BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


International Year of Polytheism

 
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
el d.
08:15 / 02.02.07
The nice guys from Vienna´s own philosophy/art/whatever collective monochrom have inaugurated the world´s very first international year of polytheism.

Besides being fun, do they actually have a point there? Can monotheism be seen as tyranny? Is polytheism more fun?

All Hail Xenu!
 
 
Ticker
15:21 / 02.02.07
Er well, it's a touchy subject. As a polytheist it's important to me to be treated with respect and part of that seems to be not being a jerk about what other people believe including monotheism. I do believe many monotheistic Gods exist and They should be treated respectfully as should Their followers.

So do I personally think poly is more functional than mono? For me it is but I wouldn't feel entitled to taking someone else's right to worship as they wish away either.

So I'd say I'm down with Polytheistic Pride, not Monotheistic Bashing.
 
 
el d.
08:31 / 06.02.07
Well, the point is illustrated quite well in your post: As a polytheist, you can accept whatever deity another person worships. A monotheist cannot. (Perhaps he could, tweaking some commandments, accept that you actually mean to worship his god, but still would think that you need to learn the "true" way of worship. )

So, is tolerance polytheist?
If monotheists would accept other deities, then they would basically cease to be monotheist.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
08:52 / 06.02.07
Why can't a monotheist accept a polytheist's deities? I know several perfectly lovely monotheists who breeze through the whole "no Gods before me" bit by having Gods behind, or underneath, or a bit to the side, of the God they worship.

You also seem to be conflating monotheism with rigid fundamentalist forms of Christianity and Islam. This is inaccurate. There are, for a start, gentler forms of both faiths. There again, there are monotheistc religions involving the reverence of beings other than their God-- Voudoun being an obvious example.

I don't need to bash and hate on Christianity or Islam to be happy with what I got, or to prove I'm a better Heathen than the next guy.
 
 
el d.
10:30 / 06.02.07
Well, I wasn´t referring to any rigid fundamentalists, just stating that a monotheist who accepts other gods basically ceases to be one. If a monotheist, regardless of his or her specific faith, believes that other forces exist beside, around, above or below god, he or she´s a polytheist.

Most strains of hinduism, for example, acknowledge a supreme creator god ( Brahman ), but also accept that there are other divine beings around (But still created by Brahman). That doesn´t make them any less polytheist, does it?

If a monotheist accepts that other people worship true deities as well ... Doesn´t that make him or her a polytheist in the same sense as above? Even if he positions them as inferior, marginal or whatever?

Just wondering, you know.
 
 
Evil Scientist
10:54 / 06.02.07
Umm, I may be being stupid here (it's been known). But doesn't acknowledgement of there being more than one god count as polytheism, even if you're only worshipping one of them?

Interestingly enough there was a feature in the Guardian last week about the struggle by worshippers of the Ancient Greek pantheon to be allowed to worship at their holy sites in Greece.

Linkety-link-link!
 
 
Seth
11:15 / 06.02.07
Scientist: most monotheists who acknowledge polytheism who I know say something along the lines that there is one god and all the others are aspects. They choose to place their emphasis on the one, which is why the self identify as mono.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
12:32 / 06.02.07
Another flexible point is the definition of the term "God." I talk about my pantheon as "Gods" because that is the most meaningul term for me, but I don't really have a problem with a monotheist who only recognises one "God" but is happy to accord my Guys full respect as divine beings, acknowledges Their full power and virtue, but uses another term for Them such as "spirits" or "minor deities."
 
 
Hydra vs Leviathan
13:21 / 06.02.07
I think there's a difference between the kind of polytheism in which the many deities are regarded as aspects of a single ultimate deity (of which Hinduism is probably the best paradigmatic example, although it can also be regarded as a form of pantheism, as IIRC every being is ultimately an incarnation or aspect of The Infinite/"God"), and the kind where different deities are actually discrete, fully separate entities...

This again needs to be distinguished from a belief system in which there is One True God, but other spiritual or semi-divine beings exist, created by that True God (some Christians believe in angels, and many Muslims believe in Djinn, but i wouldn't call them polytheistic). Interestingly a lot of Christian writers, including the likes of CS Lewis and Tolkien as well as "proper" theologians, have attempted to reconcile monotheism with "classical" polytheistic beliefs by regarding the Greek, Norse, Egyptian etc gods as angels or other created beings, worshipped in "error" by confusion with aspects of the real God (this in turn can blur into pantheism, if you go mystical enough).

