Which is why there is no point going on about monism and then attacking monotheism. Makes absolutely no sense.
If one is a monist one has to be either an atheist (one substance which is not divine) or a pantheist (one substance which is divine or should be treated or observed as divine). And pantheism is monotheistic, one divine substance = one and only god = monotheism.
The Abrahamic faiths are also monothestic but dualistic. That is the difference from Zoroastrian Pantheism.
2011/2/27 Special Kain
Monotheism = there is only one god
Polytheism = there are several gods
Monism = there is only one substance
Dualism = there are two substances
Monism + monotheism = there is only one god and only one substance and they're both one and the same
--- Parviz Varjavand
Von: Parviz Varjavand
Betreff: Re: [Ushta] Monism vs dualism, monotheism vs polytheism - a clarification!
Datum: Samstag, 26. Februar, 2011 22:24 Uhr
You say you are a "Monist Monotheist". I thought that a Monist Monotheist is called just a Monist because you can not have a Monist Dualist, but I think that you can not have any Monotheism other than Dualistic Monotheism.
--- On Wed, 2/23/11, Alexander Bard
From: Alexander Bard
Subject: [Ushta] Monism vs dualism, monotheism vs polytheism - a clarification!
Cc: "Ali Jafarey"
Date: Wednesday, February 23, 2011, 10:50 PM
Dear Parviz and friends
Let's clarify one thing once and for all: Monism and monotheism are not opposites.
The opposite of monism is dualism (or even polyism), the idea that there are at least two radically different substances in the universe that are somehow mystically interacting with each other (although no dualist has ever been able to explain exactly how this would work since it remains to be explained through which substance the two communicate). The belief that God and Creation are two separate entities is a perfect example of dualism (where it remains to be explained how God interacts with Creation in that case). While making God and The Universe synonymous is a requirement for monism.
As you can tell, I'm very much a monist myself. I do not find any credible evidence of any second substance anywhere. If there is a soul it is very much a part of the body itself, as modern neuroscience has also shown to be the case (every emotion or feeling we experience corresponds to en exact physical reaction in the brain).
The opposite of monotheism is polytheism, the belief that there are several rather than just one god.
Needless to say, I'm a monist monotheist, which is another word for a pantheist (The Universe and God are one and the same thing and substance). The famous atheist activist Richard Dawkins calls pantheism "the thinking man's atheism"; in other words he considers pantheism the only credible religious belief of all. The intelligent choice we can make is between atheism and pantheism, anything else is basically humbug.
I agree with Dawkins 100%.
And I'm convinced Zarathushtra, the author of The Gathas, and his contemporaries, were pantheists too. I don't see any evidence of dualism in his worldview as dualism was introduced by the Egyptians and the Babylonians to control their agricultural societies much later in history. Which in turn explains why the Abrahamic religions are dualist and not monist like Mazdayasna.