Thursday, July 21, 2011

A thought

In religious hierarchy, generally paganism is seen to be inferior to, well, non-paganism. (I don't know the term for the opposite.) So, if one is monotheistic, believing in one God that somehow can't be seen, touched, or heard, then that is more evolved than a value system where you pay obeisance to a rock, stream or flower.

But why?

If you can actually perceive a god all around you - or even a different god in each and every element - if every little thing fills you with wonder, joy and piety, aren't you there? ('There' being the place that religion was supposed to take you to.)

Wasn't that the whole point?


3 comments:

Vinita said...

Yes and so many have forgotten it.

Anonymous said...

mukta, the non-pagans are better at organising people to a single, non-confusing ideal... and hence louder.

Mukta said...

anon - possibly. although when you try to get people to follow a single ideal, dont you think you leave no room for individual, personal interpretation?