Actually it seems to me that a defining factor of monotheism is that, while there may be spiritual/supernatural beings secondary or inferior to Big-G God, the "real" God Hirself is infinite, in the sense of being completely omnipotent, omniscient, and the creator of everything - a pretty unequivocal "God-status" that only one being can have - whereas i'm not sure what position with regard to omnipotence, etc "true" polytheist have.

Actually, on examination most of the "polytheistic" religions i've read much about have turned out to be, at least arguably, "really" monotheistic - in that either one God is supreme over, and the creator/progenitor of, the others, or all the deities are regarded ultimately as aspects of one truly-infinite "God". I'd be really intrigued to find out if there are any "true" polytheistic religions, and if so, what their beliefs are about the origin of the universe, whether there is an ultimate "controlling force", etc...

I think a monotheist who believes in an absolutely infinite, omnipotent Creator-God wouldn't really be able to accept the beliefs of a "true" polytheist, without considering them in some way deluded.
 
 
EvskiG
13:52 / 06.02.07
There's a potentially useful term, "monolatry," which is the worship of one god while acknowledging that other gods exist.

(For example, Judaism started with a monolatrous group of Canaanites who saw Yahweh as the supreme god of a pantheon that included Ba'al, Asherah, etc.)
 
 
Unconditional Love
13:56 / 06.02.07
Some of this sounds very similar to pantheism and allied perceptions, for example there is a view that all the neter of egypt are aspects of one god, that they act as vehicles to exhibit certain characteristics. Sometimes called monoaltry.

Then you have an emanationist view point that may well view these intelligences as particular manifestations within one united field of energy, a living system.

I am not sure it matters how you conceptualize it, but how you work and relate and what practice you apply to embodying whatever intelligences you deal with.
 
 
Unconditional Love
13:56 / 06.02.07
Ev G spelt it right.
 
 
The Ghost of Tom Winter
14:49 / 06.02.07
I've always assumed monotheism as the worship of one god and polytheism as the worship of more than one god.
I say this because somewhere in my memory I remember a discussion on early Judaism and the commandments. Somewhere it said "thou shalt not worship other gods" or whatever, implying that yes, there are other gods but this god "our" god as they would say, is the ultimate one. I want to say there were more mentioning of other gods within the old biblical texts but I can’t recall at the moment.
 
 
ghadis
14:51 / 06.02.07
The idea of Henotheism is also related and of interest here and i think maybe more descriptive of the Egyptian Neteru than Monolatrism. The difference as i understand it is that one group worships one god (or gods) and acknowedges other gods but, essentially, theres is better. (like say between Egypt and Assyria). The other henotheistic group acknowedges other gods on a more equal level. (as in the differing cosmogony and neteru between towns in ancient egypt) A small difference maybe.
 
 
charrellz
14:54 / 06.02.07
So, is tolerance polytheist?

While rereading this, I picked up on a possible faulty definition of tolerance. Tolerance does not mean saying everyone is right. If you think the best ice cream flavor is vanilla, and your friend thinks strawberry is superior (because it is), being tolerant does not mean you both have to say you're both right. Tolerance is being OK with someone else liking a different ice cream flavor.

To extend to this discussion, to be tolerant of a polytheist's belief structure, a monotheist does not need to accept the existence of other gods, but the monotheist should allow the polytheist to belief as he wants without interference. (Note that there can tricky bits in the definition of interference. Is it interfering to teach another culture about antibiotics? Is it interfering to prevent someone from going to hell for being a heathen? etc.)

Other side of the same coin, the polytheist needn't except the possibility of monotheism, but ze should be tolerant and allow the monotheist to play with hir boring one god.


I notice alot of people discussing the stance that all the other gods are extensions/mirrors of the big God. While this is a popular belief, it is useful to remember that a good number of people or quite opposed to this. From my own experience I know there is a big movement among Southern Baptists to proclaim all other gods a deception of the devil. Not all monotheists are open to considering polytheism as a viable and valuable path of worship.
 
