Today, the two most popular theological beliefs in the West are monotheism (the belief in a single all-powerful divinity) and atheism (the belief that there is no divine entity). The Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam preach the former, while those who base their world view exclusively on material or scientific rationality tend to adhere to the latter. Yet, in much of the rest of the world, polytheism, or a belief in multiple divinities, has been a long held and popular conviction. Atheists and Western monotheists together denigrate polytheists and their beliefs as either ignorant or pagan. The more conservative monotheists even equate them with evil and demonism. Such narrow minded views and biases have hampered many who adhere to western thinking from understanding the value and validity of polytheistic beliefs for the people who hold them. Especially in contemporary times, religious narrow-mindedness is a prevalent and major cause of much of the violence and hatred in the world, and both Western monotheistic and atheistic thinking have been major contributors. The purpose here, then is to make the case for the inclusion of polytheism as a legitimate belief system, for it has animated people throughout the world since ancient times and has often provided an understanding of divinity and reality that is more rational than Abrahamic monotheism and has been the cause of far less violence in the world. Hinduism will be used as a primary example, since it offers a good example of polytheism and how it can be blended with the Hindu understanding of monotheism into a useful and practical theology.
No human has demonstrable or irrefutable proof for or against a belief in a divinity or a lack thereof. All theories regarding the divine are based on faith, supposition, and individual experience. That being the case, we should focus instead on the ramifications and practical usefulness of the various theological conceptualizations on the people who hold them as well as on the rest of the world. Among the most ancient of these concepts is polytheism.
"Polytheism" (from the Greek polutheos, "many gods") denotes a theological system involving a belief in and worship of multiple divinities. The term was first popularized in the writings of eighteenth century European ethnographers as they encountered, then sought to identify and label the religious beliefs of "primitive" peoples they studied. "Polytheism" was used to contrast these beliefs with Judeo-Christian monotheism. Nowadays, the term is essentially used to refer to any belief system in which multiple spirit beings are worshiped. These may include gods, goddesses, semi-divine beings, good or evil spirits, or the spirits of departed ancestors. Depending upon the tradition, there may be an established and recognized hierarchy of worshipped beings or they may be seen to act independently. They may work in conjunction with one another or at cross purposes.
There are several significant characteristics typically found in nearly all polytheistic traditions. Among these are a belief that each divinity or spirit being has a specific function (such as healing, protection in travel, etc.), that it controls a particular realm (such as a spirit realm or a specific location in the physical world), or that it possesses a specific power or range of powers. The latter can include forces of nature, such as rain, thunder, a celestial body, the seasons, or may involve dominion over characteristics of human personality, like love, devotion, compassion, jealousy, revenge, and so forth. Another common belief is that spirits possess or adopt a specific form, often human-like, and are endowed with human-like characteristics, such as love and compassion, but also jealousy and revenge. Other forms that spirits may embody include those of animals, of aspects of nature like a volcano, or a combination of several, thus making reverence toward and worship of both human-like and non-anthropomorphic forms commonplace. Finally, singular devotion to one specific divinity is not necessary. Simultaneous propitiation of several deities tends to be common and accepted. In some cases, this is seen as practical and necessary, since different spirits control different realms or powers.
Reflecting on how this approach can be understood on a human level, it parallels in many ways the functioning of democratic society in which power exists in the hands of various individuals who can be approached in turn or simultaneously for assistance. In conceptualizing such a theology, then, the adherents obviously drew upon their own human experiences. In the Jewish creation story, the gods (elohim) say "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness." What may be more accurate is that humans create the gods in their image and likeness, believing that what happens on earth must be a reflection of what happens in the heavens.
Polytheism, then, often mirrors the human experience of family, village, and state. It is frequently found in cultures with a clearly stratified social and/or political hierarchy, where power is held in the hands of different individuals based on their position within the hierarchy, and that these powers are there to benefit those who approach the various divinities seeking assistance. Different divinities, like different bureaucrats, have different powers. One then approaches and propitiates the being with the requisite power to fulfill his or her needs or desires. Additionally, one can choose to focus exclusively on a divinity who appeals to one's own personality. At the same time, one can choose to ignore all deities. While such individuals are then believed to not receive divine assistance, they are typically not understood to be punished for this choice. Thus, in many ways polytheism is a pragmatic theological view that, as mentioned above, reflects aspects of a democratic style system.
If one looks at the monotheistic concept, in which there is a solitary omnipotent divinity, on the other hand, we find a very different approach to the divine and also to the likely world experience of those who formulated it. In monotheism, especially as expressed in the Abrahamic religions, ultimate power is in the hands of a single male divinity. He is all knowing, all powerful, and ever present. Like with the gods in polytheistic traditions, he has human personality traits. Unlike what is found in most polytheistic traditions, he demands allegiance and punishes those who do not worship him exclusively. On the human level, one typically finds such a being in monarchies, dictatorships, and societies run by a ruling tribal leader or warlord like those currently found in many Middle Eastern countries. While such systems may be comforting to those who "belong" to the right tribe or belief system, a solitary all-powerful ruler is a threat to those who do not. The vast majority of individuals in such societies remain weak and powerless unless they observe strict adherence to the being in power and do whatever they are told. This is seen as the only means of survival.
