dharmdev vidyamartand Archives

VEDAS : IS THERE MONISM OR POLYTHEISM IN THEM?

Author : Pt Dharmdev Vidyamartand

From the Book “Veda:The Myths and Reality” ( A reply to Vedic Age )

One of the subjects which has generated a lot of controversy among the scholars is whether the Vedas teach polytheism, henotheism, monism or monotheism.

Before discussing this question, however, let us discuss what these terms really mean. Polytheism means belief in the plurality of gods, each with a sphere of his own in the governance of the this universe. “In simple words, it means Worship of many gods or Gods.

By monism is meant “development of the universe from a monad or from a single element.

lt corresponds to what is generally called as the principle that nothing else except Brahma (God) or the Absolute exists.

The Henotheism denotes that each of several divinities is regarded as the Supreme-each in its sphere.

And monotheism is belief in the existence of only One God.

Westem scholars like Clayton have said that there is polytheism in the Vedas. Even Max Muller who saw in Rigveda”s hymn 10.121 an expression of One God, “expressed with such power and decision, that it will make us hesitate before we deny to the Aryans, an instinctive monotheism which, however, comes out with a rider : “This is one of the hymns which has always been suspected as modem by European interpreters”

Even while commenting on Rigveda’s “प्रजापते न त्व दे तानन्यो विश्वा जातानि परी ता बभूव” he says, “This is the last verse, into my mind, most suspicious of all.”

lt is obvious that this suspicion has been raised deliberately by Max Muller and other western scholars as their study of the Vedas was biased and they were not willing to accept monotheism in the Vedas.

This is the reason why they have also created confusion while translating “कस्मै देवाय हविषा विधेम” as “to which God shall we offer worship”. ln fact they want to show that there are many gods and the devotee is wondering as to whom to Worship. (ln fact कस्मै देवाय is answered by “प्रजापति” as “क” stands for “प्रजापति” as clear from Satpath : “को हि प्रजापति अथवा प्रजापतिर्वक ”

Max Muller has, in fact, coined a new word “Hen0theism” to show the worship of many “single Gods” or a number of independent deities in the Vedas.

For instance in his book “Ancient Sanskrit Literature ” Max Muller writes :” Each Vedic poet seems to exalt the particular god to whom he happens to be singing, to a position of supremacy. It would be easy to ﬁnd, in the numerous hymns of the Veda, passages in which almost every single god is represented as Supreme and Absolute. ln the first hymn of the Second Book of the Rigveda, Agni is called the Ruler of the universe, the Lord of men, the Wise King, the Father, the Brother, the Son, the friend of men, nay all the powers, and names of others are distinctly ascribed to Agni. Indra is celebrated as the strongest in the hymns as well as in the Brahmnas, and the burden of one of the songs of the Tenth book is ” विश्वस्मादिन्द्र उत्तर “. (Indra is greater than all.) Of soma it is said that he was born great, and that he conquers everyone. He is called the king of the world, he has the power to prolong the life of men

and is the maker of heaven and earth; of Agni, of Surya, of lndra and Vishnu. ln the very next hymn, addressed to Varuna, it is the Varuna who is, to the mind of the poet, Supreme and Almighty.”

Clarifying this concept hynotheism A.C Clayton writes in the “Rigveda and Vedic Religion :-

“In his Writings Max Muller constantly referred to this and coined the word Hynotheism or Kathenotheism to express what he re-garded as a ‘peculiar character’ of the ancient Vedic religion.

It denotes that each of several divinities is regarded as highest. The one that was worshipped and that they, therefore, treated him as if he were absolutely being independent and Supreme, alone present to the mind of the worshipper.”

In effect, as pointed out by Dwij Das in his book “Rigveda Unveiled”, the Rishis have been reduced to the position of “sycophants or cowardly liars, who could call each single god, as the one Supreme Being, only to avert the wrath of that God. Knowing at the same time, that they are not telling the Truth.”