 
Daemon est Deus Inversus
14:55 / 06.02.07
Monotheism is the Neophyte's delusion that he or she is in 10=1. Look at woodcuts 18-20 in the "Rosarium Philosophorum."
 
 
ghadis
14:55 / 06.02.07
Like in a lot of subjects there is a lot of isms flying around here. And like insects and deepsea fish there are more being discovered every day.
 
 
ghadis
14:59 / 06.02.07
Monotheism is the Neophyte's delusion that he or she is in 10=1.

Is that the one hosted by Henry Kelly?
 
 
Hydra vs Leviathan
16:15 / 06.02.07
From my own experience I know there is a big movement among Southern Baptists to proclaim all other gods a deception of the devil. Not all monotheists are open to considering polytheism as a viable and valuable path of worship.

Well, that basically falls into the other monotheist position that other spiritual beings exist, but are created beings, created by the OneGod, which in every Christian theology i know of Satan is...

I didn't say that theological position necessarily implied tolerance of those (or all of those) "lesser" spiritual beings...
 
 
Ticker
16:32 / 06.02.07
I personally as a polytheist do not believe all Gods are the Same God just aspects or what have you. One of my monotheistic friends tried to find a half way ground between our beliefs by saying I was focused on a facet of the gem of truth while he was looking at the whole. Was a nice attempt on his part and I appreciated the intent but I'll pass.
For me it's akin to saying all mountains are the same mountain or all rivers the same river.

My siblings and I come from the same source but we're not the same person.Nor do I believe there is a single source everything can be traced back to. I personally can hold that multiple creation myths are true without being versions of the same myth.

So again tolerance as stated upthread is not the same as acceptance. My monotheistic pal does not accept my truth as his truth nor vice versa but we happily tolerant the operating system of beliefs that gets the other through the night.

It will be interesting to keep an eye on the situation in Greece as it develops.
 
 
Papess
17:34 / 06.02.07
For me it's akin to saying all mountains are the same mountain or all rivers the same river.

So true, but they are made of the same Earth.
 
 
Ticker
18:14 / 06.02.07
..and of the same Water but that doesn't make them the same mountain.
 
 
Papess
18:37 / 06.02.07
Not the same mountain, no. I didn't say that. Each mountain is complete in itself, but is a part of something else. I worship the mountain and that from which it originates and is a part of, at the same time. By all theories, I get the feeling that can't actually be done. Yet, I do.

I love different people in their completeness, and I can also love the human race as a single working organism. Why do these two concepts have to be perceived as incompatible?
 
 
Ticker
19:06 / 06.02.07
It's not so much incompatible to me really. It's the micro and the macro but also I'm cautious of the reductionist 'all is one' stance. Sure it's all made up of the same stuff and sometimes relating from that perspective is the most helpful. However sometimes the positioning of the difference is important.

A useful example would be in Namaste, I honor the Light within you. Me-ness greets the Universal as it manifest in you-ness. I honor both our uniqueness-es and our shared connection. It's holding the mountain and the earth in mind but not sublimating one into the other to the point of oblivion.
 
 
Papess
20:11 / 06.02.07
It's holding the mountain and the earth in mind but not sublimating one into the other to the point of oblivion.

I wholeheartedly agree with that, XK. However, that is the instant conclusion people seem to draw when that kind of belief system is mentioned.
 
 
Ticker
00:28 / 07.02.07
thems is people who don't understand sitting in silence with a friend is being together and alone at the same time.

To post something useful....

I know my perceptions of distinction are artificial and generated by my mind in many ways. There is a blurring of boundary and wholeness in other states of consciousness and I've sat in a field knowing Union. Yet to say only Union is True is not useful to me all the time. I need small chunks of reality to process and so I am given individual Truths as I can handle them.

An example is the inside of the house versus outside of the house. For me there's a huge difference between these two places, they are distinct. Not so to my cat, for her they were two rooms in the same house or two places outside with different plants. the perception of them as such was a bit of revelation for me and highly useful. yet sometimes as a human being inside is an important distinction even if I'm aware it is artificial.
 
 
EmberLeo
07:27 / 07.02.07
Why do these two concepts have to be perceived as incompatible?

It's not so much incompatible to me really.


