A Bird’s Eye View on Veda – VII

Vedic Henotheism
The Cult of one in many
(Copy right protected by Dr. G.S. Tripathy)

In different ages there is a certain religious attitude where one comes across. As found in the Vedas this is the typical of the religion. And also it is the earliest and most characteristic expression of the spiritual idealism of the Aryan type of civilization. Hence the divinity is contemplated as the one in many and the many in one. Henotheism covers the part of this idea as coined by Max Muller. Resembling both monotheism and polytheism as religious cults, primarily, it has been defined as an attitude, when it describes the divinity as one, Henotheism resembles Monotheism. When it contemplates the divine as God or Goddess. It resembles polytheism with Gods and Goddesses. But both from monotheism and Polytheism, henotheism differs.

The deities of henotheism are not the same as the deities defined as in monotheism or in Polytheism. Though it contemplates many gods its specialty lies in that it asserts each as the supreme Being. There is a general devotional attitude towards the divine in henotheism and this attitude remains unchanged even though the deities addressed are changed.

Max Muller had his own idea on henotheism and Vedas go however further than this. In two ways they do so. In the first Place. One deity is identified with another by clear statements or different deities with one deity, for example Agni. Secondly, in the neuter gender as Ekam (the one) all deities are identified with one divine Entity – TAT SAT – that reality etc. In many names and forms, thus the Vedic theism is the worship of the one divinity. This may be called as Advaitist theism. This is distinguished from the general Advaitist -- philosophy which is known as Monism. This tries to prove the unity not of god only, but of all orders of reality.

Our attention is arrested here with two essential aspects of Vedic Advaitism.
For example, in the first place, let us talk of the subjective aspect.

In the philosophical sense this cult appears to be monotheistic if we consider the attitude of the worshipper. In a spiritual mood every Vedic prayer is born in which the mind responds to the vision of the divine which is a raying attitude of the worshipper. Though the contents of the vision vary, this attitude and this feeling remain constant. The point of unity is provided by this psychological factor.

The objective aspect follows in the second place

The cult would look like a simple polytheism if we were to ignore the subjective feeling and contemplate the multiplicity of forms. The Vedic cult would appear polytheistic except for the amorphous character of the deities in relation to the form if it is observed externally. To describe it as Polytheism it is usual for many orientalists. As a purely formal one, the description may not appear inaccurate. It is the spirit which is the chief point while it loses sight of the spirit and gives the cult its specialty.

Like polytheistic gods and goddesses, the Vedic deities do not combine in their character virtue or vice, goodness and evil in respect of spirit pertaining to one important difference between Vedic Advaita and Polytheism. They are all good and by the sage each represents the highest moral standard conceivable. In the Vedic deities not only in these no moral defects but there is no aesthetic defect either. All are noble and beautiful.

The secret of the identification of one deity with another is found here. The deities are many in forms, but they are one in spirit. If this spiritual approach, Vedic henotheism is an expression only.

A Bird’s Eye View on Veda – VI

Vedic Polytheism
(Copy right protected by Dr. G.S. Tripathy)

In stead of just the one of monotheism in heaven Polytheism finds many gods. In a synod or assembly of gods it believes.
Possessing a character of his own, each being is a well- defined individual. Each is distinguished from the others by sex, special attributes and sometimes even age. The divine power is not centralized in one person so far as Polytheism is concerned. Hence in this case the divine is oligarchic in place of monarchical.

In Polytheism, the evil points in one may be counterbalanced by the good Points in another and one god or goddess may be involved against another.

By one god, a monotheist may stand or fall. But a Polytheist may change one god for another if the former fails to satisfy him as he is having several gods at his disposal. Only alternative for a monotheist to his faith is heresy or atheism. The alternative for a polytheist is not the negation of god. It is the search for a better and greater god.

In other parts of the world like Egypt, Greece and Rome there was polytheism with certain differences in comparison to Indian Puranas.

But in India there is a higher Polytheism which merges in Pantheism. Here the devotee does not think of this god or that god where the Devine being is poetically addressed.

Though in the pantheistic form there are subtleties not found in the popular type, Polytheism has some general characteristics whether anthropomorphic or losing itself in Pantheism.

In the first place poetic theism is polytheism. Through poetry is approaches the Divine idea gradually. Hence in the glory of form and colour it delights and touches the human emotions from the sublime to the tender. As an essential factor it includes the aesthetic.

Being poetical, polytheism needs the poet and also the artist in order to interpret it. Being political in structure monotheism needs the soldier to fight the battle of the Monarch of heaven. While it is a usual feature of monotheism polytheism does not know any holy war at all. This is the second feature of polytheism.

In the third place, in accordance with its innate tendencies polytheism attempts to have its hold on the masses of people by poetical and artistic abilities. By the appeal of music and song by ceremonies and rituals as well as that of architecture, painting dancing and sculpture, polytheism tries to attract the common people to its fold. On the other hand a central authority has been built by monotheism that penetrates into the life of the people in toto. It is an institution with ramifications, often to the rigid exclusion of some people, if not all.

Like that of Poetry and Art, the appeal of polytheism is spontaneous. This is also unofficial and independent. On the other hand, in the compulsion of an institution and its laws, the appeal of monotheism is Central. The attachment of its followers has been dictated by the official pressure of the institution that maintains. This is the fourth feature of polytheism.

Non-Conformity is the part of the essence of polytheism where as Conformity is the fundamental condition of the existence of Monotheism. Polytheism is marked by variety while there is uniformity in monotheism.

By individual initiative and effort, polytheistic creeds have been maintained, as a rule. But polytheism seldom became a state religion. Without the backing of a state, on the other hand monotheism is hand to put it to support itself.

By making itself constantly acceptable to the people, it will appear, that polytheism, having no authoritative institution for its support has to exist. It has changed its forms very much as styles in art and literature have changed from time to time while remaining attached to the spirit. In order to escape extinction polytheism must be perpetually creative and vital. Egyptian and Babylonian polytheism disappeared from the face of the earth because they were not creative enough. Take an example. When it was superseded by Christianity Greek and Roman polytheism, however, had not lost its creativity. Christian Religion was fertilized by this creativity possessed by Greek and Romans. Christianity reasserted itself in the Pagan form during the middle period. And at the end of that period it brought about a Renaissance of mankind.

Monotheism has derived much strength from Orthodoxy and dogmatism. It sometimes led to the ruthless Persecution and destruction of heretics and infidels while polytheism has owed its continued existence to flexibility and the capacity for change adjustment. Between Hebraism and Hellenism Mathew Arnold discovered certain difference which make by thought over.

By strictness of conscience Monotheism is Characterized which can be termed as severe conformity. But by independent perception and expression with spontaneity of conscience polytheism is expressed in thought word & deed. This is the fifth feature in the series.

To the aesthetic appeal of the universe, the reaction of the free poetic soul, makes imagination of the chief vehicle of expression. Hence in concrete imagery it deals in a way which is symbolical, suggestive and representational. But monotheism thinks in terms of facts and demands with the firm discipline of the will leading to the acceptance of definite article of faith including chiefly a belief in heaven and a God in heaven having unquestioning firm faith on them.

God's creation of the universe is an historical event that can be definitely dated according to monotheistic theology – is the example they impose.

According to monotheistic Christianity, so is the birth of the son of god. As a mere figure of speech or symbol no true Christian has attempted to interpret the birth of Christ or virgin Motherhood.

On the wings of imagination, Polytheism files while monotheism is pinned down to facts. The whole structure of monotheism falls to pieces if they disbelieve one of the facts. But by such attitude, polytheism will remain unaffected. To historicity, it makes no claim at all. With facts and dates, it has nothing to do. Just has Poetry has none, it has no quarrel with science. Take for instance, it has been found by Christian theologians that the whole doctrine of creation will fall through as given in Christian/bible and the religion itself will not have any effect on the religion if Darwinism opposes some creation / theory in some purana take for example because historically and literally the purana is not understood, symbolically and imaginatively purana is taken at hand is the reason for this. It is not the part of the Polytheistic creed to have belief in the theory of creation.

A Bird’s Eye View on Veda

A Bird’s Eye View on Veda & Introduction – V

(Copy right protected by Dr. G.S. Tripathy)

Vedic Monotheism

Both monotheism and polytheism represent two distinct pattern of thought. The claim of superiority of one over the other is based on assumptions not acceptable to all which can be seen with a close examination of the cults. The difference between them is not that of the degree of perfection but of method only as it appears from the experience.

Some salient aspects of the two patterns can be considered as follows.

In the first place, monotheism is the belief in a single divine person or a divine idol. As a partial description of the cult, this can be defined. It is the one-ness alone that matters for some and not for all. But actually it is not so. In the technical sense of the term, for instance, One who thinks of the divine as` one impersonal essence is not a monotheist.

The one being the sages call by many names Ekam SAD is the famous Rigvedic verse quoted by many. This does not sufficiently realize that there is one being only which is the Neuter standing for the divine existence and not for a divine individual. Hence it is not the same as contemplated by the well known creeds that depict themselves as monotheistic. God is not a metaphysical essence but a person to the monotheistic creeds. In any way one likes, secondly, as a person the monotheistic divinity can not be conceived. For instance, in the practical sense of the term one who accepts a single divinity as mother or maiden is not a monotheistic. The divinity is not only a single person but also a masculine person to the monotheistic. Thus the distinction between monotheism and polytheism is not one of number alone but of gender also.

Monotheistic God can not be any kind of male person, in the third place. For example, he can not be a boy or a child. He can only be a father. If one were to think of the divine as a brother or any other relation one would not be a monotheist.

In the following verse, supposing, “Agni” means the ultimate being. Because the relations in which he stands to man are more than one. He would not be the typical monotheistic God.

“Agni I deem my father, my kinsman

I deem Him my brother, my friend for ever

-------------------- Rig Veda, viii 7.3”

The monotheistic god stands in a single relationship to man and that of father, is not only a single person and a male person.

Fourthly, the monotheistic God must be believed to be a very elderly person even as father. Not only a father but a patriarch also.

The monotheistic god can not exist anywhere as a Person, in the fifth place. Heaven is his special place. He is a father who is in heaven. Though heaven is his place of residence. He may go where ever he likes or wishes.

In other words, that monotheism contemplates the divine in heaven and polytheism contemplates the divine in the universe perhaps the most essential difference between the two lies here.

In the entire conception of life and religion this makes a difference. Heaven represents God a superior order of reality and a superior plane of existence to the monotheists. In accordance with this cult while heaven is sacred, the universe is profane. While God and Angels who live in heaven are holy, man who lives on the earth is sinful. While god is great the man is small.

In the universe polytheism finds the divine. Hence there is but a thin dividing line between the sacred and profane, the divine and the human the mortal and immortal. God in nature heaven on earth and among men have been contemplated by polytheism one.

Polytheism is attached to the earth. It thinks in terms of life and joy of living. But monotheism is attached to lives for heaven. It looks down upon earthly things. This is called paganism attributed to its traits.

Sixthly, a simple being in a god in heaven who is a father is not monotheism. Its God a patriarch is a ruler. It is the emperor of heaven. He also rules over the universe as its sole monarch from heaven. Hence monotheism is termed as monarchical theism.

In other words, the ideology of a monarchy is the ideology of monotheism. Royal abode is heaven. In his throne the emperor or king is seated. He has his emissaries and plenty of servants. His vicegerents are appointed by Him. To his heavenly court he takes the best of his subjects. But the worst of them are flung in to the hell, which is known as the dark prison house.

Unstinted allegiance and homage have been claimed by him as an emperor. Regularly enough to satisfy his royal position. The subjects must offer their respects often. In dread of him they must stand by bowing their heads with honour with a view to exalt Him.

Seventhly Satan is a sort of Anti god who is the perpetual adversary of the monotheistic god. Hence for the possession of the universe there is perpetual rivalry between god and Satan.

Monotheistic God’s wrath is directed against human beings when they are suspected of having constant touch with Satan.

As monotheism centres in a monarch, who is an absolute ruler. The most important thing in this connection is for His subjects to know His will correctly.

In his conduct on the earth, the divine will is the only guide for man. But how to know the will of God? to make His will known to mankind. He sends his messengers or prophets to earth at the right time for this. For making it prevail on earth as in heaven, those men are virtuous who bow to His will. Who disobey or defy are sinners. Prophets convey periodically the will of God to mankind.

To force himself to obey the will of God, religion, here is the exercise by man of his own.

In case of monotheism, the prophets are not universally accepted. This is the difficulty. Hence there has been acute rivalry between monotheistic creeds because each claiming an exclusive relation with the ultimate Being.