Secular Paganism and Shintoism

  Table of Contents

 

Below is a Secular Pagan Party Pamphlet titled "Shintoism’s Polytheistic Mirage: Why the Party Rejects It". This pamphlet uses 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, and the revised Shintoism inquiry—to explain how Shintoism appears polytheistic but is rejected by the Party due to its bi-theistic creation core and other flaws that conflict with Secular Paganism’s hard polytheistic standards.

---

Shintoism’s Polytheistic Mirage: Why the Party Rejects It

Introduction: A Deceptive Facade
Secular Pagans, rallied by the Four Pillars—"Spread your gods, spread your law, spread your sword, spread your children"—we champion a world of hard polytheism or atheism, free from monotheism’s chains. The Constitution of the Secular Pagan State in America demands true pluralism—distinct gods, three or more (Law 1.3)—and bans monotheism, bi-theism, and soft polytheism/shituf (Laws 1.1-1.4). Shintoism, Japan’s kami-worshipping tradition, dazzles with its countless spirits, luring us with polytheistic promise. But beware—this is a mirage. Beneath its crowded pantheon lies a bi-theistic flaw that fails our laws. This pamphlet reveals how Shintoism seems polytheistic yet earns our rejection, unfit for the Secular Pagan takeover.

Shintoism’s Polytheistic Veneer: A Surface Appeal

At first glance, Shintoism shines as polytheism incarnate. Its "eight million kami" (yaoyorozu no kami)—spirits of mountains, rivers, ancestors, and forces—suggest a boundless divine multitude. Amaterasu (sun goddess), Tsukuyomi (moon god), Susanoo (storm god), and local deities like Inari (rice) fill shrines across Japan. No single holy book binds them; no one god claims all power. The Manifesto’s call to "encourage the worship of three or more deities" seems fulfilled—Shintoism’s sheer numbers dazzle, and its nature-based reverence echoes our Law 6’s environmental care. To the untrained eye, it’s a polytheistic paradise, a potential ally against monotheism’s "corrosive effects" (Manifesto).

The Bi-theistic Crack: Only Two Creators

Peel back the surface, and Shintoism’s polytheism crumbles. Its creation myth, from the Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, hinges on Izanagi and Izanami—a primordial pair who stir chaos into islands and birth kami, including Amaterasu and her siblings. Law 1.5 demands: "If the religion distinguishes between creator and non-creator deities, there must still be multiple creator deities, not just one." Shintoism distinguishes—Izanagi and Izanami create; later kami govern—but delivers only two, not three or more. The bi-theism essay warns: "Two gods are not plural enough"—Shintoism’s duo fails this test.

This bi-theistic core is no minor flaw. The essay on bi-theism critiques: "If one god is more powerful… you really only have one ruling power with a subservient troublemaker." Izanami dies, leaving Izanagi to birth key kami alone, hinting at dominance. Or, if equal, "they may get into a gridlock" (bi-theism essay)—their early strife (Izanami’s death from childbirth) suggests chaos, not balance. The conquest essay demands "a substantially pagan society" of hard polytheism—two creators lack the "dynamic interplay" of three or more (bi-theism essay), risking instability unfit for our courts (Law 7).

Beyond Bi-theism: Additional Faults

Shintoism’s rejection isn’t just about its two creators—other cracks widen the gap:

• Ambiguity of Kami: While kami seem distinct, some Shinto theology flirts with a unifying "divine essence" (shinrei), edging toward soft polytheism’s "one and many" trap (soft polytheism pamphlet). Law 1.4 bans this—gods must be separate, not reflections of a single force. Unlike Hinduism’s overt Brahman (Hinduism pamphlet), Shintoism’s unity is subtler, but it’s a red flag.
• Imperial Distortion: The Meiji era (19th-20th century) elevated Amaterasu as a near-supreme deity tied to the emperor, hinting at shituf—"subordinating gods to a supreme power" (soft polytheism pamphlet). Though not traditional, this shows Shintoism’s vulnerability to monotheistic drift, alien to our "militant, polytheistic legalism" (Constitutional review).
• Cultural Passivity: Shintoism’s tolerance of Buddhism and secularism—coexisting without critique—clashes with Law 2.2’s mandate to "critique all belief systems." The agnostic state essay praises our "blasphemy as a cornerstone right"—Shintoism’s quiet reverence lacks this edge, unfit for our confrontational ethos (psychological profile).

Why the Party Rejects Shintoism

Shintoism’s polytheistic sheen masks a bi-theistic heart, failing Law 1.5’s creator threshold. The Manifesto vows to "resist monotheistic domination"—two gods teeter too close, lacking the diversity to uphold our "big tent of polytheistic and non-theistic ideologies" (agnostic state essay). The soft polytheism pamphlet demands "hard polytheism’s truth—separate, plural powers"—Shintoism’s Izanagi-Izanami duo, even with many kami, doesn’t deliver. Its occasional soft leanings and historical shituf flirtations compound the sin. The spreading gods pamphlet insists: "Spread your gods" with true pluralism—Shintoism’s mirage won’t suffice.

Our members—open, rebellious, pluralistic—recoil at this. The economic pamphlet adapts Secular Paganism to any system, but Shintoism’s bi-theistic flaw undermines its fit. The Hinduism pamphlet rejects Brahman’s monism—Shintoism’s two creators are a subtler betrayal, but a betrayal nonetheless. It’s no ally for our conquest; it’s a half-measure we must cast aside.

Action: Shun Shintoism, Forge True Pluralism

Secular Pagans, don’t be fooled by Shintoism’s polytheistic mask. Its two-creator core—Izanagi and Izanami—violates our laws (Laws 1.2, 1.5), its ambiguities flirt with soft polytheism (Law 1.4), and its passivity dulls our edge (Law 2). The conquest essay urges: "Spread your sword"—cleanse society of such flaws. Spread hard polytheism—three or more distinct gods—or atheism instead. Build a pagan culture that willingly upholds our Seven Categories, not this bi-theistic sham. Shintoism seems polytheistic, but it’s rejected—our state demands more. Take up the Four Pillars, comrades, and leave this mirage behind.

---

Notes on the Pamphlet:

1. Polytheistic Appearance: Highlights Shintoism’s kami multitude and nature focus, aligning with initial impressions of polytheism (Manifesto, Law 1.3).
2. Bi-theistic Rejection: Centers on Izanagi and Izanami as only two creators, failing Law 1.5, using bi-theism essay critiques (gridlock, dominance).
3. Additional Flaws: Adds soft polytheism hints and imperial shituf (soft polytheism pamphlet), plus cultural passivity (Law 2), for a multi-faceted critique.
4. Contrast with Hard Polytheism: Emphasizes Secular Paganism’s demand for distinct, plural powers (spreading gods pamphlet), Shintoism’s shortfall.
5. Tone: Antagonistic and urgent, fitting Party rhetoric (conquest essay, Hinduism pamphlet) and members’ defiant traits (psychological profile).

This pamphlet separates the Shintoism critique from the prior inquiry, focusing on its deceptive polytheism and Party rejection. Let me know if you’d like further elaboration or adjustments!