Question about hard polytheism

[ghostflowers]

From study and meditation, I'm beggining to feel I fall more into the hard polytheism group. The thing I'm curious about is how do other hard polytheist see the afterlife? Are all heavens real? And also, if you believe all gods are distinct individuals, why do you worship the Wiccan gods bur not others? If you do worship other gods, how does that fit into your craft?

[Rathac]

In my mind, there are many various and unique forces within the whole of Nature, all of them worthy of being shown respect. To me, these forces can be personified by the many gods which represent them.

My personal opinion regarding the afterlife, and if heavens are real... any answer you receive from me will probably be unsatisfactory. Would you take my, "Yes." for granted? Only you can authoritatively determine this answer for yourself, based on your own experiences. Your beliefs in such things will come from searching within Nature, and likewise within yourself; you are a part of Nature, too. "As above, so below."

[Rathac]

When I made my last post, I did not understand the difference between "hard polytheism," and "soft polytheism." This is the first community I have visited which uses these definitions. The post I made was from the standpoint of "soft polytheism."

[Chalice]

There is something called 'The Mysteries' that can't be explained in books, it can only be experienced.

The true nature of the gods who dwell in the Otherworld are part of that set of mysteries, just as the true nature of the otherworld is.

Anything is, is a kind of Protestant apologetics type thing. Arguing about definitions in books from academics is not experiencing the mysteries.

We're not Christians, no need to argue about definitions. Go and experience the Gods in ritual, prayer and trance journeying.

My two cents.

[Rathac]

We're not Christians, no need to argue about definitions. Go and experience the Gods in ritual, prayer and trance journeying.

I don't see how Christianity is related to arguing about definitions. I don't think either of us were arguing about any definitions in the first place. Sometimes it's just good practice to establish a baseline for discussion before discussing. If we have different definitions for the things we try to talk about, it could end up confusing and creating misunderstandings.

[Vesca]

When I made my last post, I did not understand the difference between "hard polytheism," and "soft polytheism." This is the first community I have visited which uses these definitions. The post I made was from the standpoint of "soft polytheism."

I love people who reflect, return to an earlier post and elaborate/adjust their response with their newfound understandings (in simple terms; I love people who are responsible and aware of their statements).

[Vesca]

From study and meditation, I'm beggining to feel I fall more into the hard polytheism group. The thing I'm curious about is how do other hard polytheist see the afterlife? Are all heavens real? And also, if you believe all gods are distinct individuals, why do you worship the Wiccan gods bur not others? If you do worship other gods, how does that fit into your craft?

I'm going to answer from my own, entirely personal, standpoint of my specific semi-reconstructionist path (because true reconstructionism from this region is a pipe-dream). I have a specific set of deities from a specific region and time of that region's history, and I follow it closely.


I perceive the afterlife and heavens as the lore I look to describes it (because it makes sense to me). So to me, yes the "heavens" or upper world is real (although human souls don't go there, it's the domain of the gods). Where humans souls go, the lower world of the dead, is also real to me.

I do believe my deities are distinct individuals and that they do not cross over. Although there are some sources that say a couple of them are actually the same deity (often they are related in lore as son, father, grandfather) that represent their aging and death/rebirth process throughout the year. I am skeptical because that information is newer, but not necessarily false (I am always learning and haven't yet had a chance to dig up more scholarly sources on this).


Wiccan gods are actually gods taken from other paths. I stay out of the definition and history of Wiccan debates because you can't make everyone happy. The official Gardnerian Wicca came into existence in the 60's (or so, my history in that area is rusty), but there are a few people who believe that Wicca as a religion is older and still others who believe that the older religions are non-wiccan neo-paganism paths drawn from other belief systems (Celtic, Roman, Kemetic, Norse, etc...). I'm not going to go into that, my point is that Wiccan gods are actually gods from other places and predate the official create of Wicca as a religious system.


I do not worship other gods than in my pantheon, but there are many similarities between my pantheon and the Celtic pantheon (because both originate from Indo-Europeans). So I believe there is a deep-seated connection between specific deities with different names.


I'm not really sure how to go about answering how my path fits into my "craft," aside from that they simply co-exist because my deities and the physical/spiritual worlds make up my perception and understanding of my existence and the existence of everything else, so naturally my practices fit into and work with that perception.

[popsthebuilder]

I do not understand how polytheists can perceive many things and forces/beings/spirits/angels/gods but not look further to see that they seem to all be of one source. Is the source somehow insignificant to polytheists? I'm not knocking anyone here. I am sincerely curious.

Peace

[Vesca]

It's a legitimate question. Particularly when considering the amount of books out there that focus on the one divine source and the god/goddess focus.


I can't speak for all polytheists, so this is purely from my perspective.

