Gods in Paganism - Hard vs Soft Polytheism

[@drangelapuca]

BECOME MY PATRON! www.patreon.com/angelapuca ONE-OFF DONATIONS paypal.me/angelasymposium JOIN MEMBERSHIPS kzbin.info/door/PSbip_LX2AxbGeAQfLp-Igjoin

[@herefromhellfire370]

I'm an eclectic who works with gods from different pantheons, but I don't conflate them as all the same, or sourced from a a single divinity like soft polytheists and pantheists can. I welcome a diverse cast of spiritual allies who retain their own identities, even those with similar traits, like the multiple death goddesses I honor.

[@cernowaingreenman]

I tend to see the deities that I interact with as "hard", and other peoples' deities that I don't know personally as "soft". I believe others' deities may or may not exist, but I don't know for sure because I haven't encountered them. It also depends on what state my consciousness is in; when I am in an intellectual state of mind, all of it seems theoretical. When I meditate or when I am in circle with others, the Goddesses and Gods we invoke become very real, very "hard".

[@jeanettewaverly2590]

I can relate. The more afraid and anxious I become, the harder my deities get.

[@rrrosecarbinela]

There Are some eclectic reconstructionists who have no problem acknowledging and even calling on deities from different pantheons; as each deity is its own individual entity, each has nuanced gifts or perspectives which might be more appropriate to a given circumstance. This was an excellent exposition, though! Thank you!

[@Pagyptsian]

Great video! I would just add that in my experience many hard polytheists do actually interact with multiple pantheons (maybe not *as much* as soft polytheists?), as ancient polytheists would have adopted deities that were foreign to their own traditions. If deities are ontologically real and one from a foreign pantheon approaches you, you're not likely to reject them for the sake of tradition.

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks. Interesting contribution

[@herefromhellfire370]

Agreed! If we think of pantheons like the royalty from different nations, they can still be friends, allies, and retain their own individual identities. If our can be friends, what chance is there for us humans?

[@shawnhall3849]

@@drangelapuca yeah i think you fumbled a bit on that

[@maldito_sudaka]

Well, there you have it. I'm a soft pagan and didn't even know it. Nice to know how to label myself to people now. I precisely don't believe the gods exist in the ontological sense but in the archetypal sense, and I have many pantheons. Thanks for the video!

[@jeanettewaverly2590]

I’ve never thought about the “reality” of deities in these terms. Very interesting! And Happy Easter/Eostar/Ishtar/Ostara, etc. etc., to all.

[@drangelapuca]

Happy celebration!

[@lionelchan1601]

It's tricky honouring Eostar here in the south, especially Christian fasting, where it is Autumn and not Spring... but it's all in good fun.

[@georgew2014]

I found the part about reconstructionism fascinating. Have you considered doing a history of it? Thank you for opening my mind to something new.

[@thepeopleslibrary8673]

There are some nice KZbin channels that can serve as introduction to the idea of Reconstructionism, such as “Ocean Keltoi” and “Aliakai”.

[@georgew2014]

@@thepeopleslibrary8673 Thanks. I'll check them out.

[@Strick-IX]

I really enjoyed your coverage on the concepts of Perennialism and Platonism. It reminded me of my studies in the history and principles of Hermeticism, syncretizing the archetypes of Thoth/Hermes/Mercury. I feel strongly that such philosophical, traditional schools of thought have had an indelible impact on the evolution of various faiths worldwide, especially in modern Abrahamic circles which, through time, generated hosts of theologians and philosophers who, in due course, served to further illustrate and delineate the doctrines and canons of their respective religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, etc.). Philosophies, likewise, are - perhaps more so than full-fledged "religions" as we know them today - products of the time and place in which they were first mused and pontificated; subject to change with social/environmental exigencies. As stringent and conservative as some sects may seem, few (if any) are immune to the influx of contemporary ideas, technology, art, geopolitics, environmental changes, etc. Nowhere is this more evident, in my opinion, than in modern Wicca and other Pagan religions. To that end, I find it somewhat inappropriate to ascribe certain conceptions of postmodernism to the adherence and proliferation of "New Age" religious movements, owing to their inherently cosmopolitan proclivities. The fact of the matter is that religious figures, ideologies, texts, oral histories, traditions, and mythologies have coalesced and evolved, probably ever since humanity began to conceptualize an afterlife; an unseen world. This is especially apparent in the Ancient Near East; there is extensive historical and archaeological evidence to corroborate the notion that cultural, religious pluralism proliferated - especially in urban areas. If you haven't already, I'd be fascinated to hear your thoughts on the Greek Magical Papyri; I feel they illustrate this idea quite well.