I don't see a contradiction either, so I couldn't tell you. I'm deeply a Pantheist and functionally a Hard Polytheist, but I can play in the Archetypes/Facets sandbox if I'm needed there. As far as I'm concerned the individual gods are as sepparate from eachother as the mountains, and we're all in this Universe together. I don't believe in a creator, per se - the Universe itself is the sum of Divinity.

I need small chunks of reality to process and so I am given individual Truths as I can handle them.

Exactly - my perception of polytheism on a philosophical level is of individuals sufficiently large that they are more conciously connected to the Divine Whole than perhaps I am, and thus express as divinities.

---------------------------

So, is tolerance polytheist?

Well, polytheistic tolerance translates a couple different ways.

There's the filing-cabinet method, where all YOUR gods are faces of OUR gods, you just call 'em by different names. This shows up historically in Roman assimilation, and in modern times in some Orixa worship ("Yemeya told me to look for Her in the Fens in Norway where they call Her 'Free-kah?' Do you know Yemaya?" "No Yemaya here, but we do have a nice blue lady named Frigga." "Yes, blue, yes, that's Yemaya." "Frigga is Yemaya? Well okay then.")

There's the gods-are-people-too method, where your pantheon is your family and my pantheon is my family, and it's only to be expected that you're closer to yours and I'm closer to mine.

There's the archetype method, which is kind of like the filing-cabinet method, except that it doesn't start with a pantheon so much as a list of patterns that show up a lot.

The other forms of interaction I had in mind don't really qualify as "tolerant" now that I think of it...

--Ember--
 
 
saintmae
10:01 / 07.02.07
I heart monochrom. They're great.

To draw an irreverent parallel: consider monogamy vs. polyamory. In my circles, this is an endless topic of discussion.

It seems that the unique benefits of polyamory include not needing to force one partner to attempt to fulfill all your needs, lots of sex partners you want them, a wide loving network of intimate friends, the joys of relating without the feeling of ownership or being trapped, an accepted way of exploring interests in others that doesn't force you to deny desire or leave a satisfying relationship. The downsides of polyamory include the potential for drama, conflicts of interest, conflicts of time, having your whole life revolve around your relationships, potentially difficult emotions, more worry about STDs.

On the other hand, the unique benefits of monogamy include emotional focus, safety, the intensity of sharing a life with one other person, no conflicts of time or interests, less worry about STDs, more chance to focus on other aspects of your life and the world. The downsides to monogamy are potentially feeling trapped, no chance to explore outside desires without ruining what you have, potential stagnation, constant worry that you have crossed often-unspoken boundaries between friendly interaction and cheating.

In a lot of ways, these hold true for polytheism vs. monotheism. In polytheism, you can find a deity that may better match your specific needs in the moment without needing one god to do everything for you. You can try out different forms of ritual. You don't have to worry that your glancing interest in one god has pissed off another (well, not often, though sometimes you still have to worry about drama). At the same time, you may find your entire life is focused on religion and ritual because you have so many gods to please. You may have conflicting requirements between faiths or pantheons.

In monotheism, you have the chance for a safe and deep relationship with one god that encompasses all your needs. You have focus and discipline, a clear path. There is one way to do things ritually, and you become an artist within those boundaries. Everything relates to your one god, so you can find your god in everything and not spend lonely nights at home without deistic comfort. The downside is that your god may not be particularly suited to every practical need. You may have a jealous god that dislikes your fraternization with practitioners of other faiths or your interest in other gods, which can have unfortunate social or personal consequences. You may feel trapped within your belief system, feel unfulfilled but not explore other paths because you would have to reject your entire faith to look elsewhere.

My apologies if my irreverence has offended, but it seems to me that there are an awful lot of parallels. In the absence of knowable Truth, each of us must paradoxically choose belief (or unbelief) based on what evidence calls to us most. Practical concerns are as useful a tool for analysis as spiritual revelation.
 
 
the Kite
11:19 / 07.02.07
Ask me last year and I would have pointed out from within my spirit model that the monotheistic deities began within polytheistic contexts. Power to the poly.

For the moment however, the Sceptic has the keyboard. Polytheism: more gods to not believe in.
 
