What do you think?
Rate this book
Elements of Pantheism
Do you feel a deep sense of belonging and wonder in a forest or by the ocean? Are you speechless with awe when you see the Milky Way strewn with stars? Do you find it hard to conceive of a divinity separate from the beauty of nature or the power of the universe? Then you are probably a pantheist. The heart of Pantheism is reverence for Nature and the Universe. It offers a vibrant alternative to theism and atheism, with a joyful and accepting approach to life on this earth. Pantheism dates back to the very first Greek philosophers, and was the religious viewpoint of many famous thinkers and artists, including Marcus Aurelius, Spinoza, Wordsworth, Whitman, Emerson, Thoreau, Einstein, and Frank Lloyd Wright. The dominant religious approach of the nineteenth century, pantheism is seeing a modern revival as the underlying world view of the environmental movement, of leading scientists, and of nature-revering paganism. This accessible, clear and authoritative handbook is the only available introduction to the history, theory and practice of Pantheism. "Surely one of the most extraordinary books written in recent years about the subject of religion." --Dr. Bill Bruehl, Amazon Books
110 pages, Paperback
First published May 6, 1999
171 people are currently reading
812 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
September 10, 2015
Pantheism is entirely naturalistic, without belief in supernatural realms, afterlife, beings or forces and compatible with atheism, humanism, agnosticism, universalism, and those forms of paganism that see magic and the gods as symbols rather than objective realities. In pantheism the universe or nature = god. All is one, it's not exactly god but as a synonym for non-supernatural.
After read this book, now i'm considering myself as a pantheist but i also comfortable to be called as an atheist.
After read this book, now i'm considering myself as a pantheist but i also comfortable to be called as an atheist.
December 26, 2020
I identify with so much of this book. Probably scientific Pantheism more than anything. Richard Dawkins says that Pantheism is sexed-up atheism. It may be so. I identify with atheism as well, but atheism says what you don’t believe not what you do believe in. Scientific Pantheism is poetic and meaningful. It describes very well what I believe in.
April 26, 2020
When I first came across the Pantheism title, my vibrations nearly exploded through the chair I was sitting on. For reasons of arrogancy I'm sure, I thought my general philosophy on spiritualism was wholly unique and yet here was an ideology that ticked all of my fundamental boxes. It is the outlook that "God" is merely the energy and manifestation of the universe while a "higher power" was as simple as the collection of literally everything. This works as the only logical bridge between science and spirituality, an umbrella understanding of which I felt every belief system could hold hands underneath, the bare minimum of inarguable concepts so tragically unexplored by the majority of thought.
That said, it was amusing to me that books on the topic existed. Pantheism is akin to a mathematical formula, in a way, or riding a bike, in another. Once it clicks, it clicks on a profound level. There's no further education or elaboration required. It is a simple core belief that you either understand or do not. However, as I developed my own branch of Pantheism (known as Janthopoyism), I realised it may be best for me to cover my bases and examine what other authors had been saying in this realm. And now you're up to date as to why I purchased this publication and we can proceed together.
First up, I am happy to report that Elements of Pantheism justifies its existence. It does a great job of detailing the history of the movement by dotting it out on the timeline of more famous religions from both the Eastern and Western strings of perception, working like a nifty (but brief) crash course on most other faiths. I was also interested to note that people have been killed for their Pantheistic theories before, that's harsh. Through information such as this, I was able to unlock various other paths to trawl through in my own time and I did collect new terminology to describe my stances better. For example, omniverse is a yummy word! Or that Pantheism could be argued as "religious" in a sense due to a profound spiritual connection we feel for the universal energy as a whole. Is that different from how others view everything? I've never really thought about that before. So, for the most part, I read the book like, yeah, totally.
But not always. Not always often. One major disagreement I have with author Paul Harrison is how he seems to be quite aversive against other religions whereas I accept everything as a part of our little planet's place in the greater evolution. His wording is carefully selected to not offend other groups whilst using scripture verses and historical knowledge to boast his impressive education. But, in doing so, he does come across like someone who considers himself the authority on the subject. Furthermore, let's be honest, anyone who quotes scripture to relay their point is dodgy at best, because you can find whatever you want within those texts. And when Paul says the Universe doesn’t have a mind? And when Paul says there’s no level after death? I mean, sure, man, maybe. Personally, I could believe that. But show me evidence or you're letting your own opinions muddle an idea which is not yours to determine.
