When reading commentaries on Rebbe Nachman’s profound stories, I came across a shocking idea.
(Exasperatingly, I can’t find the exact phrase again, but I believe it appeared somewhere in Rav Levi Yitzchak Bender’s Leviat Hachen on “The Simpleton and the Sophisticate.”)
The source stated that polytheism and atheism are essentially the same.
The source presented polytheism is a rationalist belief.
This boggled my mind because I'd always thought of idol-/star-/nature-worship as mythology-based. In fact, Greek and Roman idol-worship is stuffed with action-packed stories.
Not very rationalist, right?
In contrast, atheism presents itself as dealing with hard facts and complex stiff science.
In a nutshell:
(Exasperatingly, I can’t find the exact phrase again, but I believe it appeared somewhere in Rav Levi Yitzchak Bender’s Leviat Hachen on “The Simpleton and the Sophisticate.”)
The source stated that polytheism and atheism are essentially the same.
The source presented polytheism is a rationalist belief.
This boggled my mind because I'd always thought of idol-/star-/nature-worship as mythology-based. In fact, Greek and Roman idol-worship is stuffed with action-packed stories.
Not very rationalist, right?
In contrast, atheism presents itself as dealing with hard facts and complex stiff science.
In a nutshell:
- Atheism deals with numbers, like carbon dating, light-years, temperatures, etc.
- Polytheism is rich with imagery and elaborate story plots
- Both are meant to explain the workings of the world.
The Bards of Science
As a child, I avidly read a watered-down account of Persephone’s abduction by Hades to the Underworld where Persephone unwittingly ate a few pomegranate seeds.
(And, never having seen a pomegranate before, it intrigued me why Persephone would eat the seeds of a fruit rather than the fruit itself. Later, I saw the pomegranate seed IS the fruit.)
Upon discovering her daughter’s whereabouts, Persephone’s distraught mother, Demeter, sought to rescue Persephone, but the swallowed seeds gave Hades equal ownership of the hapless young goddess.
And so it was decreed that Persephone spend part of the year in Hades (an event which the mythology claimed causes the cold barren winter/autumn — due to Demeter’s mourning over her daughter’s absence) and part of the year with her mother aboveground (which causes the world to revert back to its sunny, fruitful state).
And there you have a nifty mythological explanation for seasons.
That's just one example using Greek/Roman mythology.
Lesser known are the chaotic events popular in Welsh mythology.
Even fairy tales sometimes refer to European pagan mythology, such as Mother Holle and her magic feather pillow which, when shaken thoroughly enough, brings snow to the world.
As a child, I learned that people created these mythologies in place of science to explain the world around them.
It made me wonder who was the first to create these stories and didn’t that person realize he was creating a story from his own imagination?
How did he convince others to believe these stories and why was that okay?
After all, these entities don’t actually exist, so it couldn’t have been that the story-weaver had any evidence of the events or even of the personages themselves.
It made sense that the common masses trusted in these fantasies, but the people spinning these fantasies surely knew they weren’t true…right?
So how did it all develop?
(And, never having seen a pomegranate before, it intrigued me why Persephone would eat the seeds of a fruit rather than the fruit itself. Later, I saw the pomegranate seed IS the fruit.)
Upon discovering her daughter’s whereabouts, Persephone’s distraught mother, Demeter, sought to rescue Persephone, but the swallowed seeds gave Hades equal ownership of the hapless young goddess.
And so it was decreed that Persephone spend part of the year in Hades (an event which the mythology claimed causes the cold barren winter/autumn — due to Demeter’s mourning over her daughter’s absence) and part of the year with her mother aboveground (which causes the world to revert back to its sunny, fruitful state).
And there you have a nifty mythological explanation for seasons.
That's just one example using Greek/Roman mythology.
Lesser known are the chaotic events popular in Welsh mythology.
Even fairy tales sometimes refer to European pagan mythology, such as Mother Holle and her magic feather pillow which, when shaken thoroughly enough, brings snow to the world.
As a child, I learned that people created these mythologies in place of science to explain the world around them.
It made me wonder who was the first to create these stories and didn’t that person realize he was creating a story from his own imagination?
How did he convince others to believe these stories and why was that okay?
After all, these entities don’t actually exist, so it couldn’t have been that the story-weaver had any evidence of the events or even of the personages themselves.
It made sense that the common masses trusted in these fantasies, but the people spinning these fantasies surely knew they weren’t true…right?
So how did it all develop?
Astrological Myths and Science
But taking a moment to return to the Breslov view on it all:
Although my initial response was to ignore this shocking new theory of polytheism as a rationalist belief system like atheism, I realized that in any conflict of opinion, Rav Bender (and before him, Rebbe Nachman) would be right and I would be wrong.
