Veda28- One God or many Gods?

[Quick links]

 

During one of my early morning walks in a remote Indian village, I came across this elderly gentleman. He looked quite old with his wrinkled face betraying his age. He greeted me with a smiling face and introduced himself as a retired banker. He proudly declared himself as a person belonging to a faith that believed in a single God. Basically, he was a Muslim. I

 

I was a bit amused by his self-introduction. It is like saying “I have two hands”! What is so special about it? So does everyone! Probably there was a suggestion that he is unlike ‘others’ who believed in many Gods. This ‘others’ obviously meant the Hindus who worshipped uncountably many Gods. That is how people belonging to Abrahamic religions distinguish themselves from ‘others’.

 

But that is a myth.

 

No matter what Hindus do today, and why they do it, monotheism was the basic tenet of even the Vedic religion from which current Hinduism emerged. The so called ‘Gods’ in the Vedas are not really Gods but divine beings whom I referred to as ‘Devas’ in my previous talks. They are gods with a ‘small g’ as one Swami often puts it. They are not THE God.

 

One historian traces the ‘origin’ of this God who is ‘one and only one’ – the proud proclamation of many Abrahamic religions. He starts off with the ancient Mazdeism that emerged somewhere in central Asia. This religion believed in the existence of a single God namely Ahura Mazda. There was also an anti God who was called Angra Mainyu. This God and Anti God always fought with each other and ultimately it was God who won.

 

According to this historian, Judaism stemmed out of this ancient Mazdeism. Ahura Mazda took the name Yahve. And Angra Mainyu became the wicked Satan. But unlike Angra Mainyu, Satan is not all that powerful. He is only a problem creator who misleads humans.

 

This Yahve of Judaism later took the name Allah of Islam. Quran says that Allah is none other than Yahve. And Satan became the cursed angel/Jinn Saytan. Quran has an interesting episode on how a loyal Jinn namely Iblis became the wicked Saytan.

 

In between, there was an offshoot of Judaism namely Christianity. That too believed in mono theism. But there was a bit of confusion. Some Christian sects considered Jesus Christ as an incarnation of God. Some said he is the son of God. Some others came up with the concept of Trinity – ‘Father, son, and the holy spirit’.

 

But what is interesting is that this historian did not look beyond Mazdeism. As I discussed earlier, Mazdeism had lot in common with Vedic religion. It too had many gods – with small ‘g’. They too had ritual practices, caste divisions, mythology and so on, very much like the Vedic Indians.

 

The Aryan invasion theorists may like to say that Vedic religion was an offshoot of Mazdeism. They may at most concede that these two religions had a common ancestor based in central Asia. One group migrated to Persia and the other to India. I have discussed the controversies around this simplistic view in previous episodes.

 

But what is important to note is that monotheism was the under current even in the Vedic religion. The similarity of thoughts was so striking that it looks immature and uninformed to partition humanity into people belonging to monotheistic and polytheistic faiths. At least most of humanity had the same thoughts at the base. So, saying that ‘we believe in a single God’ does not convey much and is superfluous.

 

But then, what this God is, how He is perceived, makes these religions stand apart. On one hand we have the almost formless God, who is often reluctant take on a visible form, though having most human-like qualities. This God speaks, shows emotions, loves, hates, jealously protects his herd, expects total submission, tests and gives judgment, rewards and punishes – just like any human master would do with his subordinates. That is the God of Abrahamic religions such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

 

On the other hand, the God of Vedic religion is an abstract concept. This God rarely interacts with humans, far from expecting complete surrender from them. What is most interesting is that it is not even separate from humans or other beings or even the entire gamut of living or nonliving beings! It is not just formless but it is even inconceivable. Incapable of being expressed in words.

 

It is called Sat or Atma or Brahma, all of which are merely adjectives that try to elaborate some of its aspects and not its name per se. By the way, you probably are puzzled by my referring to this God using the pronoun ‘it’. That may be sacrilegious in other religions. But not in the Vedas. Vedas often refer to this God alternatively as ‘He’, ‘She’, or even ‘It’. The fact is that this God is gender neutral!

 

This is the God that is being talked about by the Upanishads, the concluding parts of the Vedas. This is what would be the subject matter of my succeeding talks. You can call it ‘The God of the Upanishads’, if you wish. This is not the god that we talked about while we discussed the ritual parts of the Vedas. But then, looked at in a different way, it IS the god that were talked about, and probably much more, as declared by this Vedic mantra (Rigveda 1:164:46) which says

 

indraM mitraM varuNaM agnimAhuHu

 

atho divyaH sa suparNo garutmAn

 

ekam sadviprA bahudhA vadanti

 

agniM yamaM mAtarisvAnamAhuHu

 

That means

 

Whether it is Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni or even the golden winged Garutman, all of them are nothing but Sat. The same Sat is referred variously as Agni, Yama or Maatarisva by the people who perform the Vedic rituals.

 

If you recall, Indra, Varuna, Yama and so on were the Devas that the Vedic people worshipped through their fire rituals. As I said earlier, these Devas are the divine beings and not THE God. But this mantra seems to say just the opposite. It says that all those Devas are same as Sat or God of the Vedic religion. The same God is talked about variously as many gods by the people who perform the Vedic rituals.

 

Were you puzzled? This is the mystery that the Upanishads try to crack. How? That is what we will discuss down the line and that is the main theme of the Upanishads with far reaching consequences. Let us know more on this God, step by step.

 

Just a small admission. Upanishads are ancient texts with lot of symbolism and poetic texture. Though their language is quite simple, due to the richness of the Sanskrit language as well as due to the passage of time, it is often difficult to uniquely interpret them. Various later philosophers have interpreted the very same sentences to mean different things, sometimes quite opposite things. In my talks, I normally follow the Advaitic interpretations of Sankara which feels natural to me. But at times, I may even overrule Sankara and put forth my own interpretation based on my insight and experience. Where possible, I will try to highlight my own interpretations that may differ from Sankara’s.

 

Please do join me in the next episode. 

 

Start            Previous          Next

 

A series discussing the most ancient of the Indian scriptures, nay the world scriptures namely the Vedas. © Dr. King, Swami Satyapriya 2021-22