Clayton and a few other scholars, though denying monotheism in the Vedas, say that they regard this practice of glorifying one God exclusively as “a species of poetic licence by which a singer magnified the god whom he was invoking, rather than an evidence that the poet actually claimed that the god to whom he was at the moment referring was the superior of all others”

We, however, do not agree with Clayton and other scholars that such descriptions are due to poetic license either. We are not prepared to believe that there is any scope for such poetic licence in view of overwhelming evidence of monotheism in the Vedas. The Vedas teach monotheism or the Worship of one God in the purest form . They teach that God is Omnipresent, Omniscient and Omnipotent Lord of the universe. He is absolutely formless and perfect.

The vedas declare :

Monotheism in the Vedas has not been stated more forcefully than in the following mantras from the Atharvaveda where God has been described as One and the only One. :

(He (God) is called neither the second, nor the third, nor yet the fourth. He is called neither the ﬁfth, nor the sixth, nor yet the seventh. He is neither the eighth, nor the ninth, nor yet the tenth.)

He takes care of all that breathes and of all that does not breathe. He has got all this conquering power, He is the one, one and the only one.

All these luminous forces of nature become one in Him. How emphatically the oneness of God has been asserted in such passages and how absurd and false is the view advocated by some prejudiced Western scholars that the Vedas teach polytheism.

We will give some more evidence of the Oneness of God in the Vedas.

In the हिरण्यगर्भ hymn, (in Regveda) consisting of 10 mantras, God has been described as प्रजापति and more than four times it is clearly stated that.

He is One and the only One.

Following mantras from this hymn may be quoted to clarify this point :-

(God who possesses all the luminous Worlds within Himself and exists from the very eternity, He is only One Manifest Lord of the created creatures. He is supporting this earth and this heaven. Unto that All-Blissful Divinity, we offer our humble worship.”)

(He who is the Giver of physical vigour and spiritual power, He whose order is carried out by all the luminous objects and by the enlightened beings, whose shelter is immortality and turning away from whom is death, unto that all blissful Divinity, we offer our humble Worship.)

(He who by the greatness of His power, is the Sole Ruler of living and lifeless objects existing in this world, He, who is the Lord of these bipeds and quadrupeds unto that All-Blissful Divinity, we offer our humble Worship.)

(When water in its subtler form, possessing mighty force within itself, became manifest, therein was held the Universal life force which of heat and energy, it was then the One Universal life force of all the luminous objects became manifest, unto that All blissful Divinity, we offer our humble Worship.)

Atharvaveda says. He, the only One is the Giver of joy, and should be worshipped: “एक एव नमस्य: सुशवा:”

Samveda also describes God as One एक इत्”:

The Oneness of God has been poetically described in the following mantra from the Rigveda :-

(He whose eyes go every where, who faces all sides, whose arms are here, there all around and whose feet in all directions–is the Only One Divine Being who has created all these heavens.)

God is proclaimed as ‘एक (one) and अन्तमानुष: (unparalled) in the following mantra from the Rigveda:-

Addressing God as “अग्नि” Rigveda in the following mantras in its ﬁrst hymn of the Second Mandela says:

Just as a person is called brother, father, uncle, husband etc because of different relationships he bears to other members of the same family, so also God is described differently because of his different attributes.

He is called (Agni) when we remember him as an embodiment of knowledge and इन्द्र: (Indra) when we want to denote His vast wealth.

To denote his Omnipresence, we call him विष्णु(Vishnu) and to give an idea of His greatness, we described His as ब्रह्मा (Brahma).

By virtue of his Supremacy in knowledge, He is known as ब्रह्मणस्पति (Brahmanaspati). His purifying power entitles Him to be called वरुण (Varuna).

As he loves everyone He मित्र(Mitra) and as He isjust, He is अर्यमा (Aryaman).

He is रूद्र (Rudra) because He comes harsh on the wicked, द्रविणोद (Dravinoda) because He is Giver of wealth and strength, सोम: (Soma) because He has created roots and herbs etc. God is also described as ‘सोम (Soma), पुष(Pushan) and भग (Bhaga) as evident from the following mantras from Rigveda;

(O, Soma,Thou, “who hast created these herbs, this water and these cows”, Thou who art present in the entire firmament and removeth all darkness by Thy illumination, Thou, who art Creator of good intellect, Thou who art also Creator of firmament, sky, earth, fire, sun and air etc. Thou art (“Pusan”) because of Thy powers to strengthen and revive because Thou art worthy of our Worship. Thou art the Master of the whole universe and art present in all the Worlds.)

