Moving beyond the Monad and the Demiurge is fractured and full of false equivalencies. Take light and dark, for instance; it is fair to say that on a cosmic scale dark does not exist. Dark is just Not-Light, or Not-Enough-Light. Dark however does exist on the human scale. We experience it as a distinct phenomena and therefore it is likely worthy of worship in some way. It is also conceivable that some people might reverse the relations. Science has nothing here, it is unimportant whether light is the active ingredient or not and it is important to keep that uselessness well situated in your head. Light must be described by its modes and affections, not by its cause. Gods are a human relation.
This might be falling in to the trap of science though. Seeing gods as psychological phenomena, personifications. This must also be avoided. When creating gods you must not ask “what does it mean” but “what is it, what is here”. When we start at the result the cause can be inferred or not. It remains a tantalising mystery or not.
The plurality of gods can’t have a relation with the monad. Even the demiurge is remote from them, though related. Like a cat to a human. The monad is a plane with permutations, a field of infinite points, an unwilled geography whose only power is knowing itself. A god is a mountain on this field, or a tidal wave. Geological still, but not alien.