My concerns fall even deeper when Harrison draws major comparisons from Pantheism to atheism. In fact, the back cover quotes Richard Dawkins who famously labelled Pantheism as "sexed-up atheism". I try to be open to all beliefs (or lack thereof) but I find myself biting my tongue closest to blood when it comes to the A-word. I understand that "God" has been compartmentalised (and often bastardised) by the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) but for atheists to argue with this one specific definition only perpetuates the problem. God is a concept which predates organised religion. Don't get stuck! And yet, nobody is more stuck than atheists. Even strict religions continuously evolve with new interpretations and denominations of their initial viewpoints. Atheism has crossed out the entire existence of something and stopped there forever. This has caused a big problem for me because while I see God in everything, I now have to be cautious with my use of the word simply because atheists can't handle it. The very utterance of these three-letters sends them into a malfunctioning frenzy and they switch off. You have to sugarcoat the understanding of God with terms like "universal energy" or "life" or "nature" just to get through to them and that sucks. Atheists are why we can't have nice things.
And this leads to my deepest issue with Paul Harrison, deeper than all of my issues combined. As the founder of the World Pantheist Movement and a staunch environmentalist, his own agendas seep through every page's pore. He's too certain in many of his reports with a heavy push for nature conservation, selling it as a part of the Pantheistic ethos to the point of sounding far more Pagan than he lets on. Certainly, I wholeheartedly agree with him on a personal moral level, but I do not believe this is necessarily a Pantheistic criterion. Someone who disrespects nature can still have Pantheisitc conclusions about the universe. For what is unnatural anyway? Are humans not part of nature? Could nature be evolving as self-destructive energy? Of course it could! Hence why it irks me that he's claimed the Pantheism name under his own analysis. Even the idea of a Pantheistic organisation in itself is uncomfortable. Is this book a sneaky promotional tool? And then when he provides a list of sacred dates for the "religion" I'm like... wait a minute, just who do you think you are??
Still, it would be unfair for me to claim that Dr Harrison has been completely biased here, for at least he does recognise the plethora of thought paths available (albeit fleetingly). He's done well to appeal to all spiritual beliefs without ever saying what you must or must not do, as this would be counterproductive to someone attempting to sway global consciousness. And, by the end, my own conclusions had been represented by casual mentions at least. In fact, some pretty advanced notions that I thought I'd invented were included here and I was like, ok, damn, maybe I'm not so brilliant after all.
Which is what I am most grateful for. It's that this book helped to place me in the exact spiritual point that I love. It's the one of exciting uncertainty, armed with more questions to electrocute between my neurological sparks. My deepest belief remains as one of fierce agnosticism and I begin to wonder where certain explorations may still lead me. Am I actually what's known as a Panentheist who believes there could be another level of God above the universal one? Do I believe in animism where all atoms could contain a soul? Or panpsychism where every atom has some form of consciousness? Hell, even monotheism and/or polytheism make sense to me because if you wish to personify the universe to better communicate with (and therefore manipulate) the laws of science using thought then that's the ultimate power! So what do I believe?? WHAT AM I???
Hence why I have delightedly concluded that there is more than enough space (or perhaps even a need) for Janthopyism amongst the crowded arena of spiritual philosophies. Pantheism is not going to click with everyone and so if you vibe with anything I said above, then I urge you to sign up to my newsletter. Together, we can unlock the mysteries of the cosmos! I know a lot of people have claimed this before, but I'm super cereal, you guys. Go to janthopoyism[dot]com now!
In regards to the book itself, it's probably best read by non-Pantheists seeking some understanding of the movement. If you're already pantheistic then you've most likely come to your own conclusions and this will feel a touch offkey.
