The Divine Multiplicity

The Divine Multiplicity: Understanding the Fusion of Being and Sign in Goddess Symbolism

As regular visitors to this website will recognise, at the Temple of Aurora we understand that the divine manifests in a uniplural form. With this idea in mind, recently, when I was reading Renowned Goddess of Desire, by Loriliai Biernacki I noticed the following relevant text:

“Now, the fusion of being and sign, which in normative language presents an incompatible dichotomy, is literalized in the goddess’s capacity to emit from her body a multiplicity of goddesses. Where this fusion occurs, we find a multiplicity ensues. Moreover, the notion of a singular goddess and a multiplicity of goddesses is in this context interchangeable. The twelve goddesses that arise from the body of the Goddess of Speech are both not different and at the same time different from the Goddess of Speech. Similarly, in the Devı Mahatmya, the demon fighting the goddess in battle complains he has to fight an army of goddesses. If the goddess were not a coward, she would fight him singlehandedly, alone, and not rely on the strength of others. As the goddess points out with her response, he clearly does not understand her relationship to these other goddesses. The goddess responds, ‘‘What other one is here? All are forms of me’’ as she then withdraws all the multitude of goddesses back into her body.”

Renowned Goddess of Desire, pg 126, by Loriliai Biernacki.

The exploration of divine femininity in religious and mythological contexts often reveals fascinating complexities, particularly in how goddess figures embody both singularity and multiplicity. The quote presented encapsulates this duality through the lens of the Goddess of Speech, who can generate a multitude of goddesses from her own being. This phenomenon raises intriguing questions about identity, representation, and the divine nature itself.

The Dichotomy of Being and Sign

At first glance, the phrase “the fusion of being and sign” suggests a tension between the essence of the divine being (the goddess) and the myriad representations of that being (the multiple manifestations or forms she can take). Normative language tends to categorise entities into strict dichotomies—where one often precludes the other. However, in the realm of the divine, notably within goddess symbolism, this distinction can be transcended. The goddess emerges not merely as a singular entity but as a source from which infinite variations spring forth.

This relationship illustrates that in the divine context, multiplicity does not dilute singularity; rather, it enhances it. Each goddess that emanates from the Goddess of Speech is, in essence, both a distinct entity and not different from her at all—they share the same foundational essence.

The Interchangeability of Singular and Multiple Forms

The quote emphasises that the singular and the multiple are interchangeable in this context. The twelve goddesses that arise from the Goddess of Speech reflect a complex idea in which the goddess embodies both the entirety of the group and each individual member within that group. This portrayal challenges conventional views that prioritise individual uniqueness over collective identity.

In the example drawn from the Devı Mahatmya, the battle between the goddess and the demon highlights this intertwining of the personal and the collective. The demon’s offence at facing an “army of goddesses” indicates his inability to perceive the goddess as an encompassing whole. The goddess’s response—that all those goddesses are forms of her—underscores a profound philosophical assertion about the nature of divinity: the many are one, and the one contains the many.

Courage and Understanding in Divine Representation

The demon’s view of the situation as cowardice reflects a misunderstanding of divine strength and representation. To him, fighting a multitude suggests weakness; to the goddess, however, it reveals the true nature of her power. Her ability to generate many forms simultaneously is not a sign of dependence but rather a testament to her formidable creative force.

Through her articulation, “What other one is here? All are forms of me,” the goddess dismantles the binary opposition of individual versus collective. This statement projects an understanding that the divine is not confined to a singular interpretation but flourishes through its multiplicity. The goddess’s ability to withdraw all the forms back into her body further emphasises the idea that while she can express herself in countless ways, they are all woven into her singularity.

The interplay between being and sign in goddess symbolism sheds light on a rich tapestry of divine femininity where multiplicity does not fragment but rather amplifies the essence of the goddess. In cultures that revere goddess figures, this integration of singularity and plurality challenges our conventional frameworks of identity and existence.

The complexities woven into these narratives invite us to reconsider our perceptions of power, representation, and the divine, recognising that strength can lie not only in isolation or singularity but also in the intricate dance of many forms emerging from one source. In celebrating the goddess, we come to appreciate the multiplicity of existence itself, illuminating pathways to a greater understanding of our own identities within the collective tapestry of humanity.