[@spellcircle579]

I couldn't agree more with the impact of Hermeticism. I feel like hermeticism in pagan traditions influenced Gnosticism. Gnosticism in turn was basically the inspiration for Christianity in Rome. Looking up Pagan Christ i found some interesting videos I watched today in fact. But I keep running into needing to know more about the Proto-Indo-European roots of all of this. How did these deity correlations come to be so widespread?

[@Strick-IX]

@@spellcircle579 In a word? Geopolitics. Granted, this implicates a range of sociological phenomena: wide scale trade networks betwixt and between urban centers, political upheavals, imperialism, warfare, etc. We have to keep in mind that, when populations are displaced, people within those populations tend to carry cultural ideas and keepsakes which evoke those ideas; notions of heritage and survivals of tradition. Far beyond any philological contingencies, we have to consider the cultural contexts in which these names and phrases evolved. Take, for example, the Babylonian Exile in the 6th century BCE; the expulsion of traditional adherents to Israelite religion resulted in what is commonly referred to as the Jewish Diaspora in the Near East. By the time these adherents were permitted to return to Jerusalem, scriptures tells us that Ezra, in a sense, "corrected" the behaviors of those who had strayed away from Israelite tradition, making him a "lawgiver" of sorts; in a few decades, these diaspora communities had adopted and adapted new lifestyles. It is likely that they began to worship new/different gods, adhere to different physical/dietary precepts, conduct themselves in accord with the laws of the lands in which they inhabited, etc. Although the precise historicity of these events are somewhat biased and incomplete, the broad strokes of these affairs are corroborated by (admittedly sparse and rather biased) documentation and, to a greater extent, the communities and traditions we see in the Middle East today.

[@spellcircle579]

@@Strick-IX I love your examples in this, and again, could not agree more that what we see when we peer into history is a more widespread geopolitical interaction than what we might think (Cleopatra wore Chinese silks for instance). Ezra is a perfect example as well. I am familiar with Biblical history, the wall of Jerusalem and how Yahweh was even a Canaanite god. Moses is another example of this diaspora vs. traditional Jewish faith (the golden calf). My thing is before all of this. Abraham worshipped the God El. He was from the city of Ur in Babylonia. El was the supreme God of Babylonia among the Elohim (children of El, of which Yahweh was one). Jewish history does indeed quickly turn polytheistic (i mean the angels for Gods' sake are divine beings). The correlations between the gods, whether Hindu, Judaic, Native American even!.... It leads to only two conclusions in my opinion. We truly carried the same general stories as we migrated from one central location in the world. Or there was a civilization that imperialized the world far longer in historical record than we realize.

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks for sharing

[@spellcircle579]

@@drangelapuca Angela, how far back do you think Hermeticism goes?

[@hauntedghost1136]

Hello Angela Puca I want to say Happy Easter Day 🙂

[@drangelapuca]

To you too

[@prognosis8768]

In terms of whether the gods are actually real or just archetypes, I think that Chaos Magick has an interesting theory regarding the question. According to my understanding of Chaos Magick, concentrating on the idea of entity can cause it to come into being in the spiritual planes. This concept leads to the idea that, if a god did not originally exist, the worship and belief in the entity by a group of people would end up causing it to come into existence. This, of course, would be rather unfortunate when it came to all the Christians believing that the devil exists...

[@eraimattei]

Yeah please no. That would certainly mean that Evil deities are truly evil because we believe they are.

[@lionelchan1601]

You guys have read Neil Gaiman 's "American Gods", yeah? And do you know about his experiences he had, as his friends warned, in writing that book? Modern gods/jinn of the media, of the internet, of the road, of government conspiracy. We don't create the jinn, but perhaps we do choose their form, like in Ghostbusters.

[@lionelchan1601]

@@eraimattei It could be that they really do take on the "evil" role/form, but before that taking on are "beyond good and evil". We can help such remember to do a good job in the act, but not get lost in the part.

[@monasterio3320]

Abrahamic religions are unfortunate

[@drangelapuca]

Interesting observation 😉

[@jasperek3973]

Lovely video, really expanded my comprehension of what exactly the differences between the two are! I really appreciate both "sides" of the practice, I believe that there's many different advantages to using each in specific scenarios! For this reason, I personally have two practices (one soft, very folk, very eclectic and very impromptu or unceremonial), but I mainly use a semi-reconstructed kemeticism (although admittedly my practice is not as formal as some others I've seen, it's still very hard, very ceremonial and respectful, etc). I've found there's no freedom quite like a folk practice, a practice that specifically revolves around who you are, your location and region, and your specific desires for the practice. But there's also a great structural power that comes with a harder polytheistic view, a feeling as though you're in the company of an individual very old and known, with their specific strengths and weaknesses, just like yourself. I'd thoroughly encourage everyone interested in expanding their practice to dabble (respectfully, within open religions or practices ofc) to try their hand at both, even if one feels as though it may not be for you. It's never anything you'll have to continue should it truly not suit you and your practice, but man, there's some things I would have never known without looking closely at both sides of the coin 🤟🙏👌

[@natasjavanmeulen]

As a wiccan and a Bachelor in Religious Studies, I related and you explained it very well! The link with platonism is very interesting!

