Hard Polytheism: Why is it not considered seriously?

[Goblin]

Or is it a beautiful story, that explains the sacred Nature of the holy river that Kesin sadhus live by.

I'm insulted, if im not a pagan your not a hindu... everything ive read and every bramin, and yogi I've ever learned from has described hinduism as theistic

 

[Goblin]

And yes I can prove there aren't magic People living in the clouds. Gods however live in the world not outside of the world.
What do you know of my Gods atheist

 

[Goblin]

As far as I can tell the reason People don't take hard polytheism seriously is because many probably mistake it for literalism

 

[Goblin]

the gods retain individuality even when born from the one

 

[Aupmanyav]

Neo-Paganism is a collection of religions. ..
If you like literalism so much then you must really believe the Ganges comes from Shiva hair.

What is wrong with many beliefs coalescing in one (that is what Hinduism is). At least we did not break idols or behead people. I am not a neo-pagan. Belief of my people is thousands of years old. .. And all rivers anywhere in the world originate from the feet of Lord Vishnu to fall in the matted locks of hair on Shiva's head before they appear on earth. Every Hindu knows this for a fact. All waters are 'Ganga' only.

 

[Aupmanyav]

the gods retain individuality even when born from the one

The Gods and Goddesses were not born from one. Some are primordial, others (Adityas) were born to God-Mother Aditi. Indra and Sun God, Mitra being among them. Marutas were born to Rudra. Durga appeared when Parvati, Saraswati and Laxmi desired the most powerful Goddess, so they pooled their energies. Ganesha and Kartikeya were sons of Shiva and Parvati. Hanuman was born to the monkey King Kesari and his wife Anjana. Other deities have various other histories.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I'm insulted, if im not a pagan your not a hindu. .. everything I've read and every brahmin, and yogi I've ever learned from has described hinduism as theistic

There is a problem here. What does an atheist negate? An atheist negates the existence of Gods and Goddesses. I am an 'advaitist' (believer in non-duality), therefore I do not accept Gods and Goddesses but I do accept the existence of Brahman, the sole substrate of all things in the universe. That way I cannot be termed as a 'Nastika' (Nay-sayer) though I am not a theist. And I believe in 'dharma'. That is what makes me a Hindu though I deny deities.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Quick question not to bring yall convo flow. As a Hindu, can you still believe in deities (atheist) and still deny their existences? Or do you deny their existences because you do not believe they exist?

There is a problem here. What does an atheist negate? An atheist negates the existence of Gods and Goddesses. I am an 'advaitist' (believer in non-duality), therefore I do not accept Gods and Goddesses but I do accept the existence of Brahman, the sole substrate of all things in the universe. That way I cannot be termed as a 'Nastika' (Nay-sayer) though I am not a theist. And I believe in 'dharma'. That is what makes me a Hindu though I deny deities.

 

[Goblin]

I don't just buy into theology and mythology. I believe what the old gods teach... what nature teaches. But Im glad we have a Hindu to tell us what's what. Maybe the pagan area should be blue too

 

[Quintessence]

I do not deny the individuality of the spirits. But I see them as aspects of one energy
I conceive of the gods as children of a pantheistic goddess. They are individual elements of one Nature.

If you weren't deifying the energy, I would call it polytheism + substance monism. Since you're deifying it, though, not so much. Honestly, I wish we had a separate term for the "these gods are facets of this one god" thing, because describing that as either "soft" polytheism or "soft" monotheism is, IMHO, misleading. It really is its own thing, because it has implications for how someone goes about worship that make it distinct from what either monotheism or polytheism look like. What really characterizes the "soft" mindset to me is that "softs" will interchange divine iconography. You don't see that in monotheism (because there's only one "true" god), nor do you see it in polytheism (because different gods are never equivalents of each other).

Until you dawned light on it I just thought hard meant literal

Nope. I honestly haven't run across that equivocation before.

 

[Quintessence]

I don't just buy into theology and mythology. I believe what the old gods teach... what nature teaches.

How is that different from theology and mythology? What is your understanding of those terms?

I see theology as the study of the gods, and mythology as sacred stories about the gods (among other things). Both of these are teaching and learning instruments.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Quick question not to bring yall convo flow. As a Hindu, can you still believe in deities (atheist) and still deny their existences? Or do you deny their existences because you do not believe they exist?

I consider deities to be characters of my mythology The mythology shows situations and their solutions according to my culture, as Quintessence said, learning instruments. I do not believe that deities exist or look after the working of the universe.

But let me state that my view point is uncommon among Hindus. Generally they are either pure polytheists or believe in all deities being forms of one supreme entity (Brahman).

 

[Goblin]

Mythology are just stories.
But I talk to the earth and know it is its own God
And to the trees, and rocks, and animals.
To me mythology is supplemental, these gods don't even require formal names

 

[Quintessence]

Mythology are just stories.
But I talk to the earth and know it is its own God
And to the trees, and rocks, and animals.
To me mythology is supplemental, these gods don't even require formal names

The stories we tell - our mythologies - emerge from our experiences of the world and the meaningfulness we find in it. The maps of the territory we draw are, in most respects, our mythos; our story. We often don't think of it as a story, or as mythology, as we associate mythology specifically with old tales recorded in history. But those tales emerged from experiences of the world too - meaningful experiences of other peoples long ago.

I prefer to think about things this way because I can be more conscious and deliberate with how I go about making my map of the territory, or how I create the mythos of my path. I don't utilize traditional mythologies much in my practice, but I still see myself telling stories and creating mythos. For example, when I was studying Blue Jay, I learned that this corvid is not actually blue. They are black. The blue color is an illusion caused by the construction of their feathers. So the story I tell is that Blue Jays are deceivers and tricksters. It's additional meaningfulness I experience in the world or of my gods.

In a fashion I suppose you could say mythos is still supplemental, but I see it as more of the avenue through which meaningfulness is created. It tells of the nature of things, and their relationships to each other. I would love to spend some more time developing mythos specific to my path.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

But I talk to the earth and know it is its own God
And to the trees, and rocks, and animals.

Interesting - could you say some more about what this involves from a practical point of view?

 

[MissDiscerner]

The Historical Vedic religion was indeed pagan but Hinduism which is an offshoot of the Historical Vedic religion is not necessarily a pagan religion or even a polytheistic religion.

Seconded! The Historical Vedic Religion was hard polytheist; but the Hinduism is generally seen as monist. And almost all the Vedic deities were forgotten by the Hinduism...

 

[Goblin]

You ask a question to anything, literally anything and watch for an answer. some omen or sign.
shamans often do this, for example ask a river how to solve a problem, and see how the river moves.. is it violent or soft?
Gaze at a rocks crevices and wait for pictures.

also in the subjective astral world everything takes on a similar set of chatacteristics as you do. namely human.
but the astral world is for a whole other thread. Lol

Interesting - could you say some more about what this involves from a practical point of view?

As far as mythology is concerned I agree, and greatly enjoy mythology. But it becomes a burden when People forget its origin and meaning

 

[Goblin]

please read my theology post in the pagan area. My paganism; shamanism and revelation

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You ask a question to anything, literally anything and watch for an answer. some omen or sign.
shamans often do this, for example ask a river how to solve a problem, and see how the river moves.. is it violent or soft?
Gaze at a rocks crevices and wait for pictures.

So do you ask the question out loud, or is it enough to think it?

 

[Goblin]

Whatever feels right for you