 
Ticker
13:56 / 07.02.07
In monotheism, you have the chance for a safe and deep relationship with one god that encompasses all your needs. You have focus and discipline, a clear path. There is one way to do things ritually, and you become an artist within those boundaries. Everything relates to your one god, so you can find your god in everything and not spend lonely nights at home without deistic comfort.

Er, you know I've got this and I'm polytheistic. I'm currently focusing on my Maitresse, to borrow rosie x's lovely term.

Polytheism: more gods to not believe in.
Reminds me of the poly's quip about atheists "What's one less God to believe in?"

Belief aside for the moment I'd like to dig into tolerance. When a coworker proudly says hir child is the smartest in the their class I don't feel the need to require proof for this claim. It goes unsaid that parents will dote on their sprog. Same when someone says their God is the smartest or other -est. Sort of goes along with a loving blind spot.

It is when a sense of being imposed upon happens that what others do privately becomes an issue. There are those who feel that the actions of others directly impact the chances of spiritual salvation. (almost typo: slavation)

There's this tricky sense of group indentity that happens some times. I've seen it at work in many cases of intolerance where the actions of another are an afront because those actions are assumed to impact non participants in the actions. Not just 'God will punish you' but 'God will punish me the faithful because I tolerate you'. Thems is scary thoughts.

When I've read about honor killings I see this same sort of collective group identity at work. The actions or perceived actions of another shame or blemish a non participant. It's this perception that I often don't understand when people get enraged about what others do in the privacy of their own homes let alone out in public.

Evil Scientist linked to the issue in Greece about the YSEE's public poly rituals in a climate where the State and Greek Orthodox Church are publicly allied. YSEE's FAQ at first read is a bit in your face about their rights and I was taken aback by the harsh tone until I thought about what it must be like to live somewhere with such a pronouced degree of relgious intolerance.

I expect to be able to practice my religion as I wish in the US yet I know of cases where many people have been persecuted within my lifetime for being non Abrahamic.

So how do we tolerant folk of whatever flavor address the issue of this reflected implication of spiritual badness? How do we educate that tolerance is not the same as acceptance in terms of you being held accountable for my actions? I dig Nagative Capability for this reason.
Let's politley agree that not everything can be pinned down and resolved and we need not find out which belief system is better right now this very second.

I'll take your word that your sprog is best in hir class and you'll take mine that my catses are God Emperors. Afterall I'm not deciding where to place your sprog in academics nor are you required to worship my catses.
 
 
Papess
14:52 / 07.02.07
I agree with everything you said in your last post, XK. I also would love to see more tolerance and less freaking out just because someone's methods and beliefs are not reflective of one's own practices.

Let's politley agree that not everything can be pinned down and resolved and we need not find out which belief system is better right now this very second.

Nor do we ever have to.
 
 
Papess
15:27 / 07.02.07
Also, if a religion preaches intolerance of other belief systems, that is not religion anymore, IMHO. That is politics.

Just my opinion.
 
 
Quantum
15:44 / 07.02.07
(almost typo: slavation) There's this tricky sense of group indentity xk

shurely identity? Indentity sounds like an accidental correption of indenture and identity which in that context made me larf, identity+slavery.
 
 
EmberLeo
20:04 / 08.02.07
Whereas I just read it as identity with a tab... ;p

--Ember--
 
 
Z. deScathach
07:34 / 16.02.07
I'd been reading this for some time thinking about how I haven't worked with deities for some time. I settled into an emanationist point of view and had settled into working with the "living system" per se, although I have worked with deity in the past, (and may again at any time). I settled into the view of deities, spirits, elementals and such as being part of a living system in order to free up myself. It enabled me to liberate my self from the question, "Who's God is more valuable?" (It's interesting to note that with MY typo, that came out,"Who's GOOD is more valuable?" Keyboardomancy. The "emanationist" perspective, (damn, I love that, I've been looking for a label for my strangeness for some time),could also be called a philosophy as well, and I've tried to avoid talking about it. I've always found it interesting to go to pagan gatherings, and find people trying to convert me to a philosophy. When I ask them if we can agree to disagree, the tension is palpable. True believers exist everywhere. I think that the negative capability philosophy is a good one. What is the universe and beyond? Ahhh, gee, that's a little big, er, could you ask me about my own little corner? It's fun to travel, though......
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply