A bird’s eye view of Veda-XI

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

The religious experience is the contemplation of the Divinity in accordance with the conception of different sects and religions. OF contemplating the Divine not only in terms of ones own God but of everybody else‘s God. We find a religion _______ of the same type as Vedic Adroit.

As found in Vedas, thus henotheism is not a simple religious theory, but the symptom of a deep Spiritual experience. In the synthetic parl of the Avatar theory, the working of this henotheism principle is found in a very nice fashion. OF the same deity that all Avatars are incarnations only. The resolution of age long sectarian differences is the result of this. In opposition both Rama & Parsuram were Kshatriya and Brahmin heroes. But both are the incarnations of Vishnu in the melting pot of Avatar. Against Brahminism, Buddha was a rebel. Some of his followers tried to pose him as an Avatar which is totally wrong as Buddha was a reformer only in his him. Here the conflict of ages was composed but by acceptance not by simple toleration.

Including the Principles described as above, the success of henotheism as a religious cult is found to depend on the fulfillment of the essential condition only.

a) That the ritual should be in keeping with the idea of unity.
b) That the worshipper must bring a pure prayerful mind.
c) That the metaphysical basis of unity in diversity should be securely established.
d) That whatever deity he entertains should be conceived in terms of truth & goodness & beauty.
e) That the unity should not remain a mere abstraction but must find a concrete form in terms of social life, both internal & international.

To highly cultural concept of religion, Henotheism can therefore only apply as found in the Vedas. Polytheism is easily transferred into henotheism where this attitude Prevails. In different shrines, the worship of many gods becomes really the worship of God. In India, this has been the case.

We find that there are different attitudes from the examination of the different religious concepts regarding the Divinity that One religion can take up in expect of another. With its exclusive claim of its God as the only god, one is that of monotheism. Followed by Polytheism, then there is a method of accumulation in which all types of deities imagined at different terms by different people. They are allowed to exercise, fostered and entertained whatever influence they can on the religious life of the people. By the Vedic henotheism there is the method of spiritual synthesised represented finally. As the one Divinity there is no more hospitality to the God of another, there is no mere toleration but acceptance of another’s God as One’s own. It has been the Parl of mystic experience of great sages and saints at all times as the last is logically puzzling.

In the last analysis the henotheistic God is not jealous of other gods as all true worship is the worship or of God.

Geeta- the Adhyaya- twenty- third- sloke- says

“Though in an irregular or wrong way-even those dastees who worship other Gods with faith – worship ME”.

In its accepted religious sense, monotheism carries the imperialistic challenge of one social group against all the other groups while Polytheism is a federation of different grades of theism. By its Very logic, a plurality of monotheism creates a situation is which constant conflict is the rule of life.

To lie in henotheism as found in Vedas, this has been noticed the acceptance of one another’s Gods as the one Divinity through the spiritual effort and experience perfectuing the knowledge. As a powerful force in the spiritual life of India, this henotheism or Advaitic theism has worked in its comprehensive form though it is a special feature of the Veda.

There are some basic Principles of the Vedic Religion

Not so much the intellectual acceptance as the moral Conduct and the spiritual build, it may be said that the things that matters most, is not so much what one believes as to how one behaves with the different religious sects originating in India. With the spiritual discipline guiding life, the basis of religion is the moral law, then, of course.

A word cognate with form in English the common term for this law and this discipline is Dharma. The ideal form of conduct is Dharma. An older form of the term, meaning the eternal law is the Vedic theism which presupposes the existence of Dharman. For instance, Vishnu upholds the eternal statutes. President of the eternal Law is no other than Agni.

The Mahabharata has the root meaning of the word Dharma which says------

“It is called Dharma, because it upholds. In otherwords, Dharma upholds the creation.”