So I started thinking about how it could be so.
And I realized that polytheism is simply the right-brained side of left-brained atheism.
Just for example...
Fact: Authentic unreliable astrology contains the hard science of astronomy.
The ancient astrologers were also expert astronomers.
Star charts from ancient Babylonia and Maya show extensive and impressive scientific knowledge of astronomy.
The top minds of ancient times weren’t necessarily superstitious storytellers.
In sheer brainpower, they equaled (if not surpassed) Einstein and all the rest, applying their genius to the hard facts of cosmic orbits.
And controversial as it is to say...Judaism actually acknowledges the validity of astrology — but forbids its use as misleading and detrimental to one’s emuna.
Relying solely on charted orbits and the like ignores the reality of Hashem’s Orchestration of those very orbits.
Furthermore, Hashem can change these orbits and constellations at will, changing one’s destiny on which the original astrological predictions were based.
Numerous examples exist in Torah, like Avraham Avinu’s astrological fate to remain childless or Moshe Rabbeinu’s downfall via water — which top Egyptian scientists of that time assumed this meant death through drowning.
(Note: Moshe Rabbeinu met his downfall by hitting a rock improperly to draw forth water, which condemned him to only see Eretz Yisrael rather than enter. We all know he didn’t drown in the end, but passed on via what’s known as a “Divine Kiss” — the most painless way to die. This is just one of thousands of examples why relying on even the most expert astrology is forbidden and ultimately useless.)
However, astrology does have its basis in fact and people could and did draw parallels — but that doesn’t mean it’s always reliable.
Although my initial response was to ignore this shocking new theory of polytheism as a rationalist belief system like atheism, I realized that in any conflict of opinion, Rav Bender (and before him, Rebbe Nachman) would be right and I would be wrong.
So I started thinking about how it could be so.
And I realized that polytheism is simply the right-brained side of left-brained atheism.
Just for example...
Fact: Authentic unreliable astrology contains the hard science of astronomy.
The ancient astrologers were also expert astronomers.
Star charts from ancient Babylonia and Maya show extensive and impressive scientific knowledge of astronomy.
The top minds of ancient times weren’t necessarily superstitious storytellers.
In sheer brainpower, they equaled (if not surpassed) Einstein and all the rest, applying their genius to the hard facts of cosmic orbits.
And controversial as it is to say...Judaism actually acknowledges the validity of astrology — but forbids its use as misleading and detrimental to one’s emuna.
Relying solely on charted orbits and the like ignores the reality of Hashem’s Orchestration of those very orbits.
Furthermore, Hashem can change these orbits and constellations at will, changing one’s destiny on which the original astrological predictions were based.
Numerous examples exist in Torah, like Avraham Avinu’s astrological fate to remain childless or Moshe Rabbeinu’s downfall via water — which top Egyptian scientists of that time assumed this meant death through drowning.
(Note: Moshe Rabbeinu met his downfall by hitting a rock improperly to draw forth water, which condemned him to only see Eretz Yisrael rather than enter. We all know he didn’t drown in the end, but passed on via what’s known as a “Divine Kiss” — the most painless way to die. This is just one of thousands of examples why relying on even the most expert astrology is forbidden and ultimately useless.)
However, astrology does have its basis in fact and people could and did draw parallels — but that doesn’t mean it’s always reliable.
Combining Science with Mazal
Likewise, as a different example, ibuprofen will often (though not always) reduce pain and swelling.
Meteorology often (though not always) provides an accurate weather report for the next day.
Ultrasounds often (though not always) correctly portray the appearance and weight of an unborn baby.
And they can also cause harm.
Some people suffer serious side effects from ibuprofen, even when taken properly.
You may prepare for a promised sunny day only to get caught in a chilly downpour.
Ultrasound predictions (that later proved false) of deformed babies have caused unnecessary anguish and abortions.
(These are maybe not the best examples because practicing astrology is forbidden, but pain killers, weather reports, and ultrasounds are permitted. My point is that they are all based on science which is often true, but not infallible and never override Hashem’s Mastery over the world.)
Meteorology often (though not always) provides an accurate weather report for the next day.
Ultrasounds often (though not always) correctly portray the appearance and weight of an unborn baby.
And they can also cause harm.
Some people suffer serious side effects from ibuprofen, even when taken properly.
You may prepare for a promised sunny day only to get caught in a chilly downpour.
Ultrasound predictions (that later proved false) of deformed babies have caused unnecessary anguish and abortions.
(These are maybe not the best examples because practicing astrology is forbidden, but pain killers, weather reports, and ultrasounds are permitted. My point is that they are all based on science which is often true, but not infallible and never override Hashem’s Mastery over the world.)