[@drangelapuca]

That's fantastic

[@calmingnight3376]

For me, I'm a soft polytheist. From my studies we are seeing the same gods and goddesses but with different cultures and names and forms. And also do believe in archetypes. Because the gods are energy in their "ultimate" form and with energy we just can't rely on the "physical" and the seeable form of the gods.

[@frankie2thymes913]

Thanks. I'm very open about my beliefs if asked. Sometimes it's hard to articulate exactly what I mean when it comes to the more esoteric aspects but soft Polytheism sums it up just about right for me. Not ontologically real deities with very REAL effects on the mundane world around me. I like that explanation a lot. As always thanks for sharing!

[@evwaldron]

Another fantastic video! My own personal belief system lays somewhat in the middle of these two poles.

[@jeanettewaverly2590]

Mine too. I suspect this goes for many of us.

[@jefferylongbrake7278]

Hello, Ive watched a few of your videos and am now a subscriber. I find your videos very informative and move at a pace that is easy to understand but doesnt really dumb anything down. I am a part of a spiritual organization that is relatively new and given you like to study spiritual practices in the occult I would love to hear you break it down or even point you to it to expand your knowledge base. I am a Cultist in The Official Cult of Cthulhu. We do have a channel under the same name as well as a website. We have publicated scripture as well as a footprint on Discord as well as Facebook and of course KZbin. We are serious in our beliefs and sincere in spiritual and magickal practice. Like I said, just wanted to at least give you the suggestion to check it out. Yet again, love your videos. Keep up the good work. May They Rise

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks for sharing

[@MrJoshDoty]

Interesting. 👍👍 like button smashed.

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks

[@mathildehb0076]

Some Hellenic polytheists in ancient Greece, actually were soft polytheists; also worshipping egyptian deities, persian deities and even roman deities. Same with the romans. I know, some view the roman and greek pantheons, the same, but I view them different, because in that case; all pantheons are the same, but orally delivered different 🤣

[@Midnight_Myna]

Thank for the breakdown!

[@Jeevan19966]

Iam your big fan from India 🤘

[@elizabethford7263]

Finally there's a term for my questions!

[@thewitchscollective6407]

Thank you! I learned so much about these two schools of thought. Keep teaching!

[@michaelevans3904]

I"ve always considered myself a non denominational multi pantheis5ic Agnostic. Basically doubtful about everything, but I'll pray to whichever God or goddess I suspect might help. I have found prayers to Thor are very effective for plumbing problems.

[@n30stxr28]

I love these videos!

[@michaelevans3904]

Thank You Dr. Dark Angela.

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks for listening

[@aranialawakiro7246]

I can know that there is an underlying truth, accept gods as ontologically existing and also work with different pantheons without diminishing any of their history.

[@Grap3_S0da]

You know I struggle to decide where I fall on this haha. I have days where I am feeling very platonic and very much a soft polytheist. I also have times where I feel like the Deities are very real, imminent, and exist completely independent of me. I don't know anyone that is a Pagan reconstructionist but I would love to get their take.

[@drangelapuca]

The very act of asking yourself the question makes you deepen your understanding on your belief system

[@shadown5757]

Thank you for the information and explanation 🙏

[@nicolefraser1586]

In general I have a hard polytheistic perspective but i do mix pantheons and this can be complicated in practice. I also will look back for where the stories of gods came from, and try to find the origin story/different names the deity has been called over time and compare the stories

[@AkAkAkNeil]

wonderful video, very clear. I love how your eyes flash silver when you blink!

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks

[@dexocube]

Great breakdown Dr Puca. I feel that the Perennial philosophy found in reconstructuralist paganism has it's roots in the cross-cultural comparisons of the Alexandrians.

[@drangelapuca]

Interesting

[@Mina-hm2og]

Such an interesting video!😀 And if you think about it, when you read about paganism, be it a book, a movie, a comic, a study, this difference is so so obvious that you can't see it, and you need a video from our favorite scholar to point it out!

[@joeroubidoux2783]

Excellent as usual. Thank you.

[@larryslassitervideos.4100]

Like your stuff sorry I don't practice ritual magic much anymore I've mostly been just hanging out I no it's a bad habit for my own growth but if I could say one thing on this video is to remember that there are many gods and the faster one can understand that the faster they can grow in magic keep going and rock on

[@thomasdolcelli4969]

I find the topic interesting, it can help understanding many of my friends religions. Maybe on a different topic, have people considered paganism the belief in multiple God's, as opposed to Monotheism which is one God. I ask because I've heard that before. Also Teresa likes your arm thingy. I already forgot what there called. ☺️ thanks for the video I enjoyed it.

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks to you both

[@Peregryn2356]

An excellent presentation! I would say this video was one of the best you have made so far! Your passion and broad knowledge of the subject matter were very evident. Even though I have been a practicing pagan for forty years, your lecture gave me a new appreciation, awareness, and understanding of some of the differences in the pagan community!

[@drangelapuca]

You're very kind! 😊

[@yep999]

✨looking fierce woman!✨

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks

[@yep999]

@@drangelapuca for sure ☺

[@azcactusflower1]

I will watch again, great video! A Team checking in xx

[@drangelapuca]

Thank you

[@ShannonBushEl]

I wish I lived in the Ancient times

[@kellybright862]

This video is awesome! Thank you so much for sharing the information you have gathered with us! I hope you have a great weekend and a wonderful holidays!

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks

[@MrDowntemp0]

Love how you break these topics down to digestable forms.

[@alannaanderson5785]

Thanks for this. In Kemeticism, there is the term 'Squishy Polytheism'. I am interested in this as a Kemetic practitioner, but I also find it difficult to get my head around!

[@lionelchan1601]

Peace Friends, This difference between Abrahamic "worship" and pagan acknowledgement/good hospitality of the unseen beings that we live aide by side with... it could do so much to see where each can in fact enhance the other, IMHO. Salaam.

[@fr9062]

Thank you for this channel.

[@arfonjones7565]

Yes very helpful 🙂

[@gutterhalo]

I have a shrine dedicated to Angelus symposium

[@oniondip_420]

awesome video!! really appreciate the depth to which you explored this topic, which I have found somewhat lacking in other explanatory resources. I hope pagans at the start of their path find themselves here instead of at some of the lower quality resources I had access to when starting my own journey. personally I think my conception of deity/divinity lies somewhere in the middle of the hard/soft divide, as I think all gods (and all possible versions/iterations of any specific god) all exist as equally ontologically real in a sort of platonic divine soup (😋yummy). This soup cannot be boiled down into finite underlying perennial truths, of which all deities manifest as certain aspects, but rather in a fuzzy rhizomatic haze. however, gods become phenomenologically real by being in some sense "summoned" from that soup into our world, becoming symptomatic of material reality through the thoughts/beliefs/actions of humanity. this occurs through the process by which we draw the boundaries and borders to divide up the soup, in a Jungian archetypal sense. Further, the i believe the appearance of underlying perennialism (such as the 1 God and 1 Goddess paradigm) can only occur after boundaries of archetypes (in this case, gender & its assumptions/implications) have already been drawn, creating the illusion of objectivity out of the more subjective process of how various different traits get filed away into the different archetypes. because archetypes are socially constructed, and exist both dynamically yet also conditional to the historical contexts inside which they emerge, I don't think that gods post-manifestation can be treated as interchangeable, and i feel that the traditionalist paradigm is important in keeping oneself grounded in the historical/material reality that we all inherit. too often i see soft polytheism be used as a justification for practices including cultural appropriation, in which said historical/material reality (namely, the history of colonialism) and the harm one can do by replicating harmful logics are ignored out of inconvenience. that being said, keeping one's feet on the ground does not mean we cannot have our heads in the clouds as well. acknowledging the power we all have over the drawing of boundaries while avoiding the pitfalls of unchecked cultural relativism is entirely possible. while we do inherit the archetypes we are given, and we have a responsibility to acknowledge the history of them, sometimes acknowledging that history means recognizing which parts of those archetypes are themselves influenced by historical oppression, such that we can subvert/undermine/trouble these through our own individual power to draw the "soup boundaries" in relation to the ones we are given. while staying grounded in traditionalist practices for a specific deity, we can still play with the fluid nature of those deities, as well as opening them up to recontextualization/reinterpretation (think the Discordian iteration of Eris as inspired by Greek polytheism, yet largely standing distinctly), and also wholesale inventing deities of our own personal making. tl;dr the world is our oyster; please drink responsibly.

[@rkmh9342]

154-th to like! Awesome work as always! thank you. I think there's a further distinction among the hard polytheists. What you described are the haecceitists, those who hold that each deity has its individual existence. but there are among those who hold to the ontological reality of the deities some who allow that in some cases there is a quiddity, the hypokeimenon, that in some cases allows for a hyphenation between the deities in different pantheons, more famous perhaps in some Egyptian, Hellenistic and Roman reconstructions. However, i think most are haecceitists as historically often a colonizing force would build a temple over the ruins of a temple from a similar deity, i.e., with a similar domain of concern. If i'm not mistaken, the London Stock Exchange is built on the temple ruins of a deity of commerce. Much love!

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! Very interesting

[@kimwelch4652]

“What happens when a priestess of Isis channels an orisha such as Oshun? Should she say, ‘Sorry, you are not part of my tradition, go away!’” - Janet Farrar and Gavin Bone, (Lifting the Veil: A Witches' Guide to Trance-Prophesy, Drawing Down the Moon, and Ecstatic Ritual). The problem with soft paganism is that sometimes, more often than you think, the gods actually show up. The problem with hard paganism is that more show up than tradition allows. Being is a poor fit to a reality that is always in motion where Becoming is the real daily experience. Trying to stuff a dynamic force into a static mold will fail. What do Coyote and Loki talk about when they meet for drinks?

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks for sharing

[@NorthForkFisherman]

What do they talk about? How hot Eris looks in that new dress she made out of the Trojan's hopes and dreams. As an eclectic who works with these particular aspects of chaos and trickster deities, I find these forms respond more energetically the less formal and the more "from the hip" I am with them. The reverse is true when I look to more "name" deities like Mars or Kwanyin. It seems that my approach to engaging with these gods tends to be tempered by my impression of what the external world views them as rather than my own perceptions. Since tricksters and aspects of chaos are normally avoided by most, I feel that I can embrace them more. I feel I imagine, rather like Titus Pullo in HBO's Rome. Shopping around for the best gods to get the job done...on budget.

[@brightbite]

Guess I could never be "soft." I have experienced events too concrete to ever understand the entities as mere archetypes.

[@jonjon3378]

Thank you, I really enjoy reflecting on your content through the lens of my practice.

[@lawrencepatricksingson8831]

I'm moving toward the idea of neo-pagan constructionism. Basically embracing the fact that it is NEW and constructing it as such. I like Terrence McKenna's idea of God being more like an "ecology of souls." In my personal cosmology I would expand on that to include evolution of this ecology. Sure "the old gods" are great ...but what about the new gods? what about future gods and future archetypes? Future consciousness?

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks for sharing

[@luminous3357]

⏩Fascinating topic! I tend to see deities as archetypal, as opposed to ontologically real, but I think if enough people focus on a particular image that symbolizes certain qualities and they imbue it with concentrated psychic and emotional energy it can become "real" in the sense that it achieves the status of a sort of quantum prism or thoughtform thru which we might gain insight or wisdom, find comfort, gather power, etc. Gonna listen to your presentation a few times. There's a lot to unpack. Love your channel!

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks for sharing

[@shadown5757]

Thanks!

[@edwardrobinson6717]

Thanks

[@brianhenderson1977]

Neat Angela. Always interesting, Great work!

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks

[@nicoletim8095]

I'm curious what you would call someone who worships gods from more than one pantheon, but still recognizes them as real. As in, Brigid and Frigg are both hearth and home type goddesses, but Brigid is still different because she's also associated with smithing. And Frigg is more associated with being a wife and mother. But still believing they're both real, each their own goddesses and both could be worshipped by one person. That specific example may be slightly redundant, but I've seen people mix pantheons and still treat gods as distinct entities.

[@Shashu_the_little_Voidling]

I think I'm a bit of both. Hard in the sense that I do see the gods as ontologically real and individual from other deities, but soft in the sense that I do work with beings from different pantheons and don't necessarily stick to traditional ways, but then hard again because I do see those deities from different pantheons as individually different and not just representations of the same archetype, even if their domains may overlap for 90%. Edit: Overall I would say I'm more "hard" because of the "ontologically real" argument. And in a way, isn't treating deities from other pantheons as just as "ontologically real" as your own, even more "hard." As for tradition, I've always liked the argument that human society has changed só much in the last 1000+ years, why wouldn't the gods? No new myths happened in that time? No shifts in power balance? They haven't loosened up at all from the more conservative viewpoints of their historical-cultural era?

[@thesubtlemuddlewitch]

Fascinating as always😊

[@witchbitch2792]

Love your videos 💕. Do you think you could do a video on irish paganism or Irish witchcraft thanks 😊.

