But @Liu The best way to kindv'e point you what Etu and I mean, is watching a few educational videos from Mr. LeRoy. Not trying to give you the wrong perception of how both of us may seem so dogmatic, but of how both of us perceive nearly these same approaches. (Its been a while watching some of these videos, but hopefully you will find some of this useful.)
Hm, I watched the 2 vids, and I don't really get how that relates to your approaches to the LHP. His conclusion is that self-deification means acceptance of the whole of existence (and the whole of oneself) as good. He doesn't distinguish between higher or lesser self or whatever, the only particular part of the self he brings up is the shadow, which, while it might have some parallels is a very different notion from the greater self.
As most of the first vid is on Hinduism, some notes on that as well to clarify what I was referring to in my previous comment. Now I really need to read up again on Hinduism, but based from what I remember:
Shiva is a latecomer to the pantheon, probably based on some deity from the indigenous population of the Indic subcontinent. And that trinity of Brahman, Vishnu and Shiva is even later but doesn't play much of a role in Hinduist practice as pretty much every town has a different deity that they worship - they might equate it with Vishnu or Shiva or Shakti (basically never with Brahman), but even then they only equate it with one and completely disregard the others. In other videos, LeRoy also brings up the comparison between Cernunnos and that famous relief from the Indus Valley culture - but Indus Valley culture broke down a couple hundred years before the first speakers of Indic languages moved into the Indic subcontinent, so even if Shiva goes back to that same entity that is depicted there, that would just mean that he has no relation whatsoever to Cernunnos. And as someone pointed out in the Q&A, what he's talking about is LHP Hinduism (which developed about 1200 to 1500 years ago I think), which is different from "5000 years of unbroken tradition".
@Liu I will get back to your responses, I actually have had to catch up on some of the talking's you and @Etu Malku had on the forum. Iv'e been extremely busy as of late.
But going to @Etu Malku Response The phrase 'more than human' isn't that difficult to understand. One becomes More Than Human when the human aspect of our existence is transcended. In other words, as we become more like our Greater Self, we become less like our mundane self, thus more than human.
He's hit it on the head, this is something that him and I can personally agree with. Even though @Etu Malku and I have entirely different beliefs on our views of the LHP, we both strive to achieve that Greater Self, Higher Self, Ubermensch whatever you choose to call it. This is as previously stated is the concept of the Western Left Hand Path. Unfortunatley as Etu Malku previously stated I believe, not a lot of people who are on the Western Left Hand Path achieve this stage of that Greater Self. When you first Journey on the Western Left Hand Path your ultimate goal is rebelling against what is Conventional, the Second stage is then working on erasing that "Lesser Self," the third stage is achieving that godhood. For me personally, I view myself on both on that second and third stage.
Some people are often trapped with Satanism in which they are stuck on stage 1, and remain their without any evolutionary progress.
For me, that first stage was me having a certain despise of popular culture.
That didn't relate to my spirituality whatsoever, though, except that listening to metal was what got me to read lyrics related to various forms of the LHP and thereby looking into that further.
So I'm not sure whether I ever was on that first stage, because to me, my spirituality has nothing to do with rebelling against conventions - on the contrary, I'm happy when I find conventional things that fit into it.
What exactly do you mean by the lesser self? Those parts of oneself that get into the way of your goals? If so, then I would rather consider it LHP to work on integrating these parts instead of trying to erase them (which would be in line with what LeRoy seems to be talking about concerning the shadow).
Not really, but as rigid as this might sound. Going back to my previous commentary on exchanges of my mention of "how everyone's different," or that some people may find "collectivism/egalitarianism" beneficial.
I wouldn't brush egalitarianism in with collectivism. Collectivism does not honor the individual and is framed around the collective. It seeks to regulate/hold individuals in check in order to further the collective. Egalitarianism is framed around the individual and honors the individual. It protects the individual from collateral damage from a rampaging collective by regulating the collective so it doesn't harm individuals.
That sounds about right - TST would thereby be egalitarian and not collectivist.
