Left hand path and Right hand path do not represent femininity and masculinity

See this image below?

I found this on Tuesday while searching for stuff on mysticism that wasn’t the same soft, right-hand path crap, and I find it’s premise very flawed. It assumes the left hand path is based on the same principle as yin from Taoist belief, which is passive, withdrawing, and feminine, and that right hand path is the same principle as yang, which is active, extroverted, and masculine.

Left hand path is a spiritual path emphasizing the self, the attaining of personal power and godhood, spirituality aimed towards self-oriented goals, enlightenment through one’s own self or ego, and not dissolving the self into a higher consciousness, while right hand path is spirituality based on attaining oneness with “God” or the universe, merging your self with the universe, and spirituality based on self-denial (and often denial of worldly pleasures). I don’t see left hand path as being very feminine, and I find right hand path to be too soft to be masculine (Wicca being the best example of a soft, white light, and very feminine religion, despite the male god). Come to think of it, this idea seems to come from Wicca in some ways.

Ultimately, what one must realize is that the left and right hand paths have nothing to do with gender, and everything to do with the orientation of one’s spiritual path, and I doubt it works the same way as Taoism. And who’s to say one does not look for light in the left-hand path, or see darkness in the right hand path?

Though I must admit, the LHP pentagram in that image is cool.


One response to “Left hand path and Right hand path do not represent femininity and masculinity

  1. Left-Hand Path and Right-Hand Path have nothing to do with enlightenment. Magic will not get you enlightenment.
    I almost wish I could beat this into your head. Enlightenment is not “dissolving your self into a higher consciousness.”
    The idea of moksha is different in all schools of Hinduism. Some may (appear to) teach dissolving into Brahman, others just state that the Atman realizes itself as Atman-tattva, but attains a “oneness” with Brahman, why retaining it’s “Individuality.” In any case, moksha doesn’t automatically mean becoming one with Brahman. The Jains teach that after moksha, the individual’s liberated soul goes to Siddhaloka.
    How can you attain enlightenment when you are fixated on one little body? If you remain fixated on the skandhas (“self”) you will never attain anything, except another womb.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s