The great reformer Buddha (Karna Parva)(69.59) is slaked to the sentence above It is called Dharma-because is Pephols. ODIA Pua (son of ODISHA – the then Kalinga) has popularized the term in its PALI Form – “DHAMMA” signifying eternal moral Principle, unconnected with, and independent of , one’s faith in the Divinity. Whether theistic, atheistic or agnostic, the Dharma stands the fundamentals of religion by all religious order in ancient India that was accepted as the foundation of right living having the idea form of conduct. From the general outlook of a particular religious order, the contexts of Dharma are more or less taken for granted by the people from tradition. Their concepts in detail have been defined by the latter day leaders of religion as a rule. A comprehensive definition of Dharma in early religious literature would be very interesting to find having the basic principles that are believed to uphold society.

In Attarava Veda, such a statement about the contents of Dharma is noticed which speaks of the earth as upheld by Dharma.

The fundamental principles of religion according to Vedic ideal are as follows.

a. Truth, b. Eternal order, c. Consecration, d. austerity, e. Prayer, f. Ritual.

Truth: In religion, Veda Places Truth first and ritual last which is very important be note. In every age in the history of Vedic religion ungrudging supremacy has been conceded to truth. Like articles of faith there is nothing in this religion which is not without its special significance. Not to stick to belief in every age the problem has been to find out the truth is there. For the maintenance of the philosophical and spiritual outlook every period of Indian history has had its sage and seeker of truth wherein the freedom of their minds have been responsible.

As the essence of Divinity the truth has been described in Vedas. According to Atharva Veda, the Deity has truth as the law of His being Deity manifestation of truth is as for Rig Veda.

From a truthful life and true heart, prayer & ritual of the right type generally come out. The path of truth is the path of religious progress.

As for Mundak Upanishad, through truth Atma is to be realized.

In its moral sense truth is truthfulness. In a metaphysical sense reality and integrity are signified. Satya applied to conduct – it become SAT which is an object of search of knowledge or realization of vision.

Lead me from unreality to reality is the upanisadic Prayer. It is as for Brihad aranyak all uparisad.

As a metaphysical entity Satya is abstruse & mystical. The universe is united as man in the house when the sage of yajur Veda records his vision of sat. Knowledge passes like the information from one sage to another about an unknown land just like from one traveler to another. About sat and reality a traveller may remain silent with modesty who has yet a long way to go. At every moment of life, Satya is our concern, A state beyond sat and Asat, reality and unreality, the Vedic saga has contemplated. At the beginning there was neither reality nor unreality. As a value of life truth is abiding and ultimate. As For Rig veda, the universe is upheld by truth only. By asserting his spiritual disquisition, a sage of the unpunished begins – “SATYAM VADISHYAMI”-

Ethical aspect of Rita:

The truth is the first essential of Dharma; Rita is the second which is eternal order or Eternal Law. In modern times the word is obsolete. As negative of truth it has been used from ancient times, meaning literally disorder or Chaos. Rita is cognate with-truth in its moral aspect. AS being born in the beginning of things out of perfect spiritual ardour, Rita & Satya are spoken of by the Rig Veda.

Rita upholds heavens as truth upholds earth. The sage speaks of some of the offering of SOMA libation declaring LAW splendid by law which is truthful in action. Eternal order must be praised by us and we should think in a straight way.

Omission in typing is as follows:

In its moral aspect, Rita is wider than truth. As an ethical concept it includes gustice and goodness. It is almost synonymous with Dharma. Rita is spoken of as fierce and stern as it is opposed to evil as the opposition is severe.

Rita as cosmic order:- As essential part of the conception of the Divinity Rita, like, Satya forms like Guardian of law and has a wider implication than morality. For the immutable law of nature it stands for cosmic order. The universe becomes systematized and integrated By Rita only and it avoids confusion and chaos. As per Veda the songs of Rita is chanted by Gods only. Divinity is identified with Rita in one of the Verses of upanished. Rita leads to the triumph of gods over evil as on the moral plane. Hence on cosmic plane it Leads to the triumph of light over darkness.

A Co-ordination between moral law and natural law should exist. Good life is cognate with the cosmic law governing nature. This is the life lived according to Rita and moral law. Like the sun and the moon we will follow the path of goodness according to the Vedic saga of Rig Veda. From treading this path of happiness comes. Along the Path of eternal Law as per Rig Veda – so runs a prayer – “LEAD on Beyond All pain & grief.”

