One and the many

“The Deities are Many” isn't really a polytheistic theology, and Jordan Paper even says that polytheism strictly speaking doesn't need a theology. To the author, belief in many different deities is the original, most common and hence “natural” spiritual state of humanity. Nor is polytheism a unified system (although common themes and patterns can be discerned). Paper further states that polytheism exists as a category only in relation to monotheism, indeed, it's defined by monotheism. Why the author has nevertheless chosen to subtitle his book “A polytheistic theology” is somewhat unclear. To create some commotion?

Jordan Paper is a professor of religious studies with a somewhat colourful background as a participant in both Native American and Chinese spiritual traditions. It turns out that he is a polytheist himself. Paper believes he is in contact with a number of deities, some of whom are female, and he recounts some of his miraculous encounters with numinous beings. I get the impression that Paper fears ridicule by his scholarly peers, and have only recently “come clean” about his beliefs. Perhaps his students might be more appreciative? I'm sure “The Deities are Many” might be read with some interest by today's young Neo-Pagans…

Most of the book deals with more or less common themes found in various paleo-pagan traditions: the deification of Sky, Earth, Sun, Moon and the stars; the twin “creator-gods” (or rather re-creators, since polytheists have a cyclical conception of time); worship of ancestral spirits; the hungry ghosts; tricksters and culture heroes; spirits of animals, plants and minerals. Paper also discusses shamanism and possession. His “apologetics” for polytheism seem to be almost wholly empirical. The deities are empirical beings that can be experienced directly, and so can their interventions. Polytheism therefore has nothing to do with “belief” or “faith”, nor does it need creedal statements. Monotheism is an unnatural imposition on human mind and culture. Paper mentions mystical experiences only in passing. His perspective on them sounds Buddhist or Advaitin. They are experiences of Unity and Emptiness.

The most interesting chapters deal with monotheist misconceptions of polytheism. Paper argues against the theory of Ur-Monotheism, and believes that many Western descriptions of polytheist systems are plain wrong. Thus, Native Americans don't really believe in one “Great Spirit” and “Creator”. The terms translated “Great Spirit” are either misunderstandings or a collective term for all deities. Some Native American informants were influenced by Christian missionaries and quite consciously attempted to portray their traditional religion in monotheistic garb. Paper is particularly critical of “Black Elk Speaks” in this regard (a book popular among Schuonian Traditionalists). Paper also criticizes modern Goddess spirituality, arguing that there is no evidence for a monotheist tradition with a single female deity. The creation/re-creation of the world is always the work of a divine couple. However, Paper isn't anti-feminist. Quite the contrary, he argues that matrifocal cultures are better than patriarchal ones!

Paper has obvious problems with the manner in which polytheism turns human social structures into quasi-numinous entities. He is clearly uncomfortable with the authoritarian streaks in traditional Chinese culture, which are expressed through the worship of the ancestors (really a deification of the family and lineage). Polytheist traits Paper regard as positive include the idea that “evil” in a robust sense doesn't exist (polytheist deities can be malevolent if mistreated, but they are never “evil” in the sense Satan is evil), that there are many different truths, and that the deities aren't omnipotent. Ultimately, the gods and goddesses of polytheism are subordinated to “fate”, to the impersonal cosmic cycles which simply are. Needless to say, I have a somewhat different perspective on these things…

The major weakness in Paper's book is that it never explains monotheism. Where does it come from? If deities are empirical, aren't Jahve, Allah, the Trinity or Ahura Mazda also empirical beings? Paper suggests that Judaism was originally polytheist, with Jahve being worshipped as part of a divine couple, Asherah being his female consort. This suggests that Jahve is a real god (by the author's standards). Monotheist religions claim to be based on empirical revelation. Why did some polytheist gods claim to be the only gods around? Gnosticism gives provocative answers to this question, but Paper has decided to remain silent. Perhaps he blames the exaltation of a single (male) god on humans.

Personally, I don't think “The Deities are Many” is the most interesting read around. Frankly, it's pretty boring. In the end, I give it three stars (the OK rating).