The Stellar Tradition / Western Left Hand Path

(From Wandering in Darkness)

The Stellar Tradition

            What I call the "Stellar Tradition" refers to metaphysical beliefs rooted in the earliest spiritual traditions of humanity. I do not suggest that my beliefs and practices are an accurate recreation of ancient cultures, but rather a modern approach necessitated by thousands of years of new knowledge and cultural propaganda/evolution since those times. 

            The Stellar Tradition (ST) centered around the night sky rather than the daytime sun, with the most important focus being on major constellations or bright stars, and especially the northern circumpolar stars, which never sank below the horizon for our ancestors north of the equator. These stars are part of the constellations we now call the Big and Little Dippers, Draco, and parts or all of Cepheus, Cygnus, Cassiopeia, and arguably a few others. These are not the constellations the Egyptians saw, but we will get to that later. Whereas all the other stars/gods cycled through the skies, rising and disappearing only to rise again later, the stars/gods in the far north never "died" or needed to be "reborn" as the others. This connected them with immortality and the concept of individual godhood, the dead individual as a god or imperishable spirit in the next realm/life. In Egypt these stars, especially what we call the Big Dipper, were the realm of the god Setesh, Lord of the Northern Skies. 

            The ST also valued storms and rains, as before settling in to found civilizations humans were reliant on the waters as the land became increasingly dry, and Setesh was both the Lord of Darkness and Storms.[1] Along with this the sun was seen as a hated enemy which scorched and burned.[2] Between the darkness of the night sky and the sun-blocking darkness of daytime storms, one can say the ST placed a high value and positive associations upon the darkness. 

            Early alternatives to the ST included the Solar and Agricultural religions/traditions (S/AT), which merged into one shared identity incredibly early in history. Back then the biggest differences between the ST and S/AT were mainly:

In the ST the individual was recognized a god themselves after death, while in the S/AT the individual would either be seen as one with a specific god, remain ruled over by that deity, or possibly even cease to exist. 

In the ST the individual was seen as the highest being, but in the S/AT the individual was a creation of the gods that owes them worship, subservience, etc. 

In the ST there were more checks and balances, such as a king being removed from office or even killed if they became inefficient or corrupt,[3] and priesthoods not being allowed to oppress the people. A massive driving force behind the S/AT would be the type of master/servant ideology we are all too familiar with today in favor of a ruling elite, rather than the people.

We see examples of the Stellar, Solar, and Agricultural Traditions all interacting with each other in the oldest human religious scriptures: the Pyramid Texts.[4] Most importantly we can see the remnants of the ST, which would become more and more absent as time went on, even within Egypt itself. 

Setesh and Nebet-Het, hasten, announce to the gods of Upper Egypt and their spirits: "N. (the dead individual) comes, an imperishable spirit; if he wills that ye die, you will die; if he wills that ye live, you will live."

153a-c[5]

"We see a new thing," say the primordial gods. "O Ennead, a Heru is in the rays of the Sun. The lords of form serve him, the Two Enneads entirely serve him, as he sits in place of the All-lord. N. wins heaven, he cleaves its firmness." 

304b-305a[6]

We can also see examples of the ST’s fight against the others, especially Asar and the Agricultural Tradition, all of which we will dive deeper into later. 

Asar, thou dost not gain power over him (Setesh); thy son gains not power over him.

146a[7]

The Western Left Hand Path

            My personal definition of the Western Left Hand Path (WLHP), based on both the academics who study it and the practitioners who live it, would be a metaphysical path that seeks "individuation" and "separation," and values things such as an apathy towards culture, a respect for individuality and subjective experience, a rejection of external dogma, a focus on oneself or a small tribe, pragmatism, doubt, and godhood. 

Individuation

The evolution of an individual as a separate, distinct entity. Comparisons can be found in the works of psychologists Jung and Maslow, especially the latter’s "Self-actualization."[8] It is the perfection of the True Self as something unique from that around it, a realization of how glorious the individual Self is and its true nature. Another term for this in the esoteric traditions has been finding and doing one’s True Will. We will seek to understand this Self and its nature shortly. 

            Separation 

            Going together with individuation, by separation I mean a desire to be a unique, Self-ruled, isolated individual, rather than someone defined by culture, religion, even family or any other external source. It is a mix of individuation and separation that leads to true individuality, the likes of which few ever reach in a culture that convinces us buying the latest product, or agreeing with celebrities and politicians without independent thought, is what makes an individual. 

The fact that the conventions always flourish in one form or another only proves that the vast majority of mankind do not choose their own way, but convention, and consequently develop not themselves but a method and a collective mode of life at the cost of their own wholeness.

