How's YOUR pantheism?

[illykitty]

I don't really believe in a god being. I revere nature and the cosmos, and pantheism is the best way to describe my views and how I feel about it all. There's some sort of connection which is hard to put into words. I don't think it's supernatural, it's entirely natural, but there's something intangible that I can't quite put my finger on or describe. Maybe it's sort of like the Tao. Maybe one could say it's "sexed" up atheism, but I feel like it's more.

Either way, what's your pantheism like, how do you relate to the term?

 

[SalixIncendium]

For me as a non-dualist, "god" is Absolute Consciousness. It exists beyond this illusion we call reality. The individual consciousness' of everything that is, in this reality and beyond it, is one and the same with the Absolute.

Perhaps this is what you're struggling to put your finger on, @illykitty?

 

[George-ananda]

Either way, what's your pantheism like

I am advaita/Hindu non-dual (God and creation are not-two).

The only thing ultimately real is God/Brahman; pure consciousness. In my pantheism the universe is just a cosmic play/drama of God/Brahman. He separates Himself from Himself in Act I and returns Himself to Himself in Act II. Why? To experience.

God is the core of all of us and it is just One. That is what we are learning.

 

[idav]

I don't really believe in a god being. I revere nature and the cosmos, and pantheism is the best way to describe my views and how I feel about it all. There's some sort of connection which is hard to put into words. I don't think it's supernatural, it's entirely natural, but there's something intangible that I can't quite put my finger on or describe. Maybe it's sort of like the Tao. Maybe one could say it's "sexed" up atheism, but I feel like it's more.

Either way, what's your pantheism like, how do you relate to the term?

What your saying is a lot like what I think, nature is pretty enourmous and awe inspiring.

 

[Quintessence]

I use "pantheist" as one of several theological terms to describe my perspective because it fits. Pantheism is the position that all is god(s), and I certainly do deify all things. I never much liked the prevailing theological narrative of my culture, which insisted that nature and the universe was merely creation, not God. Putting that wedge between the reality I experience on a day-to-day basis and the concept of deity - that which is worthy of worship - just felt nonsensical. So I kicked that set of ideas off to the side once I realized that yes, trees being gods was actually a thing.

Whether or not one wants to use god-language to discuss all this is something of a personal choice. However, I think there's a big difference between simply acknowledging reality and deifying it. Using god-language is a way of saying "this is worthy of worship" and assigning special status to the objects being deified. It's no longer "just" that tree over there, it's a sacred entity worthy of deep study, reverence, gratitude, and celebration. I think god-language hits upon that better than not using it, so I use it. There are other reasons I use it, but that's the main one.

As a general rule of thumb, I would say someone should use god-language whenever they worship something. There are a number of "atheists" who don't call their gods "gods" (or equivalent titles) and then engage in worship, which is very weird to me. I tend to see them as victims of the overculture that constrains our thinking about theology and religion to Abrahamic models. That most Westerners think "god = supernatural" is directly symptomatic of that overculture.

 

[idav]

To me pantheism is believing in a nature that transcends space and time, and also attempts to harness knowledge in ways to better ourselves and those around us. I see knowledge as sort of sacred, like a gift really, it can be harnessed for good or evil which requires wisdom. That's just a some of it hope I didn't ramble too much.

 

[EverChanging]

Whether or not one wants to use god-language to discuss all this is something of a personal choice. However, I think there's a big difference between simply acknowledging reality and deifying it. Using god-language is a way of saying "this is worthy of worship" and assigning special status to the objects being deified. It's no longer "just" that tree over there, it's a sacred entity worthy of deep study, reverence, gratitude, and celebration. I think god-language hits upon that better than not using it, so I use it. There are other reasons I use it, but that's the main one.

I agree with the above quote: this is why I use reverential language about the universe. In my experience it is divine.

I am a naturalistic pantheist. I do not believe that consciousness underlies the material reality or anything supernatural, but I do have other layers of spirituality on top of my pantheism. I do pray to angels and saints which I treat similarly to gods. I could be called a Christo-pagan. I also worship god-like beings that are particular to my experience and not found in any lore.

Religious symbols and the work it takes to form relationships with these saints/gods open me up to new experiences of the mind, and the mind is a very powerful thing. I doubt any of this occurs outside of my mind, but it enriches my life and helps me work on myself, and that is the important thing. I also have an outlet for emotions including the less pleasant ones.

Underlying all of this is my pantheism. I will worship, pray to, and work with any entity that I feel a connection to and feel that I can respectfully incorporate into my spirituality. I can do this because any being is an instantiation of the All which to me is God. The world is full of gods. One of the personalities I work with devotionally is Matthew Shepard for whom I have written a proto-myth.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

I'm a Christian/Taoist pantheist with a slice of Shinto and Buddhism mixed in. I see alot of meaning in the whole Body of Christ thing (basically that all Christians are part of a larger body), the whole spirits in everything, and the self/other paradigm of Taoism.

 

[Liu]

This DIR seems even less active than my main DIR (the LHP one), but maybe that can be changed?

My pantheism is a bit hard to define as I'm first and foremost an agnostic by conviction, but rather a theist in practice.
And pantheism is to me kinda the compromise between these two options, and also reflects those few beliefs that I hold well enough:
There are two facets to existence, awareness and things one can be aware of (the latter including also the mind and thoughts etc.).
There is no really objective universe, it's all just the mind of the divine and therefore inter-subjective instead.
I'm not certain whether that awareness or divine mind is really something coherent on some higher level or just as fragmented into myriads of different consciousnesses as it seems to us in our day-to-day lives.

There seem to be some parallels between my beliefs and certain forms of Hinduism, or so I heard.

However, since the religion/philosophy that really sparked my spirituality and continues to be my main inspiration is Satanism (or rather the LHP in general), I normally refer to the divine all as Satan (besides a lot of other names).
With many adherents of that religion I also share certain general assumptions about the divine, e.g. it's amoral, there is by definition nothing super-natural nor anything sinful as all that exists is nature, and we are manifestations of the divine.

I'm open to the possibility that there are also polytheistic deities or spirits and that the deity that I venerate and pray to is not exactly the all but something more specific.
Yet I'm still too much of a skeptic to actively believe in the existence of such personal deities, and I don't see an issue with treating an impersonal deity as if it was a personal one in order to make it easier to relate to it.

I have encountered the opinion that I'm actually not a pantheist but a deist or pandeist. While I see why, I don't really like the term deism as it's a historical term with some other definitions that don't really describe my beliefs at all. My current denomination title here is kinda a try to avoid such terms like theism or deism altogether.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

I guess, strictly speaking, I'm more a panentheist than pantheist.

Yeah, I noticed. Non-Revealed, Pantheism, and Syncretism all seem to be fairly inactive.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

Either way, what's your pantheism like, how do you relate to the term?

I'm a lite panentheist. I accept that Buddha-nature is within all, but is truthfully expressed through the Buddhas- unlike what is bound in Samsara.

That's a bit more precise than pantheism. However, I would not say it is hard panentheism because the Buddhas leave a lot paradoxical. They don't answer all questions- or think all questions are valid. The Buddhas often enough 'let it be'.