Harry Potter & The Deathly Greenhouse Gases
Maat Mons: An imaginary volcano covered in lava located on Venus and based on absolutely NO EVIDENCE whatsoever. Yet it still has its own Wikipedia page. Just like Persephone and Harry Potter. While researching Venus, it shocked me to discover that so much of what I’d been taught as fact lacked absolutely no basis in reality.
I mean NONE.
For example, I’d always heard that Venus is a hive of volcanic activity.
I assumed that scientists had somehow discovered actual volcanoes or lava or clouds of volcanic ash.
Nope!
The only reason why scientists decided that Venus is rife with volcanic activity is because radar imaging revealed the Venusian surface to be relatively smooth.
This actually indicates that Venus could be a young planet as older planets tend to be pocked with erosion and meteor craters.
But for some reason (cough, anti-Velikovsky sentiment? cough!), scientists leaped to the conclusion that Venus is actually an ancient planet that "renews" its surface.
Yet how can a surface be renewed, geologically speaking?
Lots o’ lava! From this completely evidence-less assumption, scores of art portraying a volcanic lava-flooded Venusian surface decorate science books and magazines reporting on Venus.
And one you have a completely imaginary image, you’re crossing the line into mythology.
Sure, many times the art is captioned with the following: An artist’s perspective of what [fill-in-the-blank] might look like.
But people view the image as based on fact.
The image is in place of the photograph we don’t have…allegedly based on scientific knowledge.
At least, that’s the assumption.
Furthermore, celebrity scientists like to hypothesize Venus once housed a lush, hospitable environment…until evil greenhouse gases appeared and transformed Venus into the hostile deadly environment we see today! Muwahahahaha…
Sort of like how the evil Dementors appeared and cast a gloomy chill mist across the UK. (Until Harry Potter and his pals managed repel them with a really strong Patronus spell and destroy all Voldemort’s Horcruxes. Forget about sending a space mission…how can we get an anti-greenhouse-gas Patronus to Venus?)
But at least they admit it’s a hypothesis.
Imagine how I felt when reading a science magazine in which the writer described a formerly lush, verdant Venus as a statement of fact.
That is for sure crossing the boundary into mythology!
No proof whatsoever of a formerly lush 'n' verdant Venus...NONE. ZERO.
But he states it as a fact, not even bothering to say "assume" or "theory" or "perhaps."
So now you’ve got this whole imaginary backdrop with the basic story plot:
“Once upon a time, the Land of Venus was a lush, verdant paradise until one day, evil greenhouse gases appeared and destroyed the Eden-like kingdom…”
All you need are dementors, centaurs, and goddesses, and you’re all set for a new tale of scientific mythology.
I mean NONE.
For example, I’d always heard that Venus is a hive of volcanic activity.
I assumed that scientists had somehow discovered actual volcanoes or lava or clouds of volcanic ash.
Nope!
The only reason why scientists decided that Venus is rife with volcanic activity is because radar imaging revealed the Venusian surface to be relatively smooth.
This actually indicates that Venus could be a young planet as older planets tend to be pocked with erosion and meteor craters.
But for some reason (cough, anti-Velikovsky sentiment? cough!), scientists leaped to the conclusion that Venus is actually an ancient planet that "renews" its surface.
Yet how can a surface be renewed, geologically speaking?
Lots o’ lava! From this completely evidence-less assumption, scores of art portraying a volcanic lava-flooded Venusian surface decorate science books and magazines reporting on Venus.
And one you have a completely imaginary image, you’re crossing the line into mythology.
Sure, many times the art is captioned with the following: An artist’s perspective of what [fill-in-the-blank] might look like.
But people view the image as based on fact.
The image is in place of the photograph we don’t have…allegedly based on scientific knowledge.
At least, that’s the assumption.
Furthermore, celebrity scientists like to hypothesize Venus once housed a lush, hospitable environment…until evil greenhouse gases appeared and transformed Venus into the hostile deadly environment we see today! Muwahahahaha…
Sort of like how the evil Dementors appeared and cast a gloomy chill mist across the UK. (Until Harry Potter and his pals managed repel them with a really strong Patronus spell and destroy all Voldemort’s Horcruxes. Forget about sending a space mission…how can we get an anti-greenhouse-gas Patronus to Venus?)
But at least they admit it’s a hypothesis.
Imagine how I felt when reading a science magazine in which the writer described a formerly lush, verdant Venus as a statement of fact.
That is for sure crossing the boundary into mythology!
No proof whatsoever of a formerly lush 'n' verdant Venus...NONE. ZERO.
But he states it as a fact, not even bothering to say "assume" or "theory" or "perhaps."