Several other mantras, can be quoted to show that अग्नि (Agni) ,आदित्य (Aditya) , वायु (Vayu) ,चन्द्रमा(Chandrama), शुक्र(Shukra) , आप (Aap) , प्रजापति (Prajapati) are all different names of the same One God and only denote His verious attributes.

For instance, take the following mantra from Yajurveda (32.1)

(Here God has been described differently because of His different attributes : अग्नि(Agni) because He is embodiment of knowledge, आदित्य (Aditya) because. He is Eternal, वायु(Vayu) because He is the cause of all movement in the world (वा गति गन्धनयो: )-“चन्द्रमा” (Chandrama) because He is pleasing to everybody, ( चदी आल्हादे ) -“शुक्र (Shukra) because He is pure (शुनिरपूर्ति मावे) (ब्रह्मा) because He is the Greatest of all, CNN: (Apa) because He is Omnipresent and प्रजापति (Prajapati) because He looks after His subjects).

The mantras published by Max Muller from Rigveda’s 2.1 under the caption “Agni”, in fact, sing the glory of One God who has been described here as अग्नि (Agni)

Can anyone believe that these adjectives have been used for simple fire? Thus Max Muller and his followers only betrayed their bias and partiality when without probing deep into the meaning of

these words, they played havoc with them.

Now the question arises 1 how can we reconcile the idea of One God with several references to 33 devas (gods) in the Vedas ?

A lot of misunderstanding results from the Western scholars who have taken ‘ ‘देव’ ‘ as “God” everywhere.

देव, according to Yaskacharya, the celebrated author of Nirukta (Vedic Philology) means one who confers some advantage upon us, can illumine things i.e. explain or throw light upon them, and one who is the source of light :-

The word देव (Deva) with its root a comprehensive term covering brave men, devotees of God, learned persons, Brahmins, objects like sun, moon, ﬁre, electricity.

Following are some of the meanings of देव occuring in the Satpath Brahman :

THE 33 DEVAS

There is reference to 33 devas in the Vedas at several place. For instance, a clear reference has been made to them in Rigveda’s 1.45/27, 8/28/1,88/30/2 and Yajurveda’s 20/26 etc.

There is also reference to the 33 devas in Satpath and other Brahmins (which are commentaries on the Vedas).

Satpata says that : there are 33 Devas which manifest the glory of God. Of them are 8 Vasus, 11 Rudras, 12 Aditya, lndra and Prajapati. The eight Vasus are (1) Agni or ﬁre (2) earth (3) air (4) superterrestrial space (5) sun (6) moon (7) atmosphere (8) stars.

These are called Vasus (abodes) because in them resides all that lives, moves or exists.

The eleven Rudras are the ten pranas (vital forces) enlivening the human frame and the eleventh is the Atma or the soul. lndra is all pervading. Prajapati is Yajna.

The 12 Adityas are the twelve solar months making the course of time. They are called Adityas as, by their cyclic motion, they produce changes in all objects.

Thus it is clear that calling sun, moon, earth, ﬁre earth etc as ‘devas ‘, the Vedic religion cannot be described as Polytheistic.

It is, however, clearly stated in Rigveda that God is the Supreme Lord of all the devas :

(God is the One Life and Lord of all devas and, therefore, we worship Him, who is Giver of all happiness, peace and bliss.)

Dependence of devas on God has been brought out by the Vedas in several mantras.

For instance in Atharvaveda, after describing God as महद यक्षम(the Most Venerable Supreme Being), it is Stated that devas live around God as the creepers around a tree :

ARE DEVAS IMMORTAL ?

ARE THEY PROOF OF POLYTHEISM

Some of the western scholars, on the basis of the portrayal of 33 devas in satpath, assert that it is a clear cut evidence of polytheism in the Vedas.

To contradict this view, first of all, let us be clear that ‘devas’ as described in the Vedas, do not necessarily only stand for gods.

The word देव(deva) which has its root as दिनु (Dinu) is a comprehensive term covering the attributes of God; sometimes they stand for devotees of God and also learned persons; they also denote objects of Nature like Sun, Moon, Fire etc.

While Devas have been described as immortal in the Vedas; it has been clarified that they derive this immortality from God. This idea also occurs in Brahmanas and Upnishadas. ln Rigveda, for instance, it is stated that God alone bestows immortality on the devas :

In Yajurveda (32.l0) also, it is said that the devas live in the protection of God :

To God turn all devas after emancipation to enjoy the everlasting bliss.

lt has been clearly stated in the Rigveda that the learned and the wise describe the One existing God in many ways.

But despite this truth, Agni, Indra, Mitra, Varuna etc have come to be considered as separate gods. It will, therefore, be fruitful to know the signiﬁcance of these words to remove the mist surrounding them. We will also discuss what have come to be known as dual gods like मरुत: etc.

From the spiritual point of view, अग्नि stands for God who is also called as यमा, मातरिश्वा,इन्द्र, वरुण as stated in the following mantra from the Rigveda :

From the social point of view, the word अग्नि (‘Agni”) denotes

There are many mantras in the Vedas in which Agni has been used in the sense of an enlightened leader,

For instance, in the following mantra from the Rigveda, अग्नि: (for whom the adjectives used are ऋषि (seer), पवमान: (purifier) पांचजन्य: (dedicated to the welfare of the society) is requested to dispel all ignorance by his discourse :

The adjectives used as होता, पुरोहित(Knower of the rites of the Yajnas (priest), in the following mantra from the also leaves us in no doubt that the word अग्नि: has been used for an enlightened leader :

The same impression is conﬁnned by the use of such adjectives as शुचिव्रतत (who firmly observes the sacred vow) कवि: (sage or poet) for ‘Agni’ in the following mantra :

INDRA :-

The word इन्द्र primarily stands for God as it has been derived from the root “इदी परमैश्वर्य”.

It also stands for “soul° as it possesses great power being the master of the sages.

From the social point of view, the word ‘E’ stands for the king or president, or the commander in-chief-of the Anny (सेना इन्द्राणी-इन्द्र:-सेनापति: ).

There is no room for doubt that the word Ef: has been used for God in several mantras in the Vedas in which He has been described as the Creator of the Universe and Bestower of happiness.

ln the following mantra, for instance, which occurs in Samaveda, Rigveda and Atharvaveda, God, described as “Indra” has been requested to ﬁll us with knowledge in the same way as a father does to his son :

In the following mantra from Rigveda, God addressing Indra (soul) tells about the power inherent in it :

(March forward and use your power, None can stop Thy thunderbolt. Everyone is subdued by Thy strength.)

lndra (soul) is made to describe its own power in the following mantra from Rigveda:

(I can face one enemy (lust) and anger), I can also face three enemies (lust, anger and greed) etc.; I will crush all my enemies like husk in the granery.)

The use of word इन्द्र for king is undeniable in the following mantras from the Rigvedic Sukta in which इन्द्र has been described as स्वस्तिदा(engaged in welfare of others), वृषा(showerer of happiness on others) अभयं कर: (inspirer of fearless in others) :

Likewise रूद्र according to Swami Dayanand, stands for the just God who makes the wicked persons weep (रोदयति दुष्टान दंड प्रदानेनेति न्यायकारी परमेश्वर: ), a great hero who makes the enemies cry (रोदयति शत्रून इति रुद्रो महावीर:) the judge who inflicts heavy penalty on the wicked (रोदयति दुष्टान इति रुद्रो न्यायधीश:), the preceptor who imparts knowledge to others (रुत ज्ञानं राति-ददातिती रूद्र: उपदेशक: ), the germ which generates diseases (राति-ददातिती रुद्रो रोगुत्पादक: कृमि:) a doctor who removes the sufferings of others (रुत दुखं द्रावयतिती रुद्रो वैद्य: ).

Referring to Swami Dayanad”s view that all the gods mentioned in the Rigveda are simply variant names for one God, Dr. Griesward in his book “The Religion ofthe Rigveda” says : “This process of reduction from multiplicity to unity would have been easier if there had been no dual gods or group gods mentioned in the Rigveda”

But the correct study of What he has described as the dual gods or group gods like अग्नोजिमौ, अश्विनौ, मरुत: will reveal that these words, like other devas, have several meanings and do not stand for any particular god or gods as such.

Dr. Griesward’s remark that monotheistic interpretation of the Rigveda on the part of Swami Dayanand is “wild” and “unscientiﬁc” is also very surprising in view of the massive evidence we have given to support monotheism in the Vedas.

The quotations given earlier in this chapter are enough to support the existence of monotheism in the Vedas. Swami Dayananda, therefore, did nothing which was purely imaginative or unscientiﬁc.

Let us examine some words which have been mistaken by westem scholars as dual gods.

The similar meanings of अग्नीषोमौ are also found in Aitteriya, Satpath Brahamanas etc. For instance:

Following are some of the meanings of “इन्द्राग्नी” :-

Some of the meanings of अश्विनौ are given below-

Swami Dayanand has at several places interpreted अश्विनौ as . This deﬁnition of अध्यापकोउपदेशकौ is substantiated by the second and third mantra of Rigveda”s I-120 in which the adjective विद्वांसौ has been used for अश्विनौwho have been requested to impart knowledge.

As मरुत ﬁgures prominently among the so- called group gods, examination of this word is very necessary. HW: does not denote God.

In ताण्डय महाब्राह्मण, मरुत: has been described as मरुत रश्मय: (l.4.l25) and in Aitareya as ( आपो वा मरुत: )(6.2O)

In Nighantu मरुत: reads as पदनामसु which stands for monsoons.

Swami Dayanand has given the following meanings of the word मरुत: in course of his commentary on the Vedas:-

No scholar can dismiss Swami Dayanand”s interpretations of the word मरुत: to be a pure fabrication of his mind. As it is clear from the above, the word has not been used for God. Some of the synonyms used for this word in the Vedas, are =नर:, मर्या, मानुष: etc. .

In Rigveda for instance, at many places (particularly l.39.3,8.20.lO,l.64.l0,10.86.8,8.552, the word नर: has been used for मरुत:

ln the following mantra, for example, words नर: and मर्य: have been used for मरुतो देवता :-

The word गृहमेघास: (householder) has been used for TRE: in the following mantra from Rigveda (7.59.l0) :-

The synonym for मरुत: in this mantra from Atharvaveda given below (7.773) is मनुषास: (thoughtful men) :-

ln a number of mantras in the Rigveda (see for instance 5.53.3,5.59.6,5.6,4,7.56.l,l.77.l)the word मर्या: has been used for मरुत: which means the ‘mortal men’. Sayanacharya has also, at some places, in his Commentary written मनुषरूपा वा मरुत: (see Rig. 10.83) While commenting on the two mantras from the Rigveda (8.89) Sayanacharya has described ITR-T: as persons who speak less ( मित भाषिण:)and who Worship God( स्तोतार: ).

Much before Sayanacharya, Samveda commentator Madhava, who belongs to the Sixth century, has also while explaining (प्र व इन्द्राय बृहते) say हे ( मरुत:) मदोया ऋत्विज:).

Bharata Swami while explaining बृहदिन्द्रय गायत मरुतो वृत्रहन्तमम writes मरुत:- स्तोतर: महत रुवन्तिती मरुत: The mantras बृहदिन्द्राय गायत also occurs in Yajurveda (20.30) Both Bharat Swami and Mahidhara give the same meaning of the Word मरुत:

MAXMULLER AND MARUTA

While Maxmuller has given the meaning ofमरुत: as (Storm gods) in his translation of hymns relating to them, at places he deviates from his usual meaning and uses the word in the sense of नरा: (men).

For instance, while translating the following mantra from the Rigveda (1.393), he uses “O ye men” for Maruti :

(When Ye overthrow what is ﬁrm, O ye men)

In the following mantra from Rigveda (1 .85.8), also Maxmuller describes Maruta as “men terible to behold”

The word “men” has also been used for Maruta in his translation of the following mantra from Rigveda

(He, oh men, whose libations ye want to enjoy, that mighty one, O shakers, will obtain your favour with brilliant riches etc.)

Thus it is clear from the above that though there is description of many devas in the Vedas and they denote different meanings there is only One God who is Omniscient, Omnipresent and Omnipotent.

