#as for monotheism vs polytheism

[incognitopolls]

For the purposes of this poll, this is how we're using these words:

Monotheistic: I believe in a singular god or higher entity/being; OR; if a higher entity/being existed, there would only be one of them

Polytheistic: I believe in more than one gods or higher entities/beings; OR; if a higher being/entity existed, there would be more than one of them.

We ask your questions so you don’t have to! Submit your questions to have them posted anonymously as polls.

[a-s-fischer]

That friend on another site that I told you about a while ago said that the feminists who first started worshiping Lilith did blame Western religious systems in general for sexism, but they didn't have any ill will towards Jews specifically. Are you willing to buy that?

I am very willing to say that the first 20th century feminists to bring Lilith into the conversation were not being antisemitic, because those feminists were Jewish. Their work is confronting, nuanced, and interesting. I don't always agree with their conclusions, but I certainly wouldn't call this examination of the place of Lilith in Jewish thought antisemitic or unwarrented.

However, almost immediately, once Gentile feminists (and specifically Gentile feminists of a Christian cultural background) got their hands on Lilith, it was a different story, and one that requires an examination of what is meant by "Western religions".

"Western religions" are contrasted with "Eastern religions", or more tellingly "Eastern Spirituality", a framing which posits two diametrically opposed worldviews and approaches to spirituality. This framing by its nature flattens such disparate traditions as Zoroastrianism and Shintoism, and applies what might be termed an orientalizing lens. It is, in other words, a bad model which expresses the biases and assumptions of its proponants, and leads to misunderstanding and bad scholarship, and also kind of racist. It was also a popular model in the mid 20th century.

It's important to note here that feminist spirituality and neo-Goddess worship were becoming a thing at exactly the time when a Western curiosity about "Eastern Spirituality" was hitting the mainstream. And because of a complicated stew of historical and cultural factors, almost all of these Western spiritual seekers approached "Eastern Spirituality" not as disparate living traditions, which are part of their own cultural contexts, and which are the traditions and worldviews of actual societies, which, as human societies, are far from perfect examples of enlightenment, but instead approached "Eastern Spirituality" as a single entity which could be stripped of context and turned into something to be consumed by a western audience, and also as the antidote to a spiritually bankrupt western capitalistic society. These Eastern teachings are just soooo enlightened, maaaan. This very much informed the framework of Western vs Eastern religions.

As for Western religions, this is a category I often see expressed in slightly different ways. I've neen this grouping called "Western religions" or even "Western religion", or Abrahamic religions (by which the speaker typically means the Abrahamic religions they have heard of, given that most don't seem to realize that there are in fact quite a few Abrahamic religions, not just Islam, Christianity, and Judaism) or sometimes it's monotheism or the monotheistic religions. These are all the same group, but the rhetorical focus is slightly different. Western religions are contrasted with Eastern religions or sometimes "non-Western religions,", monotheism with polytheism, and the Abrahamic religions with everything else. And a most cases, which goes up to nearly all cases where a value judgment is being made, what the person doing the grouping really means is "Christianity and the religions I assume are basically just Christianity." It's a framework that makes a lot of incorrect assumptions about what Judaism is, and assumes that anything the speaker objects to in Christianity is present in, and ultimately comes from Judaism. It's also a framing that by contrast assumes that these things which are bad about "Western religions" or "monotheism" are not broadly present in other religions, and are unique to Judaism and its descendents.

That last consideration is extremely important, because it's hard to argue that "Western religions" are responsible for x bad thing, when that bad thing is far from exculsively found in "Western religions" Most polytheistic traditions currently and historically have practiced some form of patriarchy. Worship of powerful goddesses does not seem to make these societies less oppressive for human women. Another popular argument I see is that monotheism brought religious intolerance into the world, but again, the idea that polytheistic societies are inherently religiously tolerant, and we have no evidence of religious persecution until monotheism came on the scene, is a myth. It's also with seeing these other terms for the same goup, and the comparisons people are using this grouping to make, that it becomes possible to understand why Hellenistic or Norse paganism, for example, are not part of the umbrella of "Western religions."

It's important to note here that it's a standard part of the Christian intellectual tradition that goes back almost to the creation of Christianity, that all the good parts of Christianity are from Jesus, and are "True Christianity" and all the bad parts are Jewish things that were insufficiently purged. Judaism-and-the-Jews-as-responsible-for-all-of-Christianity's-flaws is an old antisemitic trope, and one which has gained purchase among critics of Christianity globally.

The 20th century feminists who pioneered so-called feminist spirituality and neo-pagan Goddess worship latched onto an anthropological theory popular in the 19th century, that before the rise of patriarchy, societies went through a matriarchal, fertility, focused goddess worshipping phase. It's really really important to note here that by the time 20th century feminists got their hands on this idea, it had been already widely discredited. Anthropologists and archeologists no longer took it seriously, because after a certain point, it became really obvious that it did not fit the evidence.

Also in its original formulation it was really racist, as almost all anthropological theories popular in the 19th century were. See, the original idea was that societies progressed through stages, and that fertility focused matriarchal goddess worship was an early primitive phase, that societies passed through on their way to "higher civilization". The best and most civilized societies were (obviously) 19th century Western European ones, so societies closest to that were further along and more advanced, while societies further from that could be grouped according to which "stage" they reached.

20th feminists took this debunked, discredited formulation and flipped it on its head. Instead of matriarchal fertility-focused goddess worship being a phase societies passed through on their way to higher (patriarchal) forms of civilization, it was actually the natural state of humanity that we had fallen from, and needed to reclaim. It became a feminist Eden.

And who was the serpent in this feminist Eden, offering the fruit of the tree of patriarchy? Why, it was those first monotheists, the Ur-Abrahamic* religion, Judaism.

It's likely that a lot of the people reading this saying, hey, you are going way too far and reading way too much into this. Christianity is included in "Western religions", and nobody is being singled out, and that's a whole lot of well-meaning and progressive people that you are accusing of deliberate antisemitism. To which I say, I'm not actually accusing anyone of deliberate antisemitism here. I am saying that in a society where antisemitic tropes are a bulwark of the intellectual tradition, it's easy to accidentally and unconciously incorporate those tropes and narratives into any new, or not so new, ideas. As for whether Judaism was singled out, the fact that all these gentile feminists picked Lilith, a figure not present in Christianity, or Islam, but only in Judaism, shows who, consciously or not, they were holding responsible for patriarchy in "Western religions".

*According to the Torah, Abraham came from the city of Ur. This is a joke. I am very funny. Please take this opportunity to chuckle in a sensible and dignified manner.

[tanadrin]

Revised version of "polytheism vs elaborateness" religion chart. I started with a list of around 150 religions, sects, denominations, philosophies, and spiritual tendencies, whittled down to 100 based on what I could find information on and what meaningful differences would actually show up in a chart like this. Dark blue is Christianity and Christian-derived tendencies; light blue is Judaism and Jewish-derived tendencies; green is Islam and Islam-influenced tendencies; purple is ancient Mediterranean polytheism and related schools of thought; red is Dharmic/Hindu-influenced schools of thought; tan is Chinese religion and philosophy; orange is new religious movements; black is other, unaffiliated religions and movements.

Obviously, "what is a religion" is a complicated topic. Some of the things on this chart might strike you more as philosophical schools (Carvaka, Stoicism), epistemological approaches (Unitarian Universalism), or different ways of slicing the same tradition. The scholarly definition of "religion" is sort of fundamentally circular, and that's not something I'm interested in trying to untangle for this entirely non-scientific exercise.

Religions etc. are scored on two axis: polytheism vs elaborateness of practice. Polytheism is a rank from zero to 11, thus:

0. Strict atheist and materialist, denying the possibility of both gods and the supernatural, e.g., Carvaka.

1. Atheist. Denies the existence of significant supernatural agents worthy of worship, but may not deny all supernatural (or psychic, paranormal, etc.) beings and phenomena (e.g., Mimamsa).

2. Agnostic. This religion makes no dogmatic claims about the existence of supernatural beings worthy of worship, and it may not matter for this religion if such beings exist (e.g., Unitarian Universalists). It does not preclude--and may actually incorporate--other supernatural, psychic, or paranormal phenomena (e.g., Scientology).

3. Deist. This religion acknowledges at least one god or Supreme Being, but rejects this being's active intervention in the world after its creation (e.g., Christian Deism). Deism is marked with a gray line on the chart, in case you want to distinguish religions that specifically care about all this God business from ones that don't.

4. Tawhid monotheist. This religion acknowledges only a single transcendent god above all other natural or supernatural beings, who is usually the creator of the universe and the ground of being, and is without parts, division, or internal distinction (e.g., Islam).

5. Formal monotheism. This religion acknowledges a single god, usually transcendent above all other natural or supernatural beings, but who may have aspects, hypostases, or distinct parts (e.g., Trinitarian Christianity). Pantheism may be considered a special case of formal monotheism that identifies the universe and its many discrete phenomena with a single god or divine force.

6. Dualism. This religion acknowledges a single god worthy of worship, alongside a second inferior, often malevolent being that nevertheless wields great power in or over the world (e.g., Zoroastrianism or Gnosticism).

7. Monolatrist. This religion or practice acknowledges the existence of many gods or divine beings worthy of worship, but focuses on, or happens to be devoted to only one of them (e.g., ancient mystery cults; pre-exilic Judaism).

8. Oligotheist. This religion worships a small group of divine beings, who may function for devotional or rhetorical purposes as a single entity (e.g., Mormonism, Smartism).

9. Monogenic polytheism/Henotheism. This religion worships many gods, which it sees as proceeding from or owing their existence to, a single underlying or overarching force or supreme god (e.g., many forms of Hinduism).

10. Heterogenic polytheism. This religion worships many gods, who have diverse origins and/or natures. Though the number of gods is in practical terms probably unlimited, gods are discrete entities or personalities, i.e., they are "countably infinite" (e.g., many polytheistic traditions).

11. Animism. This religion worships many gods which may or may not be discrete entities, and which may or may not be innumerable even in principle, i.e., they are "uncountably infinite" (e.g., many animist traditions).

What counts as a god is naturally a bit of a judgement call, as is exactly where a religion falls on this scale.

Elaborateness of practice is based on assigning one point per feature from the following list of features:

Uses vs forbids accompanied music in worship

Saints or intermediary beings accept prayers/devotion

Liturgical calendar with specific rituals or festivals

Practices monasticism

Venerates relics or holy objects

Clerics have special, elaborate clothing

Clerics have special qualificiations, e.g., must be celibate or must go through elaborate initiation/training

Elaborate sacred art or architecture used in places of worship

Sites of pilgrimage, or other form of cult centralization

Sophisticated religious hierarchy beyond the congregational level

Mandatory periods of fasting and/or complex dietary rules

Specific clothing requirements for laypeople

Specific body modifications either required or forbidden for laypeople

Liturgical language

Complex ritual purity rules

Performs sacrifice

Performs human sacrifice (or cannibalism)

Uses entheogens

Uses meditation or engages in mystical practice

Additionally, a point is taken away for austerity for each of the following features:

Forbids secular music outside worship

Claims sola scriptura tradition

Practices pacifism or ahimsa

Requires vegetarianism of all adherents

These scores are probably pretty inexact, since I am not a scholar of world religion.

This chart is not scientific, it's just a goof based on that @apricops post.

Other fun dimensions along which to chart religions might be:

Orthodoxy vs orthopraxy

Authoritarianism/control of members. This would add some much needed distinctions to Christian sects in particular, and to the new religious movements.

Elaborateness of cosmological claims. Some religions (looking at you, Buddhism) really go hog-wild here.

Social egalitarianism. Even within the same framework/tradition/philosophy, some practices differ radically on how egalitarian they are.

[writers-potion]

Aight I just remembered what I was gonna ask. I think It'll be my second ask because I do remember I submitted the same question I wanna ask months ago HAHA

Okay so, I'm writing a story that explores a lot of subjects, one of them is morality

So... How do you make a fictional religion feel "real" in a sense? Like I know there'll be shrines, temples, and stuff but I need to know more than just that.

Take your time and thank you! ✨

Writing Realistic Fictional Religion

Hi! Thank you for the question :)

Please refer to my posts about writing hateful gods and writing deities for stuff about writing gods! I'll talk more about writing religion in general here.

Religious Hierarchy

Think about how you'd want your religion to be structured:

Polytheism: the belief in many gods.

Monotheism: the belief in a single, all-powerful god.

Atheism: the belief in no gods. A belief in nothing is stil a belief.

Are there tiers of gods? (Gods above Gods)?

Is there a "Mother God" or "Father God" that must be worshipped over everything else?

How are religious leaders selected and trained?

What kind of actions (celibacy, vegetarianism) do the believers need to do in order to be a faithful person? Is there a consequence when they don't do this?

Religious Texts

The most important question a religious text should aim to answer is: where did the world (and therefore, us) come from?

Here are some story patterns you can use:

Creatio Ex Nihilo: God creates the world from nothing

Creation from Chaos: God introduced order into a chaotic world

Primal Couple: The first "couple" gives birth to the world

World Parent: A god sacrifices (a part) of their body to construct the world's elements.

Emergence: Before the current world, there existed another world. After a period of time is over, a new world emerges.

Earth-Diver: A deity sends over a person/animal, etc. to construct a world out of the barren land they've created.

This "Origin Story" will dicate the basic values that your religion thinks is the most important.

Religious Practices

You have the freedom to invent your own religious practices. When you are trying to invent one, consider:

The weather. Is the Sun in your world so blazing that all religious festivals are only held during the night?

What can you not do in the name of religion? Are you not allowed to have stuffed animals in your bed? Not eat blue stuff?

Who are the people that work the most during festivals/worship ceremonies? Are slaves exploited to prepare the feast? Are the women the only ones that works while the men sing? Are animals tortured or exploited in the process?

Sacrifices. What/when/how do you offer sacrifices?

You can also think about:

Who determines the kind of religious practices the other people have to follow?

Are the reliigous practice discriminatory and if yes, who do they benefit?

Religious Locations

Historically, religious lands have had the power to have its own rules and be protected. which will provide a good

One Location vs. Many: Is there a shrine in every home/street, or is everyone required to report to the city square every Saturday?

The Ruler's Castle: Sometimes, the king is considered to be the "son of god" and the palace is therefore the most sacred place.

One Unreachable Location: It can also be that in order to be ruly faithful, you need to visit a place that is so unreachable that people die trying.

A Moving Location: Does the god choose their new home every year?

A Constructable Location: If you draw a circle in bone ash, does the patch of land inside it become holy and no ghost can enter it? What if you lack faith and the circle construction doesn't work at a time you need it the most?

Question of Morality and Religion

While many religions preach equality and kindnes, it has been used to justify conflict and discriminate those who do not believe in it.

Does the deity promote such violence? Or is it the bad leaders?

Is the deity uncritical towards such behavior? Or do they actively step in?

Is the God falliable? Like the modern-day presidents, is the god's survival/power somehow dependent on the believers? Is that why they stay silent even when bad things are being done in their name?

Does the god favor rich people?

─── ･ ｡ﾟ☆: *.☽ .* . ───

💎If you like my blog, buy me a coffee☕ and find me on instagram! 

💎Before you ask, check out my masterpost part 1 and part 2 

💎For early access to my content and priority questions, become a Writing Wizard 

[galaxymagitech]

I’ve noticed that a lot of people on the internet say things like “oh my gods”, with the plural. Growing up, I only knew one person who did that, and he said it that way because of Percy Jackson. So…I’m curious.

(Yes I’m aware polytheism vs monotheism is highly reductive. For the purposes of this poll define them however it makes the most sense to you.)

[shivasdarknight]

I CANT BELIEVE THAT I ACTUALLY FORGOT ONE

Halonic Conquest: the Destruction of the Old Gods and the First Wave of Coerthan Heretics.

which is like.

yeah fuck it here's the snippet:

“Older.”  The third book was picked up and its cover shown to Melisande, one that was titled, Halonic Conquest: the Destruction of the Old Gods and the First Wave of Coerthan Heretics.  “Ishgard’s had two waves of polytheism and one wave of monotheism.  The initial was the Old Gods, the second was the Twelve.  From what I understand, the attitude towards paganistic Coerthans during this second period was ‘don’t disrespect our Gods and we won’t have an issue’.  But during the shift to Halonic worship solely, the change of doctrine demanded sole worship of Halone — as mandated by Ishgard over the region of Coerthas.  Thus the followers of the Old Gods were persecuted, chased into secrecy, and eventually became known as the original heretics.  This is…more of a history text, I guess.  Not much on theism, more about the actual persecution.”

which is obvs based on christianity's rise to prominence and why it so thoroughly wiped out polytheistic religions wherever it went

and obvs i took this angle because of my college courses, because ancient to medieval art history is like half christian religious studies, half archaeology and anthropology.

one of the batshit things i get up to - wrt xiv fanfic - is coming up with like. what academic texts might exist within the world. and without fail it's shit that i want to read and im mad at myself because THEY DONT EXIST AAAAAAAAAAaa

[bloody-arty-myths]

In the MK universe, was Polytheism vs Monotheism just the Elder Gods and the One Being trying to one-up each other? Because that sounds crazy

@theelderhazelnut My friend, I can’t stop thinking about this after reading one of your Lore posts

[oozmium]

SMTIVA Translation Compilation

Here is a masterlist of SMTIVA related translations that can be found online to ease searching. Translators will be credited appropriately.

Important note: I am NOT the translator for any of these works. I have been granted permission to link these translations by the translators themselves. Please direct your support to the following people instead: dijeh, VerdantGrove, takujiluvr, @twilightmalachite .

Character Pages / Design Notes

Nanashi | Asahi | Nozomi | Navarre | Hallelujah (+ Chiro) | Gaston | Toki

Side Stories

Nikkari | Asahi | Hallelujah | Krishna

Demon-related / Mythology Topics

Monotheism vs. Polytheism

Dagda and Celtic Mythology

Krishna and Indian Mythology

Mysticism and Satan

Medusa and Greek Mythology

Maitreya and the Concept of Salvation in Buddhism

Odin and Germanic Deities

Sukuna Hikona and the Mythology of Powers in Ancient Japan

Taotie and the Myths of China

Chironnup and Ainu Mythology

The Birth of Humans and the Birth of Gods

Napaea and Fairy Tales

Inanna and Myths of the Orient

Adramalech and Pagan Demons

Tenkai and the Edo Mandala

Shesha and Dragon Gods around the world

Siegfried and Tales of Heroes

Myth and History

Cleopatra and Egyptian Civilization

Mephisto and the Demon Summoning Sorcerer

Misc. demons + worldbuilding

MISC TRANSLATIONS

SMT IVF Post-Release Interview (04/13/16)

SMT IVF Collab Menu: PT. 1 | PT. 2

SMT IVF Seiyuu Commentary taken from blogposts on the jp website

SMT IV Seiyuu Interview taken from jp website

[lcatala]

I am coming to the realisation that there's a particular category of worldbuilding in fantasy that I really don't like, which I call "Calque Worldbuilding", which is when you've got something that is on the surface a secundary world, but is really very obviously Real Country/ies X with the names changed and some adjustments of convenience (polytheism instead of monotheism/more active roles for women/being gay is ok/magic exists) but otherwise largely the same culture and political structure, very similar history down to specific events, similar sounding language and names and you can effectively calque most of the elements of this worldbuilding neatly 1:1 to real world elements, to the point that you can often predict events in the story if you know the real world history of the place being calqued

Examples of this I can think of at the top of my head include The Poppy War (China/Japan with the opium wars, the sino-japanese war and the red-army revolution), The Unbroken (French colonial rule in Algeria), Gunmetal Gods (Abbassids and Ottomans facing western crusaders) -- which I'm trying to read right now but it's not going well, tho mostly because the prose is really not great (but the worldbuiding is not helping)

And I don't if that's just my reading but to me that feels a bit iffy, like not just in a "that's lazy" way, but even more in a "the author wanted to write fantasy in a specific historical setting but without the messy details and complexity of real history that don't lend themselves well to clear cut good vs evil narratives and simple ideological messages". People have praised the Poppy War for its allegory but I felt that it was both pretty ideologically biased in insidious ways yet liking the "bite" of alegorized thing (yeah sure your description of the fantasy equivalent of the Rape of Nanking is harrowing ... but it really feels pale and sterile compared to descriptions of the real thing or even fictionalized accounts of it or of similar events) .

An example that is NOT doing that is The Masquerade (the Traitor Baru Cormorant and sequels) where there are many recognizable elements of our world but scrambled around in such a way that you can't reliable say that this fictional country is just that real country with the name changed — so eg: The Republic of Falcrest has elements of Revolutionary France but also of Colonial Great Britain but also of the Roman Empire but also of the Ottoman Empire but also of Imperial China and in the end it's a completely original and unique culture where individual elements are familiar but the whole picture feels novel and unfamiliar, and the author can delve into a deeply complex story with messy themes breached far more deeply than the other above examples, not being prisonner of his allegory nor bound to a particular ideological narrative about it.

[triadic]

[In the Indo-Hellenic world] space predominates over time, for time is cyclical and eternal, so that the temporal world is much less real than the world of timeless forms, and indeed has no ultimate value… The world eras go down to destruction one after the other, and the most appropriate religion is therefore either polytheism, the deification of particular spaces, or pantheism, the deification of all space… For the Judaeo-Christian, on the other hand, time predominates over space, for its movement is directed and meaningful… True being is immanent in becoming, and salvation is for the community in and through history. The world era is fixed upon a central point which gives meaning to the entire process, overcoming any self-destructive trend and creating something new which cannot be frustrated by cycles of time. Hence, the most appropriate religion is monotheism, with God as the controller of time and all that happens in it. It may seem other-worldly, despising the things of this life, but its faith is tied to the future as well as the past for the world itself is redeemable, not illusory, and the Kingdom of God will claim it. Thus, it is essentially optimistic.

quoted in a review of Science in Traditional China, by Joseph Needham (p 125–126)

I had not seen this useful summary of polytheism and pantheism before. Nor really the space vs. time distinction. Worth pondering.

[gefdreamsofthesea]

I was looking at the Steam page for a game called Svarog's Dream (RPG made by a single dev, kind of janky apparently) and one review was complaining about it being preachy with Christianity vs. Slavic polytheism

The dev's response is like "I've removed Christianity from the game" (it's been replaced by generic monotheism)

Patch notes: removed Christianity

[literaturereviewhelp]

Obviously, the retail analyst also should have strong mathematical and analytical skills because it is his duty to figure out the meanings of charts and numbers and how that information affects the success of the business. Communication skill is also essential so he can be able to make laypeople understand the concepts analyzed from the data. A certification may suffice for employment but some might require a license. The job is quite enormous but to one who is inclined to the task, it is quite simple and might even be fulfilling especially that a retail analyst can be compensated from $30,000-70,000 per year. With the descriptions mentioned above, retail analysis can be said to fall under applied science, specifically in applied mathematics. Science is applied in the job by observing how business flows especially when it comes to what sells fastest and what is stocked for a long time. Once the best-sellers or the problems are identified, solutions should be strategically planned and analyzed. The retail analyst seems to be a job that might interest me because I believe I have the mathematical and analytical skills so I just might consider pursuing such a career.   OR I agree with the author’s claim that we are currently living in a world where there is a blur between the past, present, and future. But such reality is still hidden to many of us. As stated by the author “…these shows were important to a degree and achieved cult status but it never encapsulated reality or capture a single theme or idea that made a show prestigious to a wider audience” (Gasoline Sky para 2). The author is clearly criticizing viewers for taking for granted the larger themes of science fiction shows like BSG. In general, the article is enlightening, interesting, and informative. It also offers a somewhat objective analysis of the political (e.g. terrorism) and religious (e.g. polytheism vs. monotheism) aspects in the thematic agenda of the show. Read the full article

[a-god-in-ruins-rises]

humans tend to personify things but so what? monotheism could also arise naturally. once you have many gods its not a huge leap to imagine one supreme god uniting them.

as for the belief vs. practice thing Christianity isn’t just about belief it’s about how you live, too. mysticism in Christianity focuses on experience not just abstract concepts.

paganism sees the world as inherently sacred, but Christianity doesn’t 'uproot' it. it offers a different way of engaging with the divine, seeing the world as fallen but redeemable. Christianity’s 'fragility' comes from its depth and forces more engagement unlike the more transactional nature of paganism.

okay.

first of all, monotheism is still a far cry away from being christianity. my argument wasn't against monotheism (insofar as "monotheism" is even a useful term -- which i would dispute). i agree that some kind of monotheism isn't too far of a leap from polytheism. but i think this is a totally different conversation. there are pagan (non-abrahamic) monotheisms already, especially the pluralistic kind you're alluding to (where all the gods are just expressions of a single ultimate god). though, of course, i may or may not have similar issues with any given "monotheism" depending on the specifics. and i'd argue that the specific kind of monotheism that christianity (and other abrahamic faiths) represent is not as natural. i think that kind of monotheism is still a pretty sudden, revolutionary break in religious thinking that is contingent on a bunch of historical and political factors.

but again, the conversation isn't polytheism vs monotheism. it's paganism vs christianity. so all of this is kind of irrelevant.

when it comes to belief vs practice... yeah christianity does have some mystical traditions which do have more of an emphasis on experience and practice and direct access to divine immanence and all that. but even then, at their core these still hinge on a set of abstract beliefs about who god is, what jesus did, sin, salvation, commandments, covenants, etc. mysticism in christianity still needs a framework of belief to even make sense. it's not enough to just live well; it's about being “saved,” which is ultimately rooted in belief in these specific, abstract truths. mysticism exists, but it’s always subordinate to the belief system, and if you stray too far from that, you’re no longer “in” the faith.

paganism, on the other hand, doesn’t operate the same way. the world itself is sacred, and the gods are present and active in your daily life, whether you believe it or not. you can engage with nature, spirits, and the divine directly, without needing to pass through a doctrinal gate. there's no "salvation" you have to prove yourself worthy for, no checklist of beliefs you need to affirm to remain spiritually valid. no need for an intermediary or a book to tell you about them; you just encounter them. the sacred is interwoven with your immediate environment, not something you need to conceptualize in a distant, otherworldly way.

now, about the world being “fallen”... to me, that’s where christianity starts to come across as a bit defeatist. paganism doesn’t see the world as broken. yeah, maybe it’s imperfect, but that's just because perfection would be stagnant and boring. there would be no growth. no change. the imperfections of the world is what makes it interesting and meaningful and dynamic and worth living in.

plus, christianity’s whole narrative of “salvation” depends on an idea that the world is inherently wrong and needs fixing. or as corrupt and in need of transcendence. that’s a much more life-denying view of the cosmos. whereas paganism sees the world as inherently alive with divinity. the sacredness isn’t something you achieve or ascend toward—it’s something you’re already immersed in.one that’s rooted in guilt. i'm not a fan. i prefer paganism because it's more life-affirming. there’s just a greater sense of being in the world that i prefer, rather than trying to escape it or redeem it.

also what does this "depth" and "engagement" even mean? if by “forces more engagement” you mean “requires constant mental gymnastics to maintain belief in an abstract cosmology you can’t verify or experience directly,” then sure i guess. christianity forces engagement because it has to maintain a system of inherited meaning that doesn’t self-evidently correspond to lived experience. it requires constant catechesis, apologetics, sermons, etc. that’s not depth. that's dependence. that’s insecurity.

and let's not pretend that paganism doesn't have its own depth. both in practice and in belief. i mean there is depth to be found in bacchanalian orgies or mithraic mystery cults or even like some mead-fueled berserkers dancing around a bonfire. as nietzsche says, there's more wisdom in your body than your deepest philosophy (or your deepest sunday sermons lmao). it’s just a different mode of depth -- experiential, symbolic, mythological, embodied. not doctrinal.

but even if you want to get into doctrine, philosophy, theology, etc paganism has that in spades too! so much so that a great deal of christian theology ("depth" as you call it) is based on greco-roman philosophy! despite your implications, it's not just vibes -- it’s vibes AND logos.

the key difference is that paganism doesn’t need you to master a philosophical system to participate. it’s not gatekept behind theology. the philosophy is there, it’s rich, it’s old, but it’s not required for you to relate to the divine. it’s not to justify the faith, but to deepen it. like actually deepen it. in the sense of making it stronger and more resilient. like deeper roots. (whereas somehow "depth" to you equals fragility???) it's supplemental. additive. creative. generative. but not necessary.

[pooma-islam]

Participating in Non-Muslim Religious Festivals: An Islamic Perspective. தமிழில்

The topic of whether Muslims are allowed to participate in non-Muslim religious celebrations, such as Christmas, is a matter of significant scholarly discussion and religious reflection in Islamic theology. Rooted in principles derived from the Qur’an and Sunnah, the issue largely revolves around the implications of participation in such festivities and the boundaries set by Islamic teachings in interfaith interactions. Based on the perspectives shared by renowned Islamic scholars and detailed interpretations of Islamic texts, this essay examines the permissibility of participating in non-Muslim religious celebrations, such as giving gifts, attending parties, or even wishing "Merry Christmas." This discussion underscores the importance of maintaining Islamic principles while fostering polite and respectful interactions with non-Muslim colleagues, neighbors, and friends.

🔘The Core of the Debate: Why Is Participation Prohibited?

At the heart of this issue lies the concept of preserving Islamic monotheism (Tawheed) and avoiding practices that may condone or support beliefs antithetical to Islam. Christmas, for example, celebrates the birth of Prophet Eesa (Jesus, peace be upon him) but is embedded with theological implications contradictory to Islamic teachings, such as the belief in Jesus as the "Son of God." By participating in or extending greetings for such celebrations, Muslims could inadvertently be seen as condoning or affirming beliefs associated with shirk (polytheism or associating partners with Allah).

The Qur’an explicitly advises steering clear of actions that could be construed as support for falsehood or transgression:“...do not help one another in sin and transgression.

And fear Allaah. Verily, Allaah is Severe in punishment.” (Surah al-Maa’idah: 2)

Renowned scholar Ibn al-Qayyim emphasized the severity of such involvement by equating congratulating non-Muslims on their religious festivals to endorsing their disbelief. He remarked that congratulating them for practices like shirk is akin to congratulating them for grave sins such as prostrating to the cross or committing heinous acts. This strict stance stems from the concern that any form of endorsement of such beliefs, even implied, exposes the individual to the displeasure of Allah.

🔘Avoiding Misunderstandings: The Role of Politeness vs. Principles

One common contention is balancing politeness and maintaining principles in interfaith interactions. Many Muslims feel uncomfortable declining to greet non-Muslims during their festivals or avoiding participation in cultural customs for fear of appearing rude or intolerant. While Islam emphasizes kindness, respect, and maintaining good relationships with people of all backgrounds, it establishes clear limitations when it comes to compromising one’s faith.

The illustrious scholar, Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen, clarified that politeness cannot come at the expense of affirming religious falsehood. For example, non-Muslims congratulating Muslims for Eid or other Islamic celebrations is vastly different from Muslims reciprocating for non-Islamic occasions. Eid is a holiday legislated by Allah, whereas holidays like Christmas stem from innovation or deviations from the original message of Prophet Eesa (peace be upon him). As such, responding with “Merry Christmas” or participating in Christmas festivities would undermine the Islamic belief in Tawheed.

It is important to note that declining participation should be done respectfully and with explanation. Politely educating non-Muslims about Islamic beliefs—such as the rejection of the divinity of Jesus yet the simultaneous love and respect Muslims hold for him as a prophet—can serve as an opportunity for dawah (calling others to Islam).

🔘Alternatives to Participation

Rather than participate in Christmas celebrations, Muslims are encouraged to maintain cordial relationships with their non-Muslim colleagues and friends throughout the year. Islam promotes the giving of gifts and showing kindness as general virtues, not actions tied to specific religious festivals. Muslims are encouraged to give gifts during their religious holidays, such as Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha, or even at neutral times outside the festive season. This proactive approach helps avoid the appearance of endorsing beliefs conflicting with Islamic principles, while also fostering positive interfaith connections.

Shaikh Ibn Uthaymeen expressed that participation in non-Islamic religious functions, such as accepting invitations to Christmas parties, exchanging gifts, or organizing celebrations, is impermissible. These actions go beyond simple greetings and imply active participation in and approval of the non-Islamic religious rituals, which Islam prohibits outright. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said, “Whoever imitates a people is one of them,” further emphasizing the importance of maintaining a distinct Islamic identity.

🔘Addressing Misconceptions about Christmas

While some claim that celebrating Christmas is an acknowledgment of the birth of Prophet Eesa (peace be upon him), this interpretation does not align with Christian theological underpinnings. Christmas is not only a commemoration of Jesus’ birth but also imbued with beliefs such as the "Sonship of God" and other doctrines that Islam considers shirk. Hence, Muslims must differentiate between respect for the person of Jesus as a prophet and the rejection of Christian theological concepts associated with him.

Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) warned Muslims about attending non-Muslim religious gatherings, as these occasions are seen as times when divine wrath descends upon those involved in acts of disbelief. This demonstrates the importance of avoiding environments where shirk is actively promoted or celebrated.

🔘The Importance of Educating Others

Avoiding participation in Christmas or other non-Muslim religious activities is not merely about personal religious observance but can serve as an opportunity for dawah. Muslims living in multi-religious societies should aim to educate their colleagues, neighbors, and friends about their beliefs in a polite and thoughtful manner throughout the year. By explaining Islamic principles, such as the oneness of Allah, the concept of prophethood, and the reasoning behind refraining from certain practices, Muslims demonstrate that their decisions are principled rather than prejudiced.

This consistent education helps non-Muslims understand what to expect from their Muslim friends when religious festivals arise, preventing misunderstandings or feelings of exclusion. Establishing oneself as a practicing and principled Muslim over time fosters respect and goodwill, even when declining invitations or greetings tied to religious festivities.

🔘Conclusion

In conclusion, while Islam commands kindness and fairness towards non-Muslims, especially in interfaith relations, it also sets firm boundaries when it comes to practices that could dilute or compromise the belief in Allah’s oneness. Participating in or endorsing non-Muslim religious festivals like Christmas—whether through greetings, gifts, or attendance—not only contradicts Islamic principles but could also imply condoning beliefs that Islam profoundly rejects. Instead, Muslims should focus on nurturing respectful relationships year-round, promoting mutual understanding, and using such moments as opportunities for dawah. This approach enables Muslims to uphold their faith while fostering harmony in diverse societies. As always, the guiding principle remains: Allah knows best.

முஸ்லிம்கள் முஸ்லிம் அல்லாத மத விழாக்களில் பங்கேற்பது: ஒரு இஸ்லாமிய பார்வை

முஸ்லிம்கள் கிறிஸ்துமஸ் போன்ற முஸ்லிம் அல்லாத மத விழாக்களில் பங்கேற்க அனுமதிக்கப்படுகிறார்களா என்ற கேள்வி இஸ்லாமிய தத்துவத்தில் முக்கியமான பண்டிதர் விவாதம் மற்றும் மத சிந்தனையின் பொருள் ஆகும். குர்ஆன் மற்றும் சுன்னாவில் இருந்து பெறப்பட்ட கொள்கைகளை அடிப்படையாகக் கொண்டு, இந்த விவகாரம் பெரும்பாலும் இவ்விழாக்களில் பங்கேற்பதன் விளைவுகள் மற்றும் மதங்களிடையே உள்ள தொடர்புகளில் இஸ்லாமிய போதனைகள் அமைத்துள்ள எல்லைகளைச் சுற்றி மையமாகிறது. புகழ்பெற்ற இஸ்லாமிய பண்டிதர்கள் பகிர்ந்த பார்வைகள் மற்றும் இஸ்லாமிய உரைகளின் விரிவான விளக்கங்களை அடிப்படையாகக் கொண்டு, இந்த கட்டுரை கிறிஸ்துமஸ் போன்ற முஸ்லிம் அல்லாத மத விழாக்களில் பங்கேற்பதற்கான அனுமதியை ஆராய்கிறது, பரிசுகளை வழங்குதல், விருந்துகளில் பங்கேற்பது அல்லது “மெர்ரி கிறிஸ்துமஸ்” என்று வாழ்த்துதல் போன்றவை. இந்த விவாதம் முஸ்லிம் அல்லாத சக ஊழியர்கள், அண்டை வீட்டார் மற்றும் நண்பர்களுடன் மரியாதையான மற்றும் மரியாதையான தொடர்புகளை வளர்க்கும் போது இஸ்லாமிய கொள்கைகளை பராமரிப்பதன் முக்கியத்துவத்தை வலியுறுத்துகிறது.

🔘விவாதத்தின் மையம்: பங்கேற்பது ஏன் தடைசெய்யப்பட்டது?

இந்த விவகாரத்தின் மையத்தில் இஸ்லாமிய ஒரே கடவுள் நம்பிக்கையை (தவ்ஹீத்) பராமரிப்பது மற்றும் இஸ்லாமுக்கு முரணான நம்பிக்கைகளை அனுமதிக்கக்கூடிய அல்லது ஆதரிக்கும் நடைமுறைகளைத் தவிர்ப்பது ஆகியவை உள்ளன. கிறிஸ்துமஸ், உதாரணமாக, தீர்க்கதரிசி ஈசாவின் (ஈசா, அவருக்கு அமைதி உண்டாகட்டும்) பிறப்பை கொண்டாடுகிறது, ஆனால் “கடவுளின் மகன்” என்ற நம்பிக்கையைப் போன்ற இஸ்லாமிய போதனைகளுக்கு முரணான தத்துவார்த்த விளைவுகளுடன் இணைக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது. இவ்விழாக்களில் பங்கேற்பதன் மூலம் அல்லது வாழ்த்துக்களை நீட்டிப்பதன் மூலம், முஸ்லிம்கள் தவறுதலாக ஷிர்க் (பொலிதீயிசம் அல்லது அல்லாஹ்வுடன் கூட்டாளிகளை இணைத்தல்) உடன் தொடர்புடைய நம்பிக்கைகளை அனுமதிப்பதாக அல்லது உறுதிப்படுத்துவதாகக் கருதப்படலாம்.

குர்ஆன் தவறாகவோ அல்லது மீறலாகவோ ��ருதப்படக்கூடிய செயல்களைத் தவிர்க்கத் தெளிவாக அறிவுறுத்துகிறது: “… பாவம் மற்றும் மீறலில் ஒருவருக்கொருவர் உதவாதீர்கள். அல்லாஹ்வை பயப்படுங்கள். நிச்சயமாக, அல்லாஹ் கடுமையான தண்டனையாளர்.” (சூரா அல்-மாஇதா: 2)

புகழ்பெற்ற பண்டிதர் இப்ன் அல்-கய்யிம், முஸ்லிம் அல்லாதவர்களை அவர்களின் மத விழாக்களில் வாழ்த்துவது அவர்களின் நம்பிக்கையை ஆதரிப்பதற்கு சமமாக இருப்பதை வலியுறுத்தினார். ஷிர்க் போன்ற நடைமுறைகளுக்காக அவர்களை வாழ்த்துவது, சிலுவைக்கு வணங்குதல் அல்லது கொடூரமான செயல்களைச் செய்வது போன்ற பெரிய பாவங்களுக்கு வாழ்த்துவது போன்��து என்று அவர் கூறினார். இவ்வாறு கடுமையான நிலைப்பாடு, இவ்வாறு நம்பிக்கைகளை ஆதரிக்கும் எந்தவொரு வடிவமும், மறைமுகமாக இருந்தாலும், அல்லாஹ்வின் அதிருப்திக்கு உட்படுத்தும் என்ற கவலையிலிருந்து வருகிறது.

🔘தவிர்க்க வேண்டிய தவறான புரிதல்கள்: மரியாதை மற்றும் கொள்கைகள்

ஒரு பொதுவான கருத்து, மதங்களிடையே தொடர்புகளில் மரியாதையை பராமரிப்பது மற்றும் கொள்கைகளை பராமரிப்பது ஆகியவற்றை சமநிலைப்படுத்துவது. பல முஸ்லிம்கள், அவர்களின் விழாக்களில் முஸ்லிம் அல்லாதவர்களை வாழ்த்த மறுப்பது அல்லது கலாச்சார பழக்கங்களில் பங்கேற்பதைத் தவிர்ப்பது குறித்து, மரியாதையற்றவையாக அல்லது சகிப்புத்தன்மையற்றவையாக தோன்றுவதற்கான பயத்தால், துன்பப்படுகிறார்கள். இஸ்லாம், அனைத்து பின்னணியிலுள்ள மக்களுடன் நல்ல உறவுகளை பராமரிப்பதை வலியுறுத்தினாலும், ஒருவரின் நம்பிக்கையை சமரசம் செய்யும் போது தெளிவான வரம்புகளை நிறுவுகிறது.

புகழ்பெற்ற பண்டிதர் ஷேக் இப்ன் உத்தய்மீன், மரியாதை மத நம்பிக்கைகளை உறுதிப்படுத்துவதற்காக வரக்கூடாது என்று தெளிவுபடுத்தினார். உதாரணமாக, முஸ்லிம் அல்லாதவர்கள் முஸ்லிம்களை ஈத் அல்லது பிற இஸ்லாமிய விழாக்களுக்கு வாழ்த்துவது, முஸ்லிம்கள் முஸ்லிம் அல்லாத நிகழ்ச்சிகளுக்கு பதிலளிப்பது மிகவும் மாறுபட்டது. ஈத், அல்லாஹ்வால் சட்டப்படுத்தப்பட்ட ஒரு விடுமுறை, ஆனால் கிறிஸ்துமஸ் போன்ற விடுமுறைகள், தீர்க்கதரிசி ஈசாவின் (அவருக்கு அமைதி உண்டாகட்டும்) அசல் செய்தியிலிருந்து புதுமை அல்லது விலகல்கள் ஆகியவற்றிலிருந்து தோன்றுகின்றன. எனவே, “மெர்ரி கிறிஸ்துமஸ்” என்று பதிலளிப்பது அல்லது கிறிஸ்துமஸ் விழாக்களில் பங்கேற்பது தவ்ஹீத் மீது இஸ்லாமிய நம்பிக்கையை பாதிக்கும்.

பங்கேற்பதை மறுப்பது மரியாதையாகவும் விளக்கத்துடனும் செய்யப்பட வேண்டும் என்பதைக் கவனிக்க வேண்டும். முஸ்லிம் அல்லாதவர்களுக்கு இஸ்லாமிய நம்பிக்கைகளை மரியாதையாகக் கல்வி கொடுப்பது - இயேசுவின் தெய்வீகத்தை நிராகரிப்பதைப் போன்றவை, ஆனால் அவரை தீர்க்கதரிசியாக நேசிக்கும் மற்றும் மரியாதை செய்யும் முஸ்லிம்களின் ஒரே நேரத்தில் காதல் மற்றும் மரியாதை - தாவா (மற்றவர்களை இஸ்லாமுக்கு அழைப்பது) ஒரு வாய்ப்பாக இருக்கலாம்.

🔘பங்கேற்பதற்கான மாற்று வழிகள்

கிறிஸ்துமஸ் கொண்டாட்டங்களில் பங்கேற்பதற்குப் பதிலாக, முஸ்லிம்கள் தங்கள் முஸ்லிம் அல்லாத சக ஊழியர்கள் மற்றும் நண்பர்களுடன் ஆண்டின் முழு காலமும் நல்லுறவுகளை பராமரிக்க ஊக்கப்படுத்தப்படுகிறார்கள். இஸ்லாம் பரிசுகளை வழங்குதல் மற்றும் பொது நற்குணங்களாக அன்பைக் காட்டுவதை ஊக்குவிக்கிறது, குறிப்பிட்ட மத விழாக்களுடன் தொடர்புடைய செயல்களாக அல்ல. முஸ்லிம்கள் தங்கள் மத விடுமுறைகளான ஈத் அல்-பித்ர் மற்றும் ஈத் அல்-அதா போன்றவற்றில் அல்லது பண்டிகை காலத்திற்கு வெளியே நடுநிலையான நேரங்களில் பரிசுகளை வழங்க ஊக்கப்படுகிறார்கள். இந்த முன்முயற்சி, இஸ்லாமிய கொள்கைகளுக்கு முரணான நம்பிக்கைகளை ஆதரிப்பது போன்ற தோற்றத்தைத் தவிர்க்க உதவுகிறது, மேலும் நேர்மறை மதங்களிடையே நல்லுறவுகளை வளர்க்கிறது.

ஷேக் இப்ன் உத்தய்மீன், கிறிஸ்துமஸ் விருந்துகளுக்கு அழைப்புகளை ஏற்குதல், பரிசுகளை பரிமாறுதல் அல்லது கொண்டாட்டங்களை ஏற்பாடு செய்தல் போன்ற முஸ்லிம் அல்லாத மத நிகழ்ச்சிகளில் பங்கேற்பது அனுமதிக்கப்படாதது என்று தெரிவித்தார். இந்த செயல்கள் எளிய வாழ்த்துக்களைத் தாண்டி, முஸ்லிம் அல்லாத மத சடங்குகளில் செயல்பாட்டில் பங்கேற்பதையும், ஒப்புதலையும் குறிக்கின்றன, இது இஸ்லாம் முழுமையாகத் தடை செய்கிறது. தீர்க்கதரிசி முஹம்மது (அவருக்கு அமைதி உண்டாகட்டும்) கூறினார், “யார் ஒரு மக்களைப் பின்பற்றுகிறாரோ அவர் அவர்களில் ஒருவராக இருக்கிறார்,” இது தனித்துவமான இஸ்லாமிய அடையாளத்தை பராமரிப்பதன் முக்கியத்துவத்தை மேலும் வலியுறுத்துகிறது.

🔘கிறிஸ்துமஸ் குறித்த தவறான கருத்துக்களைத் தீர்க்குதல்

சிலர் கிறிஸ்துமஸ் கொண்டாடுவது தீர்க்கதரிசி ஈசாவின் (அவருக்கு அமைதி உண்டாகட்டும்) பிறப்பை ஒப்புக்கொள்வதாகக் கூறினாலும், இந்த விளக்கம் கிறிஸ்தவ தத்துவார்த்த அடிப்படைகளுடன் ஒத்துப்போவதில்லை. கிறிஸ்துமஸ், இயேசுவின் பிறப்பை நினைவுகூரும் நிகழ்வாக மட்டுமல்லாமல், “கடவுளின் மகன்” மற்றும் இஸ்லாம் ஷிர்க் என்று கருதும் பிற கொள்கைகளுடன் இணைக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது. எனவே, முஸ்லிம்கள் இயேசுவை தீர்க்கதரிசியாக மதிப்பது மற்றும் அவருடன் தொடர்புடைய கிறிஸ்தவ தத்துவார்த்த கருத்துக்களை நிராகரிப்பது ஆகியவற்றுக்கு இடையில் வேறுபாடு காண வேண்டும்.

உமர் இப்ன் அல்-கத்தாப் (அவருக்கு அல்லாஹ்வின் மகிழ்ச்சி உண்டாகட்டும்) முஸ்லிம்களுக்கு முஸ்லிம் அல்லாத மதக் கூட்டங்களில் பங்கேற்பதைப் பற்றி எச்சரித்தார், ஏனெனில் இந்த சந்தர்ப்பங்கள், நம்பிக்கையின்மை செயல்களில் ஈடுபடுபவர்களுக்கு தெய்வீக கோபம் இறங்கும் நேரமாகக் கருதப்படுகின்றன. ஷிர்க் செயலில் ஊக்குவிக்கப்படும் அல்லது கொண்டாடப்படும் சூழல்களைத் தவிர்ப்பதன் முக்கியத்துவத்தை இது காட்டுகிறது.

🔘மற்றவர்களை கல்வி கொடுப்பதின் முக்கியத்துவம்

கிறிஸ்துமஸ் அல்லது பிற முஸ்லிம் அல்லாத மத நடவடிக்கைகளில் பங்கேற்பதைத் தவிர்ப்பது, தனிப்பட்ட மதக் கடமைகளைப் பற்றியது மட்டுமல்ல, தாவா (மற்றவர்களை இஸ்லாமுக்கு அழைப்பது) ஒரு வாய்ப்பாக இருக்கலாம். பல மதங்கள் உள்ள சமூகங்களில் வசிக்கும் முஸ்லிம்கள், ஆண்டின் முழு காலமும் தங்கள் சக ஊழியர்கள், அண்டை வீட்டார் மற்றும் நண்பர்களுக்கு தங்கள் நம்பிக்கைகளை மரியாதையாகவும் சிந்தனையுடனும் விளக்க முயற்சிக்க வேண்டும். அல்லாஹ்வின் ஒருமை, தீர்க்கதரிசனம் என்ற கருத்து மற்றும் சில நடைமுறைகளைத் தவிர்ப்பதற்கான காரணம் போன்ற இஸ்லாமிய கொள்கைகளை விளக்குவதன் மூலம், முஸ்லிம்கள் தங்கள் முடிவுகள் கொள்கைமிக்கவை தவிர முன்னுரையற்றவை அல்ல என்பதை காட்டுகின்றனர்.

இந்த நிலையான கல்வி, மத வி��ாக்கள் எழும்பும் போது தங்கள் முஸ்லிம் நண்பர்களிடமிருந்து என்ன எதிர்பார்க்க வேண்டும் என்பதை முஸ்லிம் அல்லாதவர்களுக்கு புரிந்துகொள்ள உதவுகிறது, தவறான புரிதல்கள் அல்லது விலக்கப்பட்ட உணர்வுகளைத் தவிர்க்கிறது. மத விழாக்களுடன் தொடர்புடைய அழைப்புகள் அல்லது வாழ்த்துக்களை நிராகரிக்கும் போதும், நேர்மறையான மற்றும் கொள்கைமிக்க முஸ்லிமாக தன்னை நிறுவுவது மரியாதையும் நல்லெண்ணமும் வளர்க்கிறது.

🔘முடிவுரை

முடிவில், இஸ்லாம், குறிப்பாக மதங்களிடையே நல்லுறவுகளில், முஸ்லிம் அல்லாதவர்களிடம் அன்பும் நியாயமும் கட்டளையிடுகிறது, இது அல்லாஹ்வின் ஒருமை நம்பிக்கையை நீக்கவோ அல்லது சமரசம் செய்யவோ முடியாத நடைமுறைகளுக்கு உறுதியான எல்லைகளை அமைக்கிறது. கிறிஸ்துமஸ் போன்ற முஸ்லிம் அல்லாத மத விழாக்களில் பங்கேற்பது அல்லது ஆதரிப்பது - வாழ்த்துகள், பரிசுகள் அல்லது பங்கேற்பதன் மூலம் - இஸ்லாமிய கொள்கைகளுக்கு முரணானது மட்டுமல்ல, இஸ்லாம் ஆழமாக நிராகரிக்கும் நம்பிக்கைகளை ஆதரிப்பதாகவும் இருக்கலாம். இதற்கு பதிலாக, முஸ்லிம்கள் ஆண்டின் முழு காலமும் மரியாதையான உறவுகளை வளர்க்க, பரஸ்பர புரிதலை ஊக்குவிக்க மற்றும் தாவா வாய்ப்புகளாக இந்த தருணங்களைப் பயன்படுத்த கவனம் செலுத்த வேண்டும். இந்த அணுகுமுறை, முஸ்லிம்கள் தங்கள் நம்பிக்கையை நிலைநிறுத்துவதற்கும், பல்வகைமிக்க சமூகங்களில் ஒற்றுமையை வளர்க்கவும் உதவுகிறது. எப்போதும் வழிகாட்டும் கொள்கை: அல்லாஹ் சிறந்ததை அறிவார்.

[berandomness]

Monotheism VS polytheism is a mindset. A way of thinking more than any actual pantheon of gods.