In my path (like many), the universe was created from a single source and branched out with the different realms, the tree of life, and the various creatures and manifestations.

That initial source, and the most basic of elements and forces, are... raw. Neutral. And very basic. They lack personification. They just "are," but can't really be connected with in a direct way because that sense is pretty alien and overwhelming (as a whole) to the human mind. I think it's something we can only really understand, albeit vaguely, after we've left this realm of existence. And until then it's just kind of.. "there." We know it's there, sometimes we can feel it, sometimes we feel that mystical connection to it, but it's a shadow of its whole and multi-faceted self that is probably impossible to fully grasp with our limited mental faculties.

Most people describe that mystical connection as a feeling, rather than something they can intellectually describe and scientifically analyze.

Deities are the children of those forces. They bring the personalities, the ties, the connections, the stories, and lessons with them. They're who are able to listen (and often don't respond). They have choice, like we do, like spirits do, whereas the more primal forces are just always there and can be seen in all choice (good, bad, positive, negative, productive, destructive, etc...).

Does that help?

[popsthebuilder]

It's a legitimate question. Particularly when considering the amount of books out there that focus on the one divine source and the god/goddess focus.


I can't speak for all polytheists, so this is purely from my perspective.

In my path (like many), the universe was created from a single source and branched out with the different realms, the tree of life, and the various creatures and manifestations.

That initial source, and the most basic of elements and forces, are... raw. Neutral. And very basic. They lack personification. They just "are," but can't really be connected with in a direct way because that sense is pretty alien and overwhelming (as a whole) to the human mind. I think it's something we can only really understand, albeit vaguely, after we've left this realm of existence. And until then it's just kind of.. "there." We know it's there, sometimes we can feel it, sometimes we feel that mystical connection to it, but it's a shadow of its whole and multi-faceted self that is probably impossible to fully grasp with our limited mental faculties.

Most people describe that mystical connection as a feeling, rather than something they can intellectually describe and scientifically analyze.

Deities are the children of those forces. They bring the personalities, the ties, the connections, the stories, and lessons with them. They're who are able to listen (and often don't respond). They have choice, like we do, like spirits do, whereas the more primal forces are just always there and can be seen in all choice (good, bad, positive, negative, productive, destructive, etc...).

Does that help?

I like your reasoning. So you consider yourself a polytheist but do not refute a singular creator of all other existence as we know it?

Thank you for your explanation.

Peace.

[Vesca]

I wouldn't pigeon-hole that description so lightly with polytheism. It's a bit more complicated (in my path, and my mind) than just having this shining ball of divine light that somehow created the universe.

What I mean is that most (maybe all?) belief systems contain a creation story.

A lot of new age books I've read describe there being a divine creator which has facets as the God and Goddess, which may be personified by many different deities across different belief systems. That's not what I follow. It's always felt "wrong" to me.

My universe and its creatures came from somewhere. And depending on the practitioner, you're going to get very different perspectives on this question. So I'll try to tread lightly and remind you that my explanation is only valid for me and I can't speak for any other practitioner out there.

Like the Nordic cosmic cow who licked the salt and fed the universe from its milk, many Slavic creation stories begin with the Cosmic Rooster who laid the Cosmic Egg that hatched the universe and its various realms. From there, the world tree grew to connect those realms and through various means of intermingling of archaic forces, deities were birthed.

As you can see, it's not entirely as straight-forward as the monotheistic description of a divine entity and its creation.

One could twist it and say that the rooster is symbolic in that it must contain both male and female sexes in order to procreate something fertile on its own, and that within it it must already contain all the elements that create the universe we know.

Or one could take it literally. It will depend on the individual as to how they interpret it.

[Xiao Rong]

Personally, I think the terms "soft" and "hard polytheism" are sort of a false binary. The idea that everything stems from a single unified source is "monism", which is a stance that is not incompatible with hard polytheism (at least in my book -- I know of others who disagree with me). I can believe that we are all one and stem from a single source, AND all distinct and separate from one another as discrete entities. As Vesca said, sometimes it is much easier to access a certain aspect of the Divine than all of it at once (although sometimes in relating to a deity I can get the tiniest peek of the much greater Divine ... marvelous!).

As for the original question, I don't think that all hard polytheists necessarily believe that all possible heavens/hells/Otherworlds/afterlife/deities exist. I once heard that belief described as "omnitheism". It is not unheard of for a hard polytheist to only worship one pantheon and their mythology, and believe only what they believe (e.g. someone who follows the Greek pantheon and only believes in the Greek afterlife, rejecting all other versions of the afterlife). Being a hard polytheist generally means that one believes that deities exist as independent, distinct beings -- it doesn't require faith that all deities exist, necessarily.