That said, it was amusing to me that books on the topic existed. Pantheism is akin to a mathematical formula, in a way, or riding a bike, in another. Once it clicks, it clicks on a profound level. There's no further education or elaboration required. It is a simple core belief that you either understand or do not. However, as I developed my own branch of Pantheism (known as Janthopoyism), I realised it may be best for me to cover my bases and examine what other authors had been saying in this realm. And now you're up to date as to why I purchased this publication and we can proceed together.
First up, I am happy to report that Elements of Pantheism justifies its existence. It does a great job of detailing the history of the movement by dotting it out on the timeline of more famous religions from both the Eastern and Western strings of perception, working like a nifty (but brief) crash course on most other faiths. I was also interested to note that people have been killed for their Pantheistic theories before, that's harsh. Through information such as this, I was able to unlock various other paths to trawl through in my own time and I did collect new terminology to describe my stances better. For example, omniverse is a yummy word! Or that Pantheism could be argued as "religious" in a sense due to a profound spiritual connection we feel for the universal energy as a whole. Is that different from how others view everything? I've never really thought about that before. So, for the most part, I read the book like, yeah, totally.
But not always. Not always often. One major disagreement I have with author Paul Harrison is how he seems to be quite aversive against other religions whereas I accept everything as a part of our little planet's place in the greater evolution. His wording is carefully selected to not offend other groups whilst using scripture verses and historical knowledge to boast his impressive education. But, in doing so, he does come across like someone who considers himself the authority on the subject. Furthermore, let's be honest, anyone who quotes scripture to relay their point is dodgy at best, because you can find whatever you want within those texts. And when Paul says the Universe doesn’t have a mind? And when Paul says there’s no level after death? I mean, sure, man, maybe. Personally, I could believe that. But show me evidence or you're letting your own opinions muddle an idea which is not yours to determine.
My concerns fall even deeper when Harrison draws major comparisons from Pantheism to atheism. In fact, the back cover quotes Richard Dawkins who famously labelled Pantheism as "sexed-up atheism". I try to be open to all beliefs (or lack thereof) but I find myself biting my tongue closest to blood when it comes to the A-word. I understand that "God" has been compartmentalised (and often bastardised) by the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) but for atheists to argue with this one specific definition only perpetuates the problem. God is a concept which predates organised religion. Don't get stuck! And yet, nobody is more stuck than atheists. Even strict religions continuously evolve with new interpretations and denominations of their initial viewpoints. Atheism has crossed out the entire existence of something and stopped there forever. This has caused a big problem for me because while I see God in everything, I now have to be cautious with my use of the word simply because atheists can't handle it. The very utterance of these three-letters sends them into a malfunctioning frenzy and they switch off. You have to sugarcoat the understanding of God with terms like "universal energy" or "life" or "nature" just to get through to them and that sucks. Atheists are why we can't have nice things.
And this leads to my deepest issue with Paul Harrison, deeper than all of my issues combined. As the founder of the World Pantheist Movement and a staunch environmentalist, his own agendas seep through every page's pore. He's too certain in many of his reports with a heavy push for nature conservation, selling it as a part of the Pantheistic ethos to the point of sounding far more Pagan than he lets on. Certainly, I wholeheartedly agree with him on a personal moral level, but I do not believe this is necessarily a Pantheistic criterion. Someone who disrespects nature can still have Pantheisitc conclusions about the universe. For what is unnatural anyway? Are humans not part of nature? Could nature be evolving as self-destructive energy? Of course it could! Hence why it irks me that he's claimed the Pantheism name under his own analysis. Even the idea of a Pantheistic organisation in itself is uncomfortable. Is this book a sneaky promotional tool? And then when he provides a list of sacred dates for the "religion" I'm like... wait a minute, just who do you think you are??
Still, it would be unfair for me to claim that Dr Harrison has been completely biased here, for at least he does recognise the plethora of thought paths available (albeit fleetingly). He's done well to appeal to all spiritual beliefs without ever saying what you must or must not do, as this would be counterproductive to someone attempting to sway global consciousness. And, by the end, my own conclusions had been represented by casual mentions at least. In fact, some pretty advanced notions that I thought I'd invented were included here and I was like, ok, damn, maybe I'm not so brilliant after all.