C. G. Jung[9]

            Apathy Towards Culture 

            Most people seek to align their beliefs, values, morals, desires, etc. to that of the cultures around them. Cultures themselves are based on enforcing this while casting out those who do not conform. On the opposite side we have people who have based their whole lives around shocking, upsetting, and disturbing cultures. Both equally tie one’s individuality and Self to the culture they are either aligning with or inverting. By apathy I mean something entirely different, the apathetic individual may have certain desires/values/etc. which align with culture, and others which do not. The key is they come to these on their own rather than because of what they are told to do or not do, they are apathetic to if culture agrees or disagrees, accepts or rejects them. A big problem I have with many modern groups which consider themselves part of the WLHP is that they are still bound to the culture they are trying to shock and invert. Basing one’s behavior on "upsetting the status quo" still makes one bound to the status quo. This is why it is upsetting to see antinomianism (which is actually a Christian doctrine essentially giving a license to sin) often given as a trait of the WLHP.

            Respect for Individuality and Personal Experience 

            Most folks only respect individuality as far as it conforms to their own paradigm, while holding a great distaste for individuality that goes against it. And more often than not the paradigm is bestowed upon them from external sources. Personal experience is only valued so far as it agrees with the personal experiences of other, "acceptable" individuals or authority figures. True individuality will inevitably lead to unique views that may not line up perfectly with your own, personal experience is extremely separate and individualistic. I believe that to seek individuality means to respect both your own and that of others, but I also believe we should not be so open minded the brain falls out, as they say. You can respect individual ideologies in general, but reject those which believe they can violate the individuality of others in specific (such as Fascism).

            A Rejection of External Dogma 

            All people have dogma, the question is whether you have concluded it for yourself or had it burdened upon you by outside forces. In my case, a personal dogma is to be suspicious of authority. This is not something enforced upon me, if anything the dogma of my childhood Judaism encourages one to obey authority. The dogma of academia tries to teach me to accept what an authority says and not question it, for as Max Planck said:

A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.[10]

Most people simply believe what they are commanded to, be it in areas of religion, politics, education, ethics, values, science, philosophy, or anything else. 

            A Focus on Oneself or a Small Tribe 

            The world is a mess, but it is not on any one of us to fix it. I spent several years trying to fix others and the culture of the state as a social worker, and the most important thing I learned is 95+% of people or entities do not want to be fixed. They do not even want to help themselves, let alone allow others to help, and more often than not they do not even see anything wrong to start. Altruism encourages us to neglect the Self in favor of others, when in reality Self-care is absolutely essential to even try and help others successfully.[11] We all have those very close family members or friends that we would literally die for, family and friends who accept us and value us as separate individuals, value our subjective experiences, who come to similar internal morals, values, even dogma as ourselves. These people are far more important than anyone outside of the group, and there is nothing wrong with accepting this. Selfishness is a sliding scale, there's no black and white distinction between altruism and selfishness. Indeed, closer investigation will show selfishness behind altruism. 

            Pragmatism

            Pragmatism is the idea that while there are objective truths, sometimes these are not always as relevant as what works for an individual. Magic is the best illustration of this, where certain symbols, languages, pantheons, etc. may be more effective for use by the individual than others. For instance, I acknowledge the objective existence of Setesh, but the symbols I use to connect with him, such as the heptagram, may not be the same things another uses. I only do full blown rituals rarely and with friends, whereas others feel inclined to do them every day. There are no right or wrong answers in this case, simply what works best for you (within the realm of morality). But do not mistake this for the Relativistic or Postmodern rejection of objective reality! Pragmatism inherently accepts the existence of objective truth to even define itself. 

Doubt

         Doubt is a manifestation of Philosophical Skepticism, a recognition that human knowledge is extremely limited. Whereas our culture tends to accept anything accessible to their senses at face value, the Skeptics questioned whether such senses could be trusted at all, and if they can be trusted, can we trust our interpretations of the information they give us? Beyond Self-existence (as we will see) there are very few, if any, absolute certainties. Most of what we believe to be unquestionable is rooted in faith and belief, even that others have a consciousness in the same way we do. This does not mean we should accept Solipsism, the view in which only oneself exists. There is nothing wrong with belief and faith so long as they are rooted in reason and evidence (as opposed to Fideism, or faith/belief against, opposed, or apathetic to reason and evidence).

            Godhood

            This is simply the realization and embracing of an individual’s divinity. Previously I had called this "Self-deification," and that may still appear now and then in my works out of habit. "Self-deification" and "Apotheosis" seem consistently defined, even by me, as an individual becoming a god, especially after their material body dies. This misses and distracts from the real point: that we are already gods simply being limited by matter. You cannot perform the act of Self-deification if you are already deified. I don't think it's simple semantics either, one view implies you must achieve some abstract goal to be successful. But you already have that eternal success, it's already "achieved," and recognizing what you are is much easier than becoming something you are not.

