About a year ago due to my disenchantment with the direction in which the Deanic movement was going at that time, I declared my own separation from the movement. Since that time from the few persons I still had contact with within the movement, I found out that some of the most egregious directions which had been announced at the time l left had been rescinded. But still I felt no real need to re-associate from the religion. My alienation from the religion ( some of it justified and some of it my own fault) which had built up for a period of time was too strong.
During the past year I instead decided to study other religious traditions such as Shakti Hinduism, the Nag Hammadi Gnostic texts, and certain aspects of the Abrahamic faiths to see what they could offer me in replacement of the Deanic faith. I also studied them so that certain questions evoked by my involvement within Deanism could be answered authoritatively by answers provided by those faiths. One such question was how should the nature of matter be viewed? Is it the creation of an evil Demiurge as the old Gnostics believed? Was it a fall from the beatitude of Dea as the Madrians proclaimed? Was it to be viewed as the direct opposite to the spiritual principle or was it to be viewed as positively related to it? As a result of these studies I concluded that within religions such as Hinduism many differing answers are given which very often conflict with each other. And of course while I have learned to appreciate Gnosticism more, I still can not buy into the idea that the creation of the beauties of matter, space, time, and biological life is the work of an ignorant demiurge or that it is a kind of falling away from Dea. And again while all of these religions have things to say about reality which are quite probably true and valuable, all of them are patriarchal religions in which God is fundamentally viewed in most cases as masculine in nature or as male-like. I just can not relate to this.
Another thing must be noted. During the past year I absolutely refused to visit the main sites of Deanic activity in order to regain some peace of mind and I did did not read the Deanic Scriptures. However It was never my plan that I would never read them again. It was just that I could not bring myself to do so. About a month ago the situation changed. First I ran into a newer member of the Deanic community with whom I was pleased to make contact. Secondarily I started to read the Deanic scriptures again. In reading them I wondered whether they would hold the same fascination and amazement at their incredible intelligence and beauty which I experienced when I first read them probably in 2012. The amazement is still there and this confirms my earlier view that these writings are profoundly significant. Perhaps in the distant future they will be seen as as important to the West as the Devi Mahatmya became in India about 1400 years ago.
Now none of this means that I do not have problems with certain aspects of the Scriptures. Neither do I buy into those interpretations of the Scriptures which I see as potentially harmful. However on the whole I see the scriptures as being the grace of Dea and I believe that much good can be potentially found even in the most problematic aspects of them if interpreted with wisdom.
This for me means that I do not buy in to some of the ways in which they are commonly interpreted now. Thus I do not buy into the matriarchal, anti-male world view of earlier Madrianism nor to that of current day Feminine Essentialism. Thus I do not buy into the metaphysics that identify Female, Feminine, Spirit, as Dea whereas everything that is male, the masculine, matter, and the snake are seen as opposing Dea. Neither do I buy into Traditionalism’s support of the principles of social hierarchy, class and caste privilege, and inequality as be some sort of ideal. I do not reject the principles of human equality, justice, science, and at least some democracy which Rene Guenon so demonized. I believe instead that the Deanic scriptures can be instead be interpreted in ways that are in common to the best interpretation of most of the major religious traditions
So how do I define myself religiously now. What I see now is that in spite of my differences with many within the Deanic religious community, I still hold more in common with Deanism than I do with any of the other established religions. Thus I am still a Deanic if a very independent one. As to what adjective should be added to my own evolving understanding of Deanism, well I have some ideas but I will leave that to another post