Which is what I am most grateful for. It's that this book helped to place me in the exact spiritual point that I love. It's the one of exciting uncertainty, armed with more questions to electrocute between my neurological sparks. My deepest belief remains as one of fierce agnosticism and I begin to wonder where certain explorations may still lead me. Am I actually what's known as a Panentheist who believes there could be another level of God above the universal one? Do I believe in animism where all atoms could contain a soul? Or panpsychism where every atom has some form of consciousness? Hell, even monotheism and/or polytheism make sense to me because if you wish to personify the universe to better communicate with (and therefore manipulate) the laws of science using thought then that's the ultimate power! So what do I believe?? WHAT AM I???
Hence why I have delightedly concluded that there is more than enough space (or perhaps even a need) for Janthopyism amongst the crowded arena of spiritual philosophies. Pantheism is not going to click with everyone and so if you vibe with anything I said above, then I urge you to sign up to my newsletter. Together, we can unlock the mysteries of the cosmos! I know a lot of people have claimed this before, but I'm super cereal, you guys. Go to janthopoyism[dot]com now!
In regards to the book itself, it's probably best read by non-Pantheists seeking some understanding of the movement. If you're already pantheistic then you've most likely come to your own conclusions and this will feel a touch offkey.
January 15, 2022
Elements of Pantheism is a thin book written by Paul Harrison meant to explain pantheism to the lay reader or those not in depth with philosophy; it simplifies and condenses information so that the average reader can understand what Pantheism is best.
The word ‘pantheism’ comes from Greek roots with ‘pan’ meaning ‘all’ and theism’ meaning ‘God’, put two and two together and you get ‘All is God’ or ‘Nature is my God.’ Pantheist feel a deep reverence for nature. They believe that all things are connected from the bug that moves around the earth to the tallest tree and greatest songbird. What to do when nature doesn’t love us back? Acceptance. One shouldn’t impose their will upon nature as man has and will continue to do, instead one should leave nature be and let it run its course. For the pantheist nature is not evil, it simply is what is, as in it exists by itself and for itself.
The author mentions Native Americans who have a deep respect for animals and the animals they hunt; when they hunt they either ask for permission or forgiveness to eat animals. There is no demanding force like vegan activist who say you must not eat meat as a moral duty, but rather one should choose wisely what they put into their body and if they can’t live without eating meat than one should honor the meat.
Sometimes I confuse man and nature. Man, as Nietzsche said, is the most dangerous animal. I believe that man is morally corrupt and only few don’t meet this criteria, I am having a little trouble trying to find the connection between a fan and a piece of plant, or irrelevant living thing to the next one, and relevance in terms of relation to itself rather than its essence.
Overall this is a nice simple book on pantheism that I would highly either recommend or have you think about.
The word ‘pantheism’ comes from Greek roots with ‘pan’ meaning ‘all’ and theism’ meaning ‘God’, put two and two together and you get ‘All is God’ or ‘Nature is my God.’ Pantheist feel a deep reverence for nature. They believe that all things are connected from the bug that moves around the earth to the tallest tree and greatest songbird. What to do when nature doesn’t love us back? Acceptance. One shouldn’t impose their will upon nature as man has and will continue to do, instead one should leave nature be and let it run its course. For the pantheist nature is not evil, it simply is what is, as in it exists by itself and for itself.
The author mentions Native Americans who have a deep respect for animals and the animals they hunt; when they hunt they either ask for permission or forgiveness to eat animals. There is no demanding force like vegan activist who say you must not eat meat as a moral duty, but rather one should choose wisely what they put into their body and if they can’t live without eating meat than one should honor the meat.
Sometimes I confuse man and nature. Man, as Nietzsche said, is the most dangerous animal. I believe that man is morally corrupt and only few don’t meet this criteria, I am having a little trouble trying to find the connection between a fan and a piece of plant, or irrelevant living thing to the next one, and relevance in terms of relation to itself rather than its essence.
Overall this is a nice simple book on pantheism that I would highly either recommend or have you think about.
May 2, 2015
Nature is my church
This has been my religion for a while, though I never called it such. I dabbled in Wicca and Buddhism, but they never seemed like a perfect fit. I would describe my belief system as pantheism, with some pagan and Buddhist practices.