            There are plenty who would disagree with this definition of the WLHP I have laid out. Many think simply rejecting Christianity makes them part of the WLHP, even if they are still bound to external dogma, defined by culture as they seek to shock it, or they accept the modern faith in Physicalism as blindly as they once accepted Christianity. Some reject the dichotomy all together, saying the RHP and LHP distinction is invalid, or at least that the two terms only apply to religious traditions. These claims will be addressed throughout the text.

            The main disagreement, however, is with the concept of the WLHP itself, as the term "Left Hand Path'' originated in the East with Vedic religion. In the East, both the "Right and Left Hand Paths" seek submission to some higher force, it is simply the methods which differ (though there are exceptions to this, they are beyond the scope of this book, and might be better categorized as part of the Stellar Tradition). For example, an ELHP tradition may engage in taboo acts such as cemetery rituals where they cover themselves in human ashes to be closer to the gods, but they still seek the loss of Self into something supposedly greater. The catch here is terminology grows and evolves. The ELHP and WLHP are extremely different things, yes, but I believe so long as we distinguish them from one another all is well. This book is about the Western. 

            The WLHP appears to be a descendent and modern manifestation of the Stellar Tradition discussed above, as are the aforementioned Eastern exceptions to the rules. We can see this most clearly in the concept of personal divinity, as well as the Self-focused nature of the ST. There are many ST verses in the Pyramid Texts that clearly illustrate this in my opinion, such as:

(N)’s step is great, that he may traverse the sky. He is not seized by the earth gods, he is not rejected by the planets. Let the two doors of heaven open to him. (N) has no father among men who conceived him, no mother who bore him.

658c-659d[12] 

The gods come to (N) bowing, and the spirits escort (N) to his soul. For behold, (N) is a great one, the son of a great one, who Nwt birthed. The power of (N) is the power of Setesh in Ombos. (N) is the great bull who comes forth, the pouring down of rain. (N) comes forth as the coming into being of water, for he is the Serpent with many coils. (N) is scribe of the divine book who decides what exists and what ceases. (N) is stronger than men, mightier than the gods. Heru-Ur carries (N), Setesh lifts him up.

1143b-1148c[13]

            In the same vein of thought, we can see the Solar/Agricultural Tradition(s) as the predecessor to the Western Right Hand Path (WRHP), as well as the East in general. In both Monotheism and even modern forms of Atheism, the individual is in no way the "highest being" but something subservient if not downright vile, or perhaps "just an animal." We are certainly not seen as gods, but low-life forms in need of saving by such entities, which certainly feeds into the master/servant ideology Nietzsche wrote about. 

            The WRHP seeks the exact opposite of what we listed under WLHP values above - and note that these do not only apply to Monotheism, but most forms of Theism out there, most views of politics, most cultural preferences… this division goes far beyond religion and spirituality. Such as how Monotheism, political parties, or corporations don't want the individual to individuate and seek separation, they want a well-oiled cog in the machine, submitting the Self to something greater. Personal experience is completely disregarded, look at how Monotheists only believe their divine experiences are valid but not the Polytheists', or Atheists who believe their experience of a seemingly godless universe invalidates all contradictory ones. Do you think all those commercials for consumer products want you to be the odd man out, or do they want you and all your friends using the same new product? The WRHP is entirely founded on dogma, be that of one’s religion, their political party, their company or consumer culture… We are taught to be responsible for each other rather than just ourselves, to be the keepers of our fellow humans rather than to focus on what is most important in this short life. Look at how quickly neighbors turn on each other under authoritarianism. These institutions certainly do not seek for the individual to become a god and ascend to something greater than themselves! Some believe the L/RHP division applies to religion only, but as we can and will clearly see it applies to all aspects of life. 

[1] Mercer, Religion of Ancient Egypt, 51; Breasted, Development of Religion, 40.

[2] Wainwright, Sky Religion, 1.

[3] Wainwright, Sky Religion, 4-6.

[4] Griffiths, Conflict of Horus and Set, 22-26; Turner, "A Misrepresented God," 163-192.

[5] Mercer, The Pyramid Texts.

[6] Mercer, The Pyramid Texts.

[7] Mercer, The Pyramid Texts.

[8] Jung, Collected Works; Maslow, Motivation and Personality.

[9] Jung, Collected Works, para. 296.

[10] Planck’s Principle.

[11] Jackson, "Social Worker Self-care."

[12] Mercer, The Pyramid Texts.

[13] Mercer, The Pyramid Texts.