So now you’ve got this whole imaginary backdrop with the basic story plot:
“Once upon a time, the Land of Venus was a lush, verdant paradise until one day, evil greenhouse gases appeared and destroyed the Eden-like kingdom…”
All you need are dementors, centaurs, and goddesses, and you’re all set for a new tale of scientific mythology.
Modern Mythology: Dinosaur, Evolution, and Climatology Myths
- Dinosaurs
This is despite the fact that scientists keep making new discoveries about them which alters or even voids previous theories.
And no, I don’t question their existence; I question the mythology surrounding them.
We don’t even know what they really looked like (reptilian skin or feathers?).
Lacking complete skeletons, museums routinely create fake bones for their displays.
And while we’re told dinosaurs went extinct when a large meteor hit the Earth, some scientists claim it was actually a virus that wiped out the reptilian (or is it avian?) species.
And look how many movies and “documentaries” we have that relate the mythologies of the dinosaurs, little of which is based on any verifiable evidence.
Just a lot of jumping to fun conclusions based on assumptions.
- Evolution
If you read any book or article on evolution, please take notice of how often UNscientific words come up — like "we assume" or "think" or "believe" or "theory."
If you read it critically, you'll notice at least half of the information relies on unproven assumptions or beliefs.
Fortunately for my beleaguered brain, I don’t need to detail this here because Rivka Levy and Matt already have (links below).
Suffice to say, we have the Neanderthal myth, Haeckel's embryonic evolution myth, and more.
- Climatology
Apocalypse movies portray our world flooded or frozen by global warming.
(And how does global warming cause global cooling? Well, remember those Dementors which cast a gloomy chilly mist over the UK?...just kidding.)
Documentaries show an aging ex-vice-president wearing badly applied makeup who weaves a whole mythology about global warming and its greenhouse gases (which likely originate from Slytherin's House, just like all the other evil guys).
Knowledge through Torah
Anyway, our tzaddikim proved right once again. Despite my previous assumption, atheism and polytheism are indeed merely different sides of the same heretical coin.
In a world without God, chas v’shalom, you need:
But in a world with God, you can just have the Truth.
In a world without God, chas v’shalom, you need:
- Persephone and Hades
- inescapable astrological determination
- Neanderthals and evolution embryos
- a volcano-spewing old Venus that was once a lush paradise
- imaginary horse evolution charts
But in a world with God, you can just have the Truth.
Clarification: The bulge on Venus labeled "Maat Mons" likely exists, as it was discovered by radar technology (which isn't completely accurate but still fairly good; see HERE for how accurate and affecting variables).
However, there is no evidence as to its color or status. Meaning, there is nothing to prove it's a volcano. If you read original source articles on it, you'll see they contradict themselves and also rely on phrases like "thought to be" "crude [i.e. not exact] chronometric tool" "indicates" "implies" and so on.
Also, if they DO find volcanoes on Venus, then fine with me.
(And some scientists see stuff on Venus that they think indicates lava flows and other signs of volcanic activity.)
But they've been saying there are volcanoes long before the 1991 Magellan radar mapping and presenting it as fact with absolutely no evidence of volcanoes. You can't present something as fact with no evidence.
However, there is no evidence as to its color or status. Meaning, there is nothing to prove it's a volcano. If you read original source articles on it, you'll see they contradict themselves and also rely on phrases like "thought to be" "crude [i.e. not exact] chronometric tool" "indicates" "implies" and so on.
Also, if they DO find volcanoes on Venus, then fine with me.
(And some scientists see stuff on Venus that they think indicates lava flows and other signs of volcanic activity.)
But they've been saying there are volcanoes long before the 1991 Magellan radar mapping and presenting it as fact with absolutely no evidence of volcanoes. You can't present something as fact with no evidence.
Related Posts:
Evolution is Not a Science by Matt
Yet Another Stunning Scientific Discovery: Heck, We Haven't Got a Clue!
The Venus Effect: Lots of Fun Insanity (Please scroll down to "Scientific Delusions" to read about the statement of Venus having once been "lush" and "verdant.")
The Kli Yakar on Parshat Bo (Please scroll down a bit to "How to Handle Threatening Stars and Planets" for an idea of how Judaism views astrology.)
Evolution is Not a Science by Matt
Yet Another Stunning Scientific Discovery: Heck, We Haven't Got a Clue!
The Venus Effect: Lots of Fun Insanity (Please scroll down to "Scientific Delusions" to read about the statement of Venus having once been "lush" and "verdant.")
The Kli Yakar on Parshat Bo (Please scroll down a bit to "How to Handle Threatening Stars and Planets" for an idea of how Judaism views astrology.)
Cool image from Hubble Telescope
RSS Feed