A Bird's eye view on Vedas-X

On Single Rita (The Ritualistic Factor)

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

It is in keeping with Advaita Character the Ritualistic factor is the vedic gagna, without any special applicability to the deity worshipped it is one uniform ceremonial unlike the Polytheistic or fetishistic ritual of course , as a rule. The ritual is the same whatever the deity be. In accompanying the prayer, the same oblation or libation is offered to one or many gods which may be mentioned.

From the ritualistic point of view between the vedic advaita and polytheism there is one important difference which is as follows. Polytheism has used plastic arts including sculpture where as Vedas have made music and poetry alone their media of expression. That the logical anomaly of identifying one deity with another becomes a formidable difficulty with the sculpture so thoroughly particularise as a deity.

Take for an instance: - the masculine Surya and Agni and the feminine USHAS are spoken of as EKAM – ONE in the neuter. Such identification can not be effected in visual arts. Hence vedic advaita identifies all deities with one essence in the neuter gender in as much as it substitutes one deity for another, can not possibly fixes the deities in to definite plastic forms. In the poetry of Vedas, vedic deities are visions but they are formless and they have received embodiment only. Concealed somewhere in the sky the female figure of a deity is imagined which is no other than USHA – the daughter of the sky. Like the bride decked by her mother who appears on occasions to mortals whom she favours. This is polytheism to which vedic advaita differs.

In accordance with the principle of unity in diversity the social grouping of Vedas takes place. The division of society in to four types is recognized by it (a) Brahmin (the man of knowledge), (b) the man of warfare and politics (kshyatriya), the man of industry and trade (vaisya) and the serving and working man (sudra). They are all the limbs of the cosmic being as it is said. They are the mouths, arms, thighs, and feet, of purusha respectively. They are all the same in spirit all though they are all separated by quality and occupation in philosophical language. It is social advaita which is another example of the many in one.

In respect of members of other religion, equally interesting is the social application of the principle of vedic advaita.

The Hymn recognizes the variety of man and the creeds on the earth. With various religious rites the earth bears people of speaking varied languages according to the places of abode.

Between Arya and Dasa or Dasyu in the Vedas we find the anti thesis which is started as one between enlightenment and ignorance, goodness and wickedness, lawful life and lawlessness. Unlike Buddhism the veda preaches open battle against all forces of evil.

As a fighter, Indra is the supreme being against evil. It is described as VRITRAHANTAMA. In other words, he is the supreme among killers of vritra, the power of darkness. By the idea no question of the infidel is raised as `yet. It is stated, on the other hand, whether our kin or a foreigner should be valiantly opposed. From the ranks of the foreward marching people the evil door must be eliminated. God is the god of Dasa as well as of Arya it is said. For the forgiveness of sins against the foreigner there is a prayer.

God is as much of the foreign land as of our own land. Hence unity in diversity covers all human relations according to the principle. Till at last we come to a grand conception of universal peace and serenity, there are mantras which extend the principle to all living beings.

That vedic advaita is not a casual creed thus it will be found. In its application to life, it is comprehensive. The deities had been worshipped by people of their own. With of course qualitative differences in which every deity was recognized as divine, polytheism synthesized them into a pluralistic pantheon. Hence greek was absorbed by roman polytheism and within its religious creed and Egyptian gods were absorbed.

Different kinds of gods and goddesses of different sects and tribes were absorbed by Hindu polytheism. But by vedic Aryans something different and subtler and grandeur had been done ages before them.

All the different deities that were worshiped had been accepted by them. As manifestation of one divinity had been synthesized by them also. Hence any one of them could be identified with any other or all the rest. Accustomed to mystical apprehension of reality, a mind of the highest subtlety could be conceived to be capable of this.

In the beginning of the second cycle of Rig Veda an ideal of religious synthesis was set up as per the following verses to which the greatest saints and sages of the universe had been found to contemplate for long. The deity Agni is worshipped by poet through verses. But there are other deities both male and female, like Indra, Varuna and Aditi and so on who are worshiped by other sages and saints has been recognized.