This has been my religion for a while, though I never called it such. I dabbled in Wicca and Buddhism, but they never seemed like a perfect fit. I would describe my belief system as pantheism, with some pagan and Buddhist practices.
June 14, 2016
This is the book I've been searching for, for so long! It will change the way you think about life, nature, the universe and how it all works. Very mind expanding, short and concise and to the point so it is understandable by a wide range of readers. I am so glad I own it!
October 10, 2017
Liked the book, not giving it a 5 star just because it was not what I was looking for. It might be what others may be looking for. I was more interested in the depth of how pantheism works subjectively but instead it details how it all started and the mechanisms of the so called “way of living”.
It doesn’t go deep into the universal Truth of the world and human mind.
It doesn’t go deep into the universal Truth of the world and human mind.
December 14, 2020
I think this is a nice little book that delivers on its basic promise: provide a short introduction to the pantheistic views. I do not think it is and adequate book for someone who does not feel already some sense of wonder or reverence towards the Universe. Instead, I believe it is good short introduction for those who do and want to know more about what pantheism is.
Read
May 5, 2021Excellent book about the foundation of a what the pantheist Albert Einstein would refer to as a cosmic religion. I wrote out my understanding of pantheism after reading this book here:
https://www.beholdarcana.com/pantheism/
I also recorded some videos about it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b1kH...
https://www.beholdarcana.com/pantheism/
I also recorded some videos about it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b1kH...
August 20, 2024
Pretty good intro to pantheism. Can be a bit boring but good detail and interesting
April 17, 2018
Fascinating book, Don’t think I have ever highlighted, underlined and made margin notes as much in any other book.
I thought I was a Pantheist, but apparently not. The High Priest has spoken and one of the drawbacks of this book is that it is, just like many books describing religions, quite specific about what makes a Pantheist … and what does not ! The author makes many “pronouncements” on what you have to believe to be considered a Pantheist, and statements on science throughout the book, some of which he could not possibly defend in the light of quantum science, which shows that, as several scientists have been credited with saying,"Not only is the universe stranger than we think, it is stranger than we can think." For example, on page 45 he says, “In the Universe there are no galactic neurones, no stellar data banks thinking collective thoughts”. Really ? You know this absolutely ? This is the problem. The author of this book thinks science has reached its apex and will discover nothing more.
My problem is that Pantheists as depicted by this author seem to have chucked out the baby with the bathwater. In their race to denigrate conventional religion, they have tried too hard to eliminate the “supernatural” and so, for me, their god is too small. In my opinion there is no such thing as the supernatural. There is only the natural, some of which we don’t yet understand. Also, it is all very well to revere the Universe, but surely it is more logical to revere that which brought the Universe into being. There is only one candidate for this role in my opinion. Pure energy.
The law of the conservation of energy states that, “Energy can be neither created nor destroyed. It can only change its form”. Thus, there is only one thing that has never been created, and which will never be destroyed, and thus is immortal. That is Energy. But, beautifully, energy can change its form, which makes pretty much anything possible.
If you reduce all matter to its most basic component, the atoms reduce to protons, neutrons, etc, these reduce to smaller particles and so on until you reach the Absolute which forms every other particle, atom and material thing. Pure Energy.
Thus, to paraphrase the Bible, “In the beginning was the Energy, and the Energy was God”. The Immortal Energy somehow exploded in the Big Bang and changed its form into …… The Universe and everything in it. This to me is much more worthy of reverence than the Universe itself.
And of course, if this Primal Energy is capable of changing form into the Universe and everything in it, then really …. nothing is impossible for it to change its form into. All things are possible.
So, because I take this reverence to a stage further than the Pantheists, I guess I am not a Pantheist … at least not in the “theology” of Paul Harrison.
But what am I ?
I thought I was a Pantheist, but apparently not. The High Priest has spoken and one of the drawbacks of this book is that it is, just like many books describing religions, quite specific about what makes a Pantheist … and what does not ! The author makes many “pronouncements” on what you have to believe to be considered a Pantheist, and statements on science throughout the book, some of which he could not possibly defend in the light of quantum science, which shows that, as several scientists have been credited with saying,"Not only is the universe stranger than we think, it is stranger than we can think." For example, on page 45 he says, “In the Universe there are no galactic neurones, no stellar data banks thinking collective thoughts”. Really ? You know this absolutely ? This is the problem. The author of this book thinks science has reached its apex and will discover nothing more.
