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?


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?