In Hinduism, polytheism and monotheism coexist in a relationship much like the parts of a wheel. The many deities are like the spokes, all of which emanate from the hub and each playing an important role. The more common of these deities to be propitiated by rural agriculturalists Bhudevi (Mother Earth), Surya (the Sun God), Ganesh (Lord of Auspiciousness and Success), regional deities, and various river goddesses. Among the myriad of others who receive attention and reverence are Lakshmi (Goddess of Wealth), Saraswati (Goddess of Knowledge and Learning), and Hanuman (Devotion Incarnate), to name just a few. Countless deities are regularly propitiated, often together.
Then, there is the Hindu form of monotheism, in which the Divine is formally referred to as Brahman (not Brahmin, the priestly caste). It is said to be the source, the hub, from which all deities are manifest. It transcends all attempts at defining or qualifying it. It is not male nor female, has no form or description. It takes on apparent form or characteristics solely to allow humans the ability to relate to it. In that state, it may be called Ram, Krishna, Shiva, Devi, etc. All these names thus refer to a Qualified Absolute that is simultaneously beyond qualifications. For Hindus, this makes total sense. With characteristics, the Divine can love, protect, and show compassion; beyond qualifications, it is all encompassing. It is not only the source and reality of all other deities, but also of all creation, both animate and inanimate. Because of this all encompassing nature, it is the One to whom all prayers are offered. This is why it is commonplace for Hindus to be seen in Buddhist or Jain temples, in Sikh gurudwaras, and in mosques and churches. The deity worshipped in each is seen by Hindus to simply be a different manifestation of the deity they already worship.
In the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, an important Hindu sacred text, a man asks a great teacher, "How many gods are there?" To this he is told, "Three thousand and three." When he questions this answer, he receives the reply, "There are thirty-three gods." He asks again and is told, "There are six." Not satisfied, he continues to ask and gets the response, "There are only three gods." Again he asks and is told, "One and a half gods." After one final query, the teacher says to him, "There is one god." In the explanation that follows, the teacher tells him that the many are all ultimately manifestations of the one indwelling presence. In the process, he alludes to a concept found in various Upanishads that equates the unchanging reality that exists in each individual with the Supreme Changeless Divinity. In Sanskrit, this concept is "tat tvam asi," which can be translated as "you are that" or "that you are."
The merging of polytheistic and monotheistic concepts in this way is unique to Hinduism. It allows people to believe in and pray to their own conceptualizations of the divine in whatever form they choose, while at the same time elevating all of them to their ultimate reality, which is the singular omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient divinity, who demands no allegiance, punishes no one for lack of belief, yet provides wisdom, comfort, compassion, and freedom to those who seek it. All they need to do is look within.
Is Hinduism Polytheistic? - ReligionFacts
Polytheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Is Hinduism Polytheistic or Monotheistic? | One, God, Hinduism ...
Gen 9:18-19 “Now the sons of Noah who went out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And Ham was the father of Canaan. These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the whole earth was populated.”
Jesus in the Hindu scriptures
http://sites.google.com/site/whoisthisjesus/hinduscriptures
"There is no belief involved in atheism.
An atheist simply says: 'I do not accept any claim of existence of god and supernatural entities because there is no evidence or proof, empirical or logical, of such existence AND no logical proof can ever be found'."
There are many things that don't exist in the way we experience them, yet we take them to be "real" and act accordingly because our experience is there to keep us alive. I think there are many people who accept the experience of God because it is a real experience, but who according to your definition might be technical atheists, particularly if by "exist" you mean fill up space in physical scientific reality. Still most of them don't even care about the issue of "existence" and agree not only that it can't be proved one way or the other, but also that it doesn't matter one way or the other. The only people that care are atheists and the kind of religionists who have a vested power interest in the issue.
Most atheists that I have run across are rationalists, who believe that it matters that they know what really exists and knowing it somehow makes them better more moral people. They tend to like to make people wrong for living in their experience and tend to think that life is rational and it matters that one have good reasons for what one wants. Atheism is not a belief, but rationalism is.
Part 4
=====
6. Finally you say "Hindu doesn't exist before about 1100 CE". I do not know where you came up with that date. Again no reference. More importantly you are getting confused between the word Hind/Hinduism and the schools of philosophy it represents. The time when the word Hinduism was introduced (may be derived from the river Sindhu), does not say anything about the origination of Hindu schools of philosophy. Water as a physical substance existed even before Germanic people started calling it "wasser". Similarly the six Hindu/Vedic/Sanatan Dharma philophies existed even before people started referring to them as "Hindu". In that sense, Hinduism, Vedic and Sanatan Dharma refer to the same core six philosphies and are one and the same.