My problem is that Pantheists as depicted by this author seem to have chucked out the baby with the bathwater. In their race to denigrate conventional religion, they have tried too hard to eliminate the “supernatural” and so, for me, their god is too small. In my opinion there is no such thing as the supernatural. There is only the natural, some of which we don’t yet understand. Also, it is all very well to revere the Universe, but surely it is more logical to revere that which brought the Universe into being. There is only one candidate for this role in my opinion. Pure energy.
The law of the conservation of energy states that, “Energy can be neither created nor destroyed. It can only change its form”. Thus, there is only one thing that has never been created, and which will never be destroyed, and thus is immortal. That is Energy. But, beautifully, energy can change its form, which makes pretty much anything possible.
If you reduce all matter to its most basic component, the atoms reduce to protons, neutrons, etc, these reduce to smaller particles and so on until you reach the Absolute which forms every other particle, atom and material thing. Pure Energy.
Thus, to paraphrase the Bible, “In the beginning was the Energy, and the Energy was God”. The Immortal Energy somehow exploded in the Big Bang and changed its form into …… The Universe and everything in it. This to me is much more worthy of reverence than the Universe itself.
And of course, if this Primal Energy is capable of changing form into the Universe and everything in it, then really …. nothing is impossible for it to change its form into. All things are possible.
So, because I take this reverence to a stage further than the Pantheists, I guess I am not a Pantheist … at least not in the “theology” of Paul Harrison.
But what am I ?
June 29, 2018
REREAD JUNE 2018
I still stand behind this being the best book on Pantheism I’ve ever read as well as it being my biggest recommendation to anyone looking for an introduction.
READ 2016
One of my favorite books on Pantheism. Harrison does a wonderful job of explaining the ideas in a way anyone can understand them while still giving the reader thought provoking examples. There's a lot of information in this small book, if this is a topic you are interested in I think this is a must read.
I still stand behind this being the best book on Pantheism I’ve ever read as well as it being my biggest recommendation to anyone looking for an introduction.
READ 2016
One of my favorite books on Pantheism. Harrison does a wonderful job of explaining the ideas in a way anyone can understand them while still giving the reader thought provoking examples. There's a lot of information in this small book, if this is a topic you are interested in I think this is a must read.
March 24, 2016
This is an excellent introduction to pantheism. It provides information about different pantheistic world views, shows how pantheistic thought has shaped different religious ideas, and explains pantheism in a concise and accessible manner. I've read most of the information on the World Pantheist Movement's website before reading the book, and still found the book to be useful.
December 17, 2017
Lots of good basic information about pantheism, but reads like a text book. Not exactly pleasure reading, but the ideas and philosophy itself could help a great many to find something that they have been looking for. Something that would make sense to them.
Read
July 19, 2016An important book for me at the time. A way-station between the fundamentalist Christianity I grew up in and the rationalist atheism I ended up in.
Read
November 25, 2020Nice overview. Informative. Author does go on a bit long toward the end of the book, even so i enjoyed the read!
February 8, 2021
An interesting book on the subject of pantheism.
However, it is very short, and towards the end it becomes very prescriptive
However, it is very short, and towards the end it becomes very prescriptive
October 24, 2020
Dành cho những người yêu thiên nhiên và vũ trụ 🌌
Liệu mình có cảm thấy bản thân chẳng theo tôn giáo nào; không tin vào Đấng, Thượng đế hoặc ai đó toàn năng chi phối định mệnh của mình hay thế giới; cảm thấy một số hoạt động tâm linh có phần thái quá? Song song đó bản thân mình có sự an lạc, niềm yêu quý sâu thẳm với thiên nhiên, cây cối và muôn loài khác. Nếu có tất cả hoặc phần lớn những điều trên, thì mình là người có khuynh hướng Phiếm thần.