“then O Agni I art Indra, the Hero of heroes

X x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

“thou O Agni I art king Varuna whose laws stand fast

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Thou, God Agni! and Aditi to the offerer of oblation”

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

There is really nothing like henotheism in the Vedas have been told by some orientalists. To them it is simply Polytheism.

Every deity is flattered as the supreme deity only owing to the peculiar primitive mentality of the worshipers. All the deities with the abstract divine essence in the neuter form we find in the Vedas, not only henotheism but also the identification of one deity with another or of one deity with all the rest with the description of every deity as the supreme deity. In polytheism is there anything like this? of the one in the many and the many in one, never has polytheism spoken in the manner of the veda, ancient or modern.

In post vedic Ages how was vedic henotheism?

Though a speciality of the Vedas, the Advait theism is found in later ages also. In their own way we find a number of medieval sages in india preaching this idea that the god is one, though by different names in different ways.
Ordinarily it is a mutual toleration of the gods of different people belonging to different religion. But the attitudes of the vedic sages is much above this principle. For them it is not only simply one of toleration, but of acceptance also. With the hospitality of polytheism it is not only the acceptance of another’s god, but acceptance of all gods imagined by all other sages as identical with ones own the one deity without a second.

A Bird's eye vie on Vedas - IX

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

This method is frequently used in the Vedas as it is not casual. This is the metaphysical foundation of Vedic theism. It is said in the “Creation Hymn” “that the one breathed, airless by self-impulse” in which the term (EKAM) one is in the neuter. In the first and tenth cycles of the Rig-veda this idea does not occur.

To a doctrine not of oneness of the type of being Called God we have come across. This god lives in a particular place but of one Divine Being which pervedes all being understood metaphysically. It is clearly indicated in the Vedas that this metaphysical description in the neuter singular and poetical, do not contradict each other in masculine & feminine both in duel & plural.

Therefore this Vedic there is not simple henotheism. It is subtle and abstruse to a greater extent. It is something for more sophisticated than any primitive idea. It has touched modern civilized notion also.

For example, TaT (that) implies this Divine Being in a verse in Yajur Veda- it is said

“Agni is that, VAYU is that, Chandrama is that,
Aditya is that, Light is that, Brahman is that
Apha (waters) are those- Prajapati is He”

To masculine deities like Agni, Aditya and so on not only is “That” Predicated but to Apah- the deity is plural. Hence “That” is made synonymous with “those” and “He”. It is indicated clearly that “THAT”, “THOSE” and “He” are there the same of course to put it in a different way.

One of the unpunished tries to clarify the meaning by reading “Apah” (waters) are THAT, Prajapati is THAT (Sveta. up VIII.27).

In accordance with a Yagur Veda verse (32.8) the Divinity is spoken of in the neuter as TAT SAT means That Being in the very first line. And in the second line Lord (vibhu) is the masculine. The Advaitic theism of the Vedas is here only we find. That Advaitic theism of the Vedas is here only we find. That there is only one individual in the species of God, does not mean the unity of God, but that the Divine is supreme and all Pervading. All reality becomes unified in HIM in whom all find one nest only.

Vedic henotheism has been developed by simple monotheism. One god is understood By monotheism. In other words all are ruled by one god. The conception of the Vedic Advait- “One in many” and “many in one” lies beyond human imagination.

By the application of logic, the philosopher may think to reduce the proposition to simple monism. That many is unreal and the one is real only. Beyond the logic of monism, the Vedic Advaita lies. On a mystical expression it takes its stand in which the one is real and the many too are real also. And in the one the many find their unity.

Philosophers can alone Penetrate into the conception of the one in the many who accept mysticism as follows: - Rigved (1.82.10)

“Aditi is the Sky, Aditi the mid – region
Aditi the mother, the father and the son
Aditi all deities, the five classed men
Aditi is all that is born, all that will be born.”

Beyond the time and space, the above conception goes with the following logical sense of quantity which is superseded.

“And both the seas are varun’s loins
And He lies in this small drop of water”(Atharva Veda, 1V 163)

It is poetically conceived that all- Pervasiveness of the one exists not only in the cosmic world but also on the earth where men live in. The neuter term for Divinity is addressed to Brahman as follows.

“Thou art man, Thou art woman, Thou art boy
Thou art maiden
Thou art the old man, tottering with the staff
Thou existest on the sides.” Artharva Veda (X. 8.27)

To any of the least extent, the Veda has not ignored the vision of the individual Pertaining to Divine. It may be whether in the singular or the duel or the plural, whether masculine, or the feminine or the neuter. The poetry of particular experiences has been maintained by Veda only take for example:-

One existence is Agni – (EKAM) – But in the masculine he is contemplated. Like that USHAS – though one – (EKAM) - is contemplated in the feminine.

The poet and mysticism is the theism of the intellectual interpretation of a deep experience.

A Bird's eye view on Vedas - VIII

The Aesthetic Factor
(Copy right protected by Dr. G.S. Tripathy)

Each vision of the Divinity carries an aesthetic value in the Vedas. It is a vision of beauty and splendour. It is a religious attitude. In Bhagavat Geeta it is Vibhuti yoga which can be termed as path of splendour. Jyoti or light is the typical form of splendour. In the more abstract sense it is termed as “greatness, Beauty, glory, wonder or loveliness etc. ‘” In accordance with this outlook the divinity is Dev which is the glorious one and shining one. Primarily the divine conception becomes a generic idea. The idea of an individual deity comes next. So long as the generic idea remains constant, there is no essential contradiction in identifying one specific deity with another.

The Ethical Factor

As much as the aesthetic, the Vedic deity embodies the ethical value. Indicating their ethical values, there are two basic terms in the Vedas. In the Vedas there can be no god or goddess if they do not represent the conception of Rita and Satya where Rita is the eternal order and Satya is the truth.

Satya dharma is nothing but God. Source of power is Satya only. Upholder of eternal order is God only.

Without reference to a divinity, this can be contemplated as ends in themselves while taking religion to some fundamentals. As in the case of Buddhism, Vedic theism is based on moral values. This may be upheld in a non theistic way also it is not the astheist who is really objectionable in India but also the person by whom the moral law is repudiated.

In accordance with Vedas, the earth is upheld not by the will of almighty, but by truth which is known as “Satya”, where the supreme component is God only. God reveals Himself through RITA which is the eternal order told by the Vedas only.

According to another form of Vibhuti Yoga – God is supreme. He represents beauty and splendour of nature. All virtues, goodness nobility in man and woman at its highest are the wonderful reflection of god only. There are descriptive terms for the Divinity in the Vedic prayers in the subjective form. By this the supremacy of Divinity is indicated though the names of the Deities are different.

In the Vedas the divinity has been spoken of in one name or another as the supreme poet, as the supreme mother, supreme hero, supreme father and as the supremely beneficent etc. The Vedic sense of quality and value have been indicated by these terms. The superlative can imply only one individual, again to an intellectual person. The implication is that they are the same when two deities are described by the same superlative. Take for an instance: - Brahmanaspati and Agni are both spoken of as Vipratma the supreme sage. Hence both Agni and Brahmanaspati are one divine being by implication as the superlative adjective indicates one person only.

The Metaphysical Factor

The oneness of the divine is also presented in the veda as a definite metaphysical proposition so far it is the simple henotheism of Max Muller implied through the psychological and ethical factor. The sages contemplate “THE ONE BEING” in many ways which is stated clearly –

EKAM SANTAM BAHUDHA KALPAYANTI
------------ (Rig veda, X, 114.5)

That all gods are one in INDRA – Sometimes it is said (Rig veda, 111, 54.17) and sometimes all gods are described as one god only.

Well known verse sets down the vedic Advaita in clear language as follows:-
[EKAM SAD VIPRA BAHUDHA VADANTI]

By many names as Agni, Yama, Matarishavan
Because the divinity is spoken of in the neuter as one being (EKAM SAT) the conception of divine becomes metaphysical which is shown in a closer observation.

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.