intact as a first priority. We care about maintaining the two sides of the coin. We want to have individuated existence, to have a personal identity, to have desires, to experience the ups and downs of life, to be a person. We can also explore transpersonal/nondual states on occasion as a tasty dessert so to speak, but it isn't desired as a permanent state. We never desire to lose the ego. We think it is essential to experience as we know it, and see no value in altering or abandoning ordinary personal experience.
We can use ordinary experience as a launching point for more transpersonal/mystical experiences, but we always make sure we can come back "down" and maintain a good anchor to ordinary existence. Any value in mystical or transpersonal experiences is in how they can help us transform or better our ordinary experiences; they aren't sought after for their own sake. At the core is a love of life, and at the core of the "RHP" is a rejection of life in favor of a permanent nondual existence. We think the Buddha's declaration that life is "all suffering" is a good exemplification of the story of the fox that couldn't reach the grapes on top of the tree and claiming that the grapes are sour anyway. So no; the Eastern traditions can never be LHP proper. They can still provide good tools such as mindfulness and non-attachment that we can use and appreciate, but they are essentially anti-individual and anti-life in their full context. Any of this making sense?
At the core of eastern/western mysticism is seeking to create an experience of oneness/non-duality (disabling the brain's "object association areas"), whether by using (often abusing) the ego (left-handed methods) or supressing it with rigid taboos (right-handed methods). The contemporary LHP wants to keep the individuated self intact as a first priority. We care about maintaining the two sides of the coin. We want to have individuated existence, to have a personal identity, to have desires, to experience the ups and downs of life, to be a person. We can also explore transpersonal/nondual states on occasion as a tasty dessert so to speak, but it isn't desired as a permanent state. We never desire to lose the ego. We think it is essential to experience as we know it, and see no value in altering or abandoning ordinary personal experience.
We can use ordinary experience as a launching point for more transpersonal/mystical experiences, but we always make sure we can come back "down" and maintain a good anchor to ordinary existence. Any value in mystical or transpersonal experiences is in how they can help us transform or better our ordinary experiences; they aren't sought after for their own sake. At the core is a love of life, and at the core of the "RHP" is a rejection of life in favor of a permanent nondual existence. We think the Buddha's declaration that life is "all suffering" is a good exemplification of the story of the fox that couldn't reach the grapes on top of the tree and claiming that the grapes are sour anyway. So no; the Eastern traditions can never be LHP proper. They can still provide good tools such as mindfulness and non-attachment that we can use and appreciate, but they are essentially anti-individual and anti-life in their full context. Any of this making sense?
Last edited:
Shuddhasattva
Well-Known Member
LHP BUddhism is, by default, Mahayana which doesn't seek to escape suffering but to redeem the universe through a sort of reverse soteriology; each aspirant is themselves exhorted to become a Buddha (supremely sovereign being consorting freely with sensory realities in the bodies of bliss and aspect) for the sake of all other beings, themselves embryonic Buddhas.
Absolute exaltation of the ego it is not, however, nor need it be to shape itself in the lefthanded manner.
Absolute exaltation of the ego it is not, however, nor need it be to shape itself in the lefthanded manner.
Shuddhasattva
Well-Known Member
It's always best to go back to primary sources for clarity, I'll quote when I get up from a few tantras to set the record straight.
Usually in contemporary LHP we don't believe the universe needs redeeming. Buddha-nature isn't the same as your recognizable personal identity, so what you touched on is still nonduality or abandoning the ego. We don't think there is any value in abandoning the ordinary sense of self because we don't see anything wrong with it. We think the ups and downs of life is what gives us authentic meaning. We love our material existence. It's the reason these set of ideas are now labeled "LHP" starting around 1966 with Anton Lavey's synthesis. He basically took it from the notion of left-handed Eastern practices being against the stream of the mainstream approaches of observing taboos, but applied to the wider anti-individual, anti-life context of the world religions. I understand the LHP DIR is dedicated to the latter. I think what you are describing is pure Eastern, using a set of different methods to get there (left-handed). So I don't think any of it fits in the LHP DIR in my estimation.
It is actually irrelevant for this discussion.
Last edited:
Shuddhasattva
Well-Known Member
So basically you're more interested in defining your own little world and then imposing this as consensus reality? Naturally, such is to be rejected.