[@bladeandcloak666]

Yes a video on druids would be great

[@Frithogar]

@@bladeandcloak666 There are two videos that feature contemporary Druidry kzbin.info/www/bejne/joDcp5Wcopx6m9k & kzbin.info/www/bejne/jmnIpGt5fNylo5Y

[@almogyarden]

As one who got his Polytheistic education in India, I often find it frustrating to talk to and read material from Sof Polyteistics. I feel it sterilizes the gods and goddesses of the entwined beauty expressed through different stories, Poems, and ways of interaction, mashing them into a tasteless grey portage referred to as "archetypes." The approach of working with spirits and deities as if "You" (the soft Polytheist) as one single person contain all of those personalities, traits, and expressions when in fact, "You" in reality have not even one Saga or a worthwhile story to tell is so very lame. The dualistic approach is even worse and gravely unupdated as surly alongside the great ultimate Feminin universal expression and great ultimate masculine expression of the universe. There is also the tremendous transexual non-binary expression of the universe? ;-).

[@drangelapuca]

Interesting. Thanks for sharing

[@xkagutaba]

thank you for the interesting essay! now if i were to be a practitioner of a polytheistic pantheon (i prefer not to use the word paganism bc it carries the vibe of being oppositely identified with abrahamic religions and not an independent tradition in itself), i'd prefer the reconstructionist approach bc it doesn't matter how much one thinks that the human mind is powerful and capable, it just can't access the divine power gate hidden in the depth of the unconscious. this also brings out the importance of "blood" and "ethnicity" regarding the polytheism or shamanism, bc let's be honest, each shaman was the cornerstone of a specific tribe and his/her connection to the tribe members was bc of the shared ethnic blood. although that doesn't mean that shamans can't, for example, heal a foreigner, but to get the full access, one needs to have some type of a blood connection. the cultural aspects of polytheism or shamanism in practice is utmost important. they are part of the collective identity of a specific community. you can't just omit this important aspect and try to practice it without it. that's just absurd. on the other hand, what you call a "soft polytheism" is kinda like the chaos magick compared to the rest of the ceremonial magick systems. it's part of the evolution of the human consciousness that has reached a point in the current century where it's getting completely detached from the intuitionistic mindset of our ancestors. it's the byproduct of the rationality, or to be precise, it's the feature of post-rationality where the postmodern humans have lost their identities, having no zero ground to guard their steps on it. that's why a priori setting of the traditional divine cults, such as cultural norms or any connections at all, is no longer meaningful or important in the soft polytheism. it's too arrogantly humanistic in disguise, it's too hippie, but simultaneously it's desperately compensating for the primeval fear of divine by inventing some mumbo jumbo concepts or altering the existing ones. a rational human-made divinity is just a self-deception. almost all of their creators had some shady intentions for creating and promoting them. i also prefer to keep the archetypal view of the deities separate from the soft polytheism, bc archetypal approach does not adhere to any worship system, be it hard or soft or in between. it's reserved for the individuals who are passionate about understanding a bigger picture of existence without limiting themselves to the dogmas, and they may or may not become (or they are or are not) a polytheistic practitioner themselves. they are seekers (not related to perennialism by the way), or finders (in the spirit of Hesse's Siddhartha) that's all.

[@meditationgio]

How would you classify Hinduism? They definitely believe that the deities are ontologically real, yet they also see many deities as being the expression of common deities. For example, the Dasha Mahavidya are all seen as different “forms” of Shakti or Parvati.

[@ciprianom8394]

❤️❤️❤️

[@drangelapuca]

🖤

[@phillipbernhardt-house6907]

Hmm... While some of what you laid out here is broadly accurate, there are some major exceptions, and in general, this construction might be a bit too neatly schematic in comparison to the reality of what many people and groups are actually doing. Have you looked at the work of Dr. Edward Butler? He is a Platonic philosopher, and a hard polytheist, but one that worships Deities from several pantheons, and sees Deities as being inherently unique in Their individual manifestations...and has evidence from Plato himself that such was the great philosopher's own view (as well as that of Proclus and other Platonists--and Proclus worshipped Deities from other pantheons as well without necessarily syncretizing Them in an equative fashion!). Another possibility is looking at the main essay in P. Sufenas Virius Lupus' A Serpent Path Primer, which discuss the differences between equative and metaphorical syncretism, and how they are not the same things and could be hiding in plain sight in some cases. As is the case historically with certain Deities, like Hermes, Anubis, and Hermanubis, it's not that "one plus one equals one," but instead "one plus one equals three," in that the two individual Deities still remain as individuals, but then there's also a new syncretized form of the two Deities together that is separate, and may even be honored in an inscription alongside one of the others (as there are inscriptions to Hermanubis that have Him honored alongside Anubis, for example). So, to summarize: not all hard polytheists limit themselves to one pantheon (and do so without equating the Deities), and not all forms of syncretism equate Deities with one another. Obviously, the variations that are possible and that you mentioned can cover these differences, and yet these exist beyond a few individuals in many cases, particularly in the U.S. in my own experience and informal surveying.

[@drangelapuca]

Thank you for helping me understand this phenomenon better! This is very interesting and I will definitely look up the works you mentioned.

[@shawnhall3849]

@@drangelapuca Hi Angela can you do a video on the concept of a Supreme Being in paganism(or in general). I know that its emphasized in the Abrahamic religions since they're staunch monotheists, so the divine is conceptualized as primarily transcendent, as well as immanent in a religion like judaism or christianity for instance i.e. Yahweh, or as well as Hinduism( in Hinduism the different deities are viewed as different manifestations and forms of one God or divine principle/reality), even though the conception of the divine may differ. But the idea of the Supreme Being is that it's the origin of everything as everything and everywhere, it's not a being like humans or other entities but that its being/existence itself. While the Supreme Being is the objective cosmic universal absolute principle or spirit

[@shawnhall3849]

@@drangelapuca actually nevermind about this video suggestion

[@dennisdanielson5561]

I think my view of the gods is somewhat of a mix between the two. I generally believe that all the gods are uniquely and objectively real, and at the same time that they can be perceived or manifest as archetypes, forces of nature, aspects of the subconscious, etc. I’ve definitely been influenced by perennialism and as such I’m inclined to believe that the apparently differing gods are the various “masks of the divine” and that there is-or at least may be-an underlying truth being and behind everything.

[@nicholasfurious9694]

Thank you for the explanation of this. You make it very clear and understandable. I am curious where animism falls in regards to the two, or should that be considered something completely separate?

[@Tdtsnowflake]

Just wondering if a middle path exists between these 2 poles? Is it possible to believe ontologically in the deities as indeed real distinctiveness ,however at the same time considering the law of oneness and all beings being a manifestation through the nous of this one being ,essentially having the perspective being dependent by where you are standing in the room.and so rather than having the belief in one or the latter you reconcile and dissolve both poles and remain balanced in between ?is this unorthodox in paganism or perhaps in perennial philosophical ,magick,esoteric etc practices? Thank you love your work !

[@sebastian7494]

You are sooooo beautiful, Ma'am!

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks

[@kellyanquoe]

This is another disposition of the new age of the 70s. Reconstructing pre-christian is another wide discussion. Aho

[@drangelapuca]

Thanks

[@salemyo2525]

Damn.. I need a witch like this...

[@julianiemeyer1010]

Would you say that there's a continuum of pagans between the two major types?

[@drangelapuca]

There can be overlaps

[@HalTuberman]

I liked the analysis of Plato as far as soft polytheism goes. To me, soft polytheism is the more interesting of the two because I think its claims rely on fewer assumptions. And I've always liked Plato's ideas concerning his forms. Like, there's something to permanent, unchanging reality... ie necessary truths about a triangle, etc. I think Plato's ideas about the forms are prone to be taken more literally than they ought to be, and that's why people don't see anything of value in them. But there IS value in them. Plus... to me anyway... reconstructionists seem to have a more traditional anthropomorphic idea of what gods are. And that just doesn't seem realistic to me. But maybe I'm selling hard polytheism short; I don't think Angela said that hard polytheists necessarily believe in anthropomorphized gods. But isn't that what "traditional" ideas about the gods would entail?

[@nathanvinson7992]

I do alot of my own study and i would definitely consider myself eclectic. What you said about searching for the truth behind culture veils really rung true for me. Could you please point me to more transcultural shaman sources?

[@drangelapuca]

You find them in my videos on the topic

[@Frithogar]

Dr Puca's videos on Shamanism and Indigenous traditions can be found in this playlist kzbin.info/www/bejne/aIW6fWCAn7GBgNk

[@nathanvinson7992]

@@drangelapuca thanks lady

[@jeanblique389]

Several little remarks : Seing the gods as immanent to nature, and not fully separable from each other (in ancient stoicism or in current eclectic neopaganism) is not the same thing as judging them inexistant. Even if ontology, in contemporary analytic philosophy at least, is generally ultimatly binary, it's very concerned about ambiguous objects (does a color exist in itself ? does the colorness of this particular thing exist in itself ? does a concrete thing can be said to exist independently from all of its property ? what about numbers ? what about events ? what about past and future things ? etc), and the "reality" of something is very often to be asserted in an oblique way. Funny to notice that the scandinavian neopagans are messing all of that. They have a reconstructionnist soft-polytheism, asatru, and a more free practice "living tradition" (I'm not sure if "eclectic" would be appropriate here, since they try to stick to their own cultures) associated with a harder polytheism, folketro. (and also, politically, it's their reconstructionnists that are left-wing, and their "living tradition" folks that are right wing, while it's generally the other way around). Also, the anti-eclectic reconstructionists are quite laughable, since what they are trying to reconstruct is the religion of generally very eclectic peoples.

[@dionysian4689]

I guess I'm a soft polytheist

[@michaelbindner9883]

Where do you fit Astrology and Hindu in your schema. Astrology is soft, but Hinduism seems to be either. Yoga is definitely soft.

[@wizardoftas7779]

I am a real individual, the gods are real individuals. Everybody interacts with me archetypical, bringing their own baggage. Father and son, friend, enemy, young to old people and old in the eyes of young people, banal to the local folk and exotic to some foreign folk. A lot of Europe has a hunter goddess. Hunters travel and gods don't respect the ever changing boundaries of humans. Maybe Skadi, Diana and Artemis are the same actually existing deity. 'Hard' and 'Soft' coexisting.

[@oflameo8927]

Which model is more useful for studies?

[@smellysock4260]

On the definition of Hard Polytheism vs Soft Polytheism, what would be some examples of each? Would Hinduism be Hard Polytheism? And would New Age practices like wicca, neo-shamanism, novi-druidism be soft polytheism?

[@liamh5127]

Interesting, isn't wicca a bit modern?

[@drangelapuca]

Yes it is

[@sergioclarke5633]

🔯

[@Tyler.i.81]

Wow what a stunning beautiful goddess you are lovely outfit. 😍

[@milascave2]

You will find these tendencies going WAY BACK IN BOTH THE WESTERN AND THE Eastern traditions. Hinuds believe that the Gods are real and exactly as theire particular traditions describe them. Or th ey believe that all Goddesses are manifestations of one Goddess and all Dieties are representative of the ultimate diety. In anceint Roman liturature, you find that while generaly, peole belived in The GODS BEING REAL AND JUST AS THEIR TRADTION DESCRIBES THEM, IN LATER SECTS, SUCH AS THE WORSHIPERS IN ROME OF GODDESS ISIS, YOU WILL AGAIN FIND THE IDEA that all Godesses are manifestations of one Godess. OF COURSE, MUCH LATER, CARL JUNG BROUGHT THAT IDEA TO THE MIDERN WORLD, IN A SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT form. I do not believe that this view deried from Platonism (at least not exclusivly.) You can believe that all Gods are manifestations of one God without believing in the utterly absurd idea that all chairs are a reflection of one true, idea chair that exists in the realm of forms. Anyway, good stuff.

[@bubblegumgun3292]

The CEO of polytheism here and gotta say soft polytheism isss CCCringe

[@Saint_nobody]

5:37, stopped you there to remark, reconstructionism of pagan practice is to the restoration movement within greater Christiandom. yes, Christianity is greater than paganism because I managed to "commune with the divine" earlier, got through to Jesus Christ, via beat boxing Ye Elders of Israel, whilst trying to astral project such singing in front of the Twelve Tribes Community shop in Manitou Springs earlier. I'm now waiting between wind gusts coming off Pikes Peak, facing down the Garden of the Gods, knowing how useless Thor is therein. yes, this static is of an autistic lamentation. the days of calling such magic are long gone.

[@Saint_nobody]

8:53 stopped to steal a kiss. thanks Angela, you're the best.

[@Saint_nobody]

16:20 stopped on account of the wind, be it from Odin, Jupiter/Zeus or perhaps Thoth. they all with their mountains and men shall bow when Christ our Lord returns.

[@Saint_nobody]

Angela, if you read this, thanks and I'll try asking again next month, is the song *I am the Highway* by -Audioslave- soft or hard paganism to you? anyone else reading this, uhhhhhhh hi. sorry I'm ALWAYS so awkward. you look good today though. smile more. 🕊️

[@drangelapuca]

Not sure what you mean 😅

[@Saint_nobody]

@@drangelapuca sorry doc. where did I lose you?

[@mohamedabdi4519]

Islam Is The Only Right Path To Obey Allah Plz Stob Paganism And Warship The Real God Allah

[@Tyler.i.81]

I would worship you as a goddess for sure.

[@PlagueCabaret]

That's creepy.

[@shawnhall3849]

keep it in your pants please, thank you

[@FxUxCxMx]

Is it correct to say that LP is more synchronous than HP? Is it also correct that HP may be a perspective that a folkish heathen or a nationalist Hellenistic pagan would have?

[@drangelapuca]

Is LP soft Polytheism?