Phiếm thần luận không phải tôn giáo, cũng không phải cách gọi khác của Vô thần luận, không có ai có quyền lực hơn ai và không có kinh hay điều răn cũng như tục lệ. Chỉ là một hướng đi cùng lòng sùng kính đối với những sự vật quanh mình, thiên nhiên và Vũ Trụ.
Sách dành cho bất kì ai quan tâm đến khuynh hướng này. Trên 18 tuổi thì tốt hơn để có nhận thức đủ vững. Nguồn gốc tên gọi, lịch sử, suy niệm có phần triết học và những tranh cãi của Phiếm thần luận cũng được nêu rõ (định dùng từ 'xiển dương' mà thấy kì quá 😅) trong cuốn sách này.
Đó giờ không biết thì cứ kêu mình đạo thờ ông bà hay là Vô thần, nhưng thật ra mình lại là người chỉ yêu quý chúng sinh quanh mình, kính sợ thiên nhiên (và cả "Hoàng thượng 🐱" nữa) mà không biết tên gọi.
Liệu mình có cảm thấy bản thân chẳng theo tôn giáo nào; không tin vào Đấng, Thượng đế hoặc ai đó toàn năng chi phối định mệnh của mình hay thế giới; cảm thấy một số hoạt động tâm linh có phần thái quá? Song song đó bản thân mình có sự an lạc, niềm yêu quý sâu thẳm với thiên nhiên, cây cối và muôn loài khác. Nếu có tất cả hoặc phần lớn những điều trên, thì mình là người có khuynh hướng Phiếm thần.
Phiếm thần luận không phải tôn giáo, cũng không phải cách gọi khác của Vô thần luận, không có ai có quyền lực hơn ai và không có kinh hay điều răn cũng như tục lệ. Chỉ là một hướng đi cùng lòng sùng kính đối với những sự vật quanh mình, thiên nhiên và Vũ Trụ.
Sách dành cho bất kì ai quan tâm đến khuynh hướng này. Trên 18 tuổi thì tốt hơn để có nhận thức đủ vững. Nguồn gốc tên gọi, lịch sử, suy niệm có phần triết học và những tranh cãi của Phiếm thần luận cũng được nêu rõ (định dùng từ 'xiển dương' mà thấy kì quá 😅) trong cuốn sách này.
Đó giờ không biết thì cứ kêu mình đạo thờ ông bà hay là Vô thần, nhưng thật ra mình lại là người chỉ yêu quý chúng sinh quanh mình, kính sợ thiên nhiên (và cả "Hoàng thượng 🐱" nữa) mà không biết tên gọi.
December 31, 2023
I will be totally honest. I mostly skimmed this just to see if Pantheism does in fact resonate with me. From the chapters that I did read it did confirm that this type of spirituality is the closest to what I feel.
Even though I have skimmed this book, I will definitely be coming back every so often if I have any questions.
I loved the section about dualist Pantheism as I feel that's the closest I feel to how we die. That the soul or our consciousness is not tied to our bodies, and could possibly exist in some other form of existence. Of course, I am slightly agnostic as well tho lol. So, I am always open to discussion and debate about beliefs and theories of different aspects of how our mind/soul exists. I love how Pantheism celebrates that and doesn't discourage you to find your own definition of your spiritual journey. As long as you are kind to all living things, and care for the Earth that has given us a home.
If you'd like to read about if you're possibly a pantheist. I would recommend this book as it has all the answers you need about this particular religion/spiritually.
Even though I have skimmed this book, I will definitely be coming back every so often if I have any questions.
I loved the section about dualist Pantheism as I feel that's the closest I feel to how we die. That the soul or our consciousness is not tied to our bodies, and could possibly exist in some other form of existence. Of course, I am slightly agnostic as well tho lol. So, I am always open to discussion and debate about beliefs and theories of different aspects of how our mind/soul exists. I love how Pantheism celebrates that and doesn't discourage you to find your own definition of your spiritual journey. As long as you are kind to all living things, and care for the Earth that has given us a home.
If you'd like to read about if you're possibly a pantheist. I would recommend this book as it has all the answers you need about this particular religion/spiritually.