Best regards
-Voxel.
Part 3
======
4. You mentioned "Sankara is known as a pracanna bauddha (hidden buddhist) for a reason. He and Gaudapada basically took the Madhyamika view of Nirvana, Shunya, Paramartha and Vyavahara and imposed them on the Vedanta School". This statement is factually incorrect at several levels. First of all, Shankara is called a crypto-Buddhist by scholars whose hidden agenda is to show that Vedanta is derived from Buddhism. They do not employ any logical arguments to prove their point. Also, Shankara spent considerable time criticizng Buddhist concepts, not "imposing" them on Vedanta. In his work Sutra Bhashya, Shankara rejects the concept of Shunyata whole-heartedly and logically. The bold but erroneous statements you made are somewhat dangerous because they lead newcomers in this field to a wrong start.
5. Previously you mentioned Upanishads are a product of both Vedic and Shramanic Traditions. You gave no reference whatsoever. Ranging from commentaries of Shankara on Upanishads to "Essential Vedanta" by Eliot Deutsch, no where any claim has been made that Upanishads are product of "Shramanic Tradition". These scholars agree that Upanishadic knowledge (Vedanta literally means conclusion of Vedas) is derived solely from Vedas.
Continued in Part 4..
Part 2
======
2. You mentioned "Samkhya says nothing about practice of the Vedas". Most of the Samkhya Concepts have direct analogs to concepts in Vedas. Please refer to Samkhya-Pravachana-Sutram by Vijnana-Bhiksu who showed how Samkhya's core concepts are derived from Vedas.
3. You said "In any Vedic yagna only the Samitha and Brahmanas are used not the Upanishads or Aranyaka". First of all it is "Samhita" not Samitha. Ritualistic aspects like Yagna is one of the many perspectives that Vedas cover. Just because vedic yagnas do not recite Upanishadic sayings, does not mean Upanishdas do not belong to Vedic System. In Vedic Yagnas, they also do not recite ontological knowledge of Ayurveda. That does not mean, Ayurvedic System is not part of the Vedic tradition.
Will continue in Part 3..
Just this single line shows how this writer is simply an ignorant about Monotheism religion. Just because we refers God as He doesn't mean God is a male!
Who said God is a male ? Where did you found it ?
God, the Eternal Refuge.
He neither begets nor is born,
Nor is there to Him any equivalent,
He neither a male nor a female.
God, Lord of the worlds,
The Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful,
Sovereign of the Day of Recompense.
वेद प्रामाण्यं कस्य चित् कर्तृवादः स्नाने धर्मेच्छा जातिवादाव लेपः|
संतापारंभः पापहानाय चेति ध्वस्तप्रज्ञानां पञ्च लिङगानि जाड्ये||
Believing that the Veda are standard (holy or divine), believing in a Creator for the world,
Bathing in holy waters for gaining punya, having pride (vanity) about one's caste,
Performing penance to absolve sins,
Are the five symptoms of having lost one's sanity.".
From "Atheism in Hinduism"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_in_Hinduism
---------------
Incorrect representation of atheism.
There is no belief involved in atheism.
An atheist simply says: "I do not accept any claim of existence of god and supernatural entities because there is no evidence or proof, empirical or logical, of such existence AND no logical proof can ever be found".
There is no belief involved.
Douglas Wilson
Basic problems like evil and suffering make sense when the gods are at odds, or when the sins of past lives carry into this one, or suffering is a basic element of this world of illusion, but not when the only evil force is a rogue creation of the one god who could be willed out of existence by the Almighty with a blink, or when the sin of distant ancestors (who, being free of knowledge of good and evil at the time they sinned, shouldn't be held culpable, let alone their descendant for perpetuity)-is imposed on innocents by a supposedly loving God.
Torah assumes all originally worshiped God. Abraham preached about the Eternal prior to Sinai.
Talmud says that Abraham had a tract dealing with idolatry. There is a Talmudic teaching that Abraham taught the mysteries involving “unclean names” to the children of his concubines¬. Attribution of Sefer Yetzirah, the oldest Kabbalistic text, to Abraham places its origin in the 18th century BCE. The Vedic scriptures (Hindu) date from this period. Abraham was born in Mesopotamia, and also lived in Egypt. (paraphrase Aryeh Kaplan).
The “silk route” (trade) connected India, Mesopotamia, Canaan/Israel and Egypt. Mitanni (Vedic/Hindu) of Indo-Irani¬an origin entered Mesopotami¬a during the 17th Century BCE. Mitanni formed an alliance with Egypt in the 14th century BCE.. Canaanite religion was influenced by its peripheral position between Egypt and Mesopotama.
Kabbalah is “a ‘switching station’ in which the biblical tradition, Near Eastern mysticism, and western philosophy converge.” (Sanford Drob)
He got that right anyway.