The existence of many devas in other words, does not interfere with the concept of One God.

THE VEDAS AND THE MONISTIC PHILOSOPHY

We must, however, clarify that though there is monotheism in the Vedas, there is no enunciation of monistic philosophy in them.

The whole relationship between God and soul has been clearly defined in the following mantra from the Rigveda (where both of them have been described as two birds sitting on the same tree):

In the above mantra, it is stated that जीवात्मा (soul) and परमात्मा (God) are two birds who are friendly to each other. Both of them are enternal and are sitting, as though on the tree of matter. One of them (soul) is to reap the fruits ofpast action and the other just looks on. Elaborating this, says Mundakakopanishad :-

On the same tree sits जीवात्मा (soul) immersed and deluded account of his ignorance and helplessness. But, when he sees the other, the Lord, who is worshipped by all and His glory, he becomes freed from sorrow. This shows the difference between God and soul.

While God is all-pervading, the soul is not, while God is Onmiscient, the Soul is not, and therefore, the soul is a prey to grief and sorrow. While God is Omnnipotent, the soul ‘s power is limited. Their relationship is that of the father and the son, the master and the servant, the King and his subject, the adorable and the adored.

Says the Taitteriya Upanishada :

(God is the embodiment of Bliss. The soul enjoys Bliss only by attaining Him.)

The above quotations from the Upanishadas (which are at many places only the Explanation of the Vedic mantras or expression in different words of what is contained in the Vedas) show that in the mantra “हा सुपर्णा” the reference is to God and soul and not (intellect) and जीवात्मा (soul)

That God and soul are different is also evident from the following mantra which occurs in Rigveda and Yajurveda :

God, who is Creater of all Worlds, is different from them and yet within them. People do not know about it because their mind is clouded by ignorance.

The same idea finds expression in Satpath Brahmana :-

God is one who is present in the soul and yet who is different. It is God which controls the soul)

The same supremacy of God over soul has been established in the mantra given below in which God has been described as अद्भुत(wonderful) प्रियम( very loving) and काम्भम्(worthy of the soul’s adulation) :

In the following mantra, God has been described as भुज्य: सखा(a worthy friend) of soul thus clearly establishing their mutual relationship.

ln the following mantra, it is stated that the only way (soul) to seek salvation is to know God who is (Full of lustre) (Great) and (Beyond darkness) :-

We may also quote another mantra from the Rigveda (8. l 6.6) which totally contradicts the monistic philosophy whose basic tenet is:-

Brahma alone is सत्य (true) and the whole creation is मिथ्या(false) and that the जीवात्मा (soul) is not different from Brahma.

The true relationship between the (soul) and (God) and (matter) indicated in the following mantra falsiﬁes the dictum (God alone is real, the world is illusory)

In this mantra it is stated that :

(a) We should offer our prayers only to God

(b) All objects like sun, moon etc are inferior to God because they are all inanimate and lifeless.

lt would also be wrong to presume that though the attributes of the world are visible, they appear to be so out of ignorance. This would be quite contrary to the teachings of the Vedas. For instance, in the following mantra from the Rigveda (2.15.1) not only God has been described as महतासत्यस्य: (true) but even His करणानि(Creations) are stated as महानि सत्या: (true)

The same idea has been clariﬁed in Rigveda”s 4.17.6 :

lt is stated here that all objects created by विश्वे सोमा: (God) are सत्रा अभवन: (true)

Even in Rigveda’s 10.55.6., it is stated that all the objects are सत्यम इत् (true) न मोघम (not false or useless) :-

In Yajurveda’s 40.8 also, it is clearly stated that God created this universe for the beneﬁt of the mankind with truthfulness or reality :

“This universe is not only true but it is different from Him.”

This idea occurs at several places in the vedas. For instance, it is stated in the following mantra from the Rigveda (1.4.14) that God is only One (11:63: ) and He has created this world (विश्वम) separately from Him (अन्यत) But because He is Omnipresent (मानुषक्), all this Creation is permeated by Him. There is no place where He is not present :-

The existence of God, separate from His creation, has also been mentioned in the following mantra from Rigveda (1.151.1) (which is also repeated in Samveda) :-