Read
May 13, 2021Elements of Pantheism by Paul Harrison is an attempt to change the definition of pantheism itself.Pantheism is discovering the Divine in nature .When Divine is discovered in nature,the Universe become God.But this is not happening here.If there is Divine in me ,who am a part of nature, I must exist even after my death.Harrison says elements of my body would exist, not me.This means he considers me a composite of elements.He must clarify is Consciousness a product of bio- chemical reactions in human brain?No answer.So his pantheism is just NATURISM.I don't agree with him.
November 29, 2022
The pitch on the back cover says Pantheism is a 'sexed-up atheism' -- kind of a tacky blurb if you ask me. There are countless layers to Pantheism since there is no structure, no priests, no sins - the list goes on. May you be a Taoist Wiccan Pan-Worshipping scientist of the stars, you can consider yourself under this spiritual viewpoint in some substantial way. A great springboard for many interpretations.
DH Lawrence, John Toland, Giordano Bruno, Lao Tzu, and Einstein. (and even DC's Swamp Thing) - there are many...
DH Lawrence, John Toland, Giordano Bruno, Lao Tzu, and Einstein. (and even DC's Swamp Thing) - there are many...
July 10, 2020
I was looking for something to give me the basics on pantheism as I continue my journey of trying to find a religious “home” and honestly, this was that and more. I may be biased because I just really identify with what was discussed in the book, but in just 102 pages, I feel like I have an incredibly clear picture of what pantheism is all about. So grateful for this quick read.
January 2, 2022
3.5 stars.
January 14, 2022
eye opening.
April 12, 2023
made me absolutely sob at midnight bc religion makes sense now
April 30, 2023
It is more like an introduction book about pantheism. It is nice and easy to read.
April 20, 2024
Well written! The author clearly explains the different types of Pantheism, as well as how it compares to other religions or beliefs without demoralizing other beliefs.
January 28, 2025
A pretty good, short book on what pantheism is. Only real problem I have with the book are a number of spelling and grammatical errors.
Read
February 8, 2025This is an excellent introduction to all forms of pantheism, thank you Paul Harrison.
April 22, 2012
This was my first book on pantheism, and I am a bit disappointed. This is an introduction and history as the author, by all means, promotes it as. After reading it, I am able to express the difference and similarities between several systems that I have been more or less attracted to. However, the author writes only about the agreeable and easy aspects but never take his arguments into the conclusions that might be challenged. Alas, the book is overly simplistic, I guess for feel-good's sake.
Most of the arguments seem reasonably coherent, at least at this introduction level and on only 100 pages. However, in the chapter on ethics, the author makes several assertions that require some arguments (e.g. asserting human positive rights, p.67), and at least one outright logical fallacy (e.g. appeal to nature, regarding how chimpanzees eat meat which therefore is "natural" (whatever that means -- non-human?) which therefore is claimed to be right, p.63). Sure, the author does write about some to describe some variants of pantheism rather than committing to them. However, they do make it easy to question the coherence and validity of the philosophy.
While I do sympathize with most of the points and conclusions the author makes, I would prefer more rigor on the fundamentals and would prefer the handwavy, feel-good but easy to dispute, sometimes even refute, arguments to be left out.
Still, it helped me established the borders and a vocabulary on the subject. Now I hope that Pantheism: A Non-Theistic Concept of Deity will suit my taste better.
Most of the arguments seem reasonably coherent, at least at this introduction level and on only 100 pages. However, in the chapter on ethics, the author makes several assertions that require some arguments (e.g. asserting human positive rights, p.67), and at least one outright logical fallacy (e.g. appeal to nature, regarding how chimpanzees eat meat which therefore is "natural" (whatever that means -- non-human?) which therefore is claimed to be right, p.63). Sure, the author does write about some to describe some variants of pantheism rather than committing to them. However, they do make it easy to question the coherence and validity of the philosophy.
While I do sympathize with most of the points and conclusions the author makes, I would prefer more rigor on the fundamentals and would prefer the handwavy, feel-good but easy to dispute, sometimes even refute, arguments to be left out.
Still, it helped me established the borders and a vocabulary on the subject. Now I hope that Pantheism: A Non-Theistic Concept of Deity will suit my taste better.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews