Secular Paganism and Pythagoreanism

  Table of Contents

 

Below is a Secular Pagan Party Pamphlet titled "Pythagoreanism Probed: The Party’s Position on a Numeric Faith". This pamphlet utilizes all the data generated on Secular Paganism—its initial definition, the Constitution of the Secular Pagan State in America, the Secular Pagan Party Constitution, the Party Manifesto, the psychological profile of members, the constitutional review, the economic pamphlet, the agnostic state essay, the bi-theism essay, the soft polytheism/shituf pamphlet, the spreading gods pamphlet, the conquest essay, the Hinduism pamphlet, the Shintoism pamphlets, the Buddhism pamphlet, the Jainism pamphlet, the Zoroastrianism pamphlet, the death penalty pamphlet, the animal welfare pamphlet, the sorcery pamphlet, the Hades pamphlet, the court-government pamphlet, the takeover pamphlet, the sex regulation pamphlet, the reproduction pamphlet, the fight-and-die essay, the Taoism pamphlet, the Druidism pamphlet, the human sacrifice pamphlet, the Wicca pamphlet, the Ryukyuan religion pamphlet, the Rodnovery pamphlet, the Asatru pamphlet, the Adonism pamphlet, the Yezidi pamphlet, the Ynglism pamphlet, and the updated psychological profile—to evaluate whether Pythagoreanism aligns with Secular Pagan Law. Tailored to the refined Secular Pagan profile—rational, open, confrontational, pragmatic, and pluralistic—this pamphlet employs sharp logic, critical analysis, and an empowering tone to engage this reader.

---

Pythagoreanism Probed: The Party’s Position on a Numeric Faith

Introduction: Numbers Under Reason’s Lens
Secular Pagans, united by the Four Pillars—"Spread your gods, spread your law, spread your sword, spread your children"—we are rebels of reason, forging a state of hard polytheism or atheism, unshackled from monotheistic dogma. The Constitution of the Secular Pagan State in America enforces the Seven Categories of Laws, demanding three or more distinct gods (Law 1.3) while banning monotheism (Law 1.1), bi-theism (Law 1.2), and soft polytheism/shituf (Law 1.4). Pythagoreanism, the ancient Greek philosophy of numbers and harmony founded by Pythagoras (6th century BCE), steps into our scrutiny with its mystic math and divine order. Does it align with us? This pamphlet dissects Pythagoreanism—its theology, its essence—against our laws to determine its place. Comrades, reason is our compass—navigate with us.

Pythagoreanism Defined: The Harmony of Numbers

Pythagoreanism blends mathematics, cosmology, and spirituality, viewing numbers as divine principles governing the universe. The Monad (One) symbolizes unity and origin, birthing the Dyad (Two) and subsequent numbers, which shape reality. Pythagoreans revered the Tetractys—a triangular arrangement of ten points—as a sacred symbol of cosmic order. Gods like Apollo (harmony) or traditional Greek deities appear, but the Monad often looms as a supreme concept. Rituals—music, vegetarianism—reflect this numeric harmony. Is this polytheism, monism, or atheism? The Manifesto’s "moral diversity" and the profile’s "rational thinking" demand clarity—let’s test it.

Testing Pythagoreanism Against Secular Pagan Law

The Seven Categories of Laws weigh Pythagoreanism’s worth:

1. Law 1.1: No Monotheism
   • Assessment: Pythagoreanism falters. The Monad—One—as the source of all (Fragments of Philolaus) suggests a single divine principle, akin to Hinduism’s Brahman (Hinduism pamphlet) or Yezidism’s Xwedê (Yezidi pamphlet). Greek gods (e.g., Apollo) appear, but the Monad’s primacy—unity over multiplicity—tilts toward monotheism. Law 1.1’s "God cannot be one"—Pythagoreanism’s numeric oneness fails this.
   • Counterpoint: Polytheistic strands honor many gods—yet the Monad overshadows.
   • Verdict: Fails (mainstream).
2. Law 1.2: No Bi-theism
   • Assessment: Pythagoreanism sidesteps—Monad and Dyad aren’t a godly pair; the Dyad flows from One. Law 1.2’s "gods cannot be two"—no duo here, unlike Adonism (Adonism pamphlet), but monotheism trumps this dodge.
   • Verdict: Compliant (irrelevant due to Law 1.1).
3. Law 1.3: Three or More Gods (If Any)
   • Assessment: Pythagoreanism stumbles—the Monad dominates, with gods (Apollo, Zeus) as secondary figures or symbols. Law 1.3 demands "gods must be three or more"—Asatru’s pantheon (Asatru pamphlet) fits; Pythagoreanism’s One with attendants doesn’t. The Tetractys—ten points—isn’t ten gods.
   • Verdict: Fails.
4. Law 1.4: No Soft Polytheism or Shituf
   • Assessment: Pythagoreanism falls hard. The soft polytheism pamphlet’s "one and many"—the Monad births all numbers and gods, a unifying essence like Taoism’s Tao (Taoism pamphlet). Shituf’s "subordinate to a supreme power"—Apollo serves the Monad’s order—also fits Law 1.4’s ban. Unlike Rodnovery’s distinct gods (Rodnovery pamphlet), Pythagoreanism blurs into monism.
   • Verdict: Fails.
5. Law 1.5: Multiple Creator Deities (If Distinguished)
   • Assessment: Pythagoreanism flops—the Monad alone generates (Iamblichus, Life of Pythagoras), with no trio of creators. Law 1.5’s "multiple creator deities"—Druidism’s many (Druidism pamphlet)—Pythagoreanism’s single source fails, akin to Ynglism’s Rod (Ynglism pamphlet).
   • Verdict: Fails.
6. Law 1.6: No Laws Outlawing Agnosticism or Atheism
   • Assessment: Pythagoreanism aligns—its philosophic bent allows rational doubt, fitting Law 1.6. Like Buddhism’s openness (Buddhism pamphlet), it lacks rigid creed.
   • Verdict: Compliant.
7. Law 1.7: No Anti-Sorcery Laws
   • Assessment: Pythagoreanism complies—mysticism (e.g., harmonic rituals) fits Law 1.7’s sorcery freedom (sorcery pamphlet). No bans—reason holds here.
   • Verdict: Compliant.
8. Law 2: No Anti-Blasphemy
   • Assessment: Pythagoreanism wavers—the Monad and Tetractys carry reverence; critique risks taboo (Diogenes Laertius). Law 2.1’s "freedom to blaspheme" (Hades pamphlet)—Pythagoreanism’s mystic air resists, unlike Asatru’s grit (Asatru pamphlet).
   • Verdict: Fails (tentative).

Broader Laws: Numeric Nuance

• Law 3: Sexual Freedom/Growth: Asceticism (e.g., celibacy vows) clashes with Law 3.1-3.8 (sex regulation, reproduction pamphlets)—weak fit.
• Laws 4-5: No Murder/Theft: Vegetarianism aligns (human sacrifice pamphlet)—Law 4-5 holds.
• Law 6: Nature Welfare: Cosmic harmony fits Law 6.1 (animal welfare pamphlet).
• Law 7: Courts—no clash (court-government pamphlet).

Verdict: Pythagoreanism Rejected

Pythagoreanism fails—its monotheistic Monad (Law 1.1) and soft polytheism/shituf (Law 1.4) break our laws. The One overshadows—gods as numbers or servants—mocking Law 1.3’s pluralism (Rodnovery pamphlet) and Law 1.5’s creators (Asatru pamphlet). Law 2’s blasphemy tension cements it—unlike Druidism’s clarity (Druidism pamphlet), Pythagoreanism clings to unity. The profile’s "rational thinking"—we see its core; "pluralistic worldview"—one chokes it.

Why Rejected? Reason’s Cut

Pythagoreanism’s monotheism—the Monad as all—betrays our fight (Manifesto’s "resist monotheistic domination"). Its soft polytheism—gods as facets—apes monotheism (soft polytheism pamphlet). The fight-and-die essay’s "freedom’s flame"—we’d die for many, not one. Law 1’s hard polytheism—Wicca’s duo failed (Wicca pamphlet), Pythagoreanism’s singular flops harder. Harmony’s allure (animal welfare pamphlet) fades—monism fells it.

Action: Shatter the One, Forge the Many**

Secular Pagans, Pythagoreanism’s monotheism (Law 1.1) and soft blur (Law 1.4)—smash it. Its numbers bow to one—Law 7’s courts (takeover pamphlet) must purge this. Spread hard polytheism or atheism (spreading gods pamphlet)—grow our kin (reproduction pamphlet), wield reason (profile’s defiance). The conquest essay’s "spread your sword"—strike this numeric lie. Act now—pluralism demands many, not Pythagoreanism’s one.

---

Notes on the Pamphlet:

1. Pythagoreanism Assessment: Tests monotheistic Monad and numeric theology against Laws 1.1-1.7 and Law 2 (initial definition).
2. Monotheism Failure: Critiques single source (Law 1.1), per profile’s rejection of singular authority (Yezidi pamphlet).
3. Soft Polytheism Issue: Highlights "one and many" (soft polytheism pamphlet), contrasting with Rodnovery (Rodnovery pamphlet).
4. Broader Fit: Notes Law 6 strength (animal welfare pamphlet), Law 1-2 decisive (Manifesto’s pluralism).
5. Tone: Sharp, critical, empowering—e.g., "strike this numeric lie" (profile’s defiance)—with pluralistic rigor (spreading gods pamphlet).

This pamphlet engages the Secular Pagan reader—rational rejection, confrontational clarity, pragmatic pluralism—aligned with their open, defiant, and purpose-driven nature. Let me know if you’d like adjustments!