Hard polytheism v. soft polytheism in Hinduism, textual sources?

[Jainarayan]

At another site there are discussions about hard v. soft polytheism. Hard polytheism being defined as deities being real, individual beings. For example Horus, Bastet, Zeus, Lakshmi, Cernunnos, Heimdall or any deity of any pantheon would be an individual deity, just as you and I are individual persons. The deities would not be emanations of one Supreme God, or the same deity seen through different cultural lenses. That is, the Slavic sky god Perkunas is not Thor is not Indra is not Zeus.

Conversely, soft polytheism was defined as all deities being the same god, and different manifestations of one Supreme God seen through different cultural lenses. For example Thor, Perkunas, Indra would the same god seen through different cultural lenses, as well as being manifestations of one God.

I know Hinduism runs the gamut of -theisms, but as far as I've ever known, it is largely soft polytheism. I was at a loss to point to any sources or reasons for the two different beliefs within Hinduism. I'm not comparing the Hindu pantheon to any other. I used the examples above only to define hard v. soft polytheism in the context of the convos we were having. I could only answer with "I don't know; when I practiced Hinduism, that's the way we did it", i.e. I followed the crowd that for example Lakshmi, Saraswati, Parvati, Durga et al. are all forms of Devi, one Goddess. I could not point to a source for that being so or not being so.

So to the question: is there a source I can point to that supports and/or refutes soft and/or hard polytheism in Hinduism?

 

[Vinayaka]

You may not find direct explanations, Thorbjorn. I'm no scholar, so I wouldn't know. But you can find works that would support either. Almost any Advaita or Vedanta work will support soft polytheism. while works like that of my sampradaya will support hard polytheism, or some version there of.

As you know, Hinduism includes both, and everything in between.

 

[Jainarayan]

Great, thanks. I could point to the Upanishads for the soft polytheism, I didn't think of that, though I have read them. I haven't read any of the texts of your sampradaya, but I know you consider Ganesha, Murugan individual deities. So that would point to hard polytheism. Yeah, it was hard to nail down because there is so much variation and variety.

 

[Stormcry]

So to the question: is there a source I can point to that supports and/or refutes soft and/or hard polytheism in Hinduism?

There's a conversation of Krushna with his wife Satyabhama. The verse is as follow: Krishna says: शैवा: सौरा: गणेशावैष्णवा: शक्तिपूजका: । मामेवप्राप्नुवन्तिहवर्षांभसागरंयथा ।। पद्म पुराण उत्तरखण्ड ८८।४३। "Like the rain water comes from all around and finally reaches to the ocean, similarly all those worshiping Shiva, Surya, Ganesha, Vishnu, Devi acquires me only." I think above verse supports unity of all primary gods.

 

[Jainarayan]

Thanks @Hinduism♥Krishna I can refer to that also. That will be useful to quote for a person who was asking about Krishna. I think he is calling her.

 

[punkdbass]

Hard polytheism being defined as deities being real, individual beings.

What is an individual being or personality? I think there is tons of support within Hinduism for the idea that each deity is a real being with a unique individual personality.

The deities would not be emanations of one Supreme God, or the same deity seen through different cultural lenses

I see the problem that is motivating you asking this question. Essentially your question revolves around the age old philosophical problem of how to define the relationship between the Universal and the Particular, between the Infinite and the Finite. Pure Monism (all is literally one, or the manifestation of one supreme thing) negates any real individuality. Under Pure Monism, the individual deities would not be 'real,' rather only the one supreme thing is real. Only the Infinite is real, the finite is not. Are there Hindu's who have this view? Sure.

Alan Watts gives a great explanation (a Hindu perspective) of a relationship between the Infinite and Finite that allows both the Infinite and Finite individual beings to be real. For him, the Infinite necessarily contains/embraces the finite within itself. The infinite does not obliterate the finite, but rather contains/embraces the finite within itself. There are tons of great metaphors for visualizing this. The infinite is like a flame, the finite are like little sparks of the flame. The Infinite is like an ocean, the Finite are like the waves. Here a very real distinction is allowed to exist between the flame and a single spark, or a wave and the ocean, thus individual personality is real under this view, but still deeply connected with the Infinite Whole. So under this view, there may be one Supreme Being, but this being contains within itself many individual/unique beings - all of which are real.

Sorry for the long answer, but the bottom line is that there are Hindus who share this view that Watts has, the implication being that the individual deities are unique, real personalities. Look to Ramanuja's Vishishtadvaita philosophy for scriptural support of this view.

 

[Vinayaka]

Sometimes I think this monotheistic thing is just apologetics or compromise to the invading hordes of determined hard monotheists. Hindus tend to be very agreeable to foreign concepts.

Could be dead wrong though.

 

[Jainarayan]

What is an individual being or personality? I think there is tons of support within Hinduism for the idea that each deity is a real being with a unique individual personality. ...

Yeah, that's what I was looking for to refer to as sources. Fortunately monism never entered the discussion - that would have added another layer of complexity. It turns out that, as an essay linked to in the Paganism DIR says, the answer is "it depends on whom you ask or what you read". It's that simple and that complicated. So I guess I would give that answer.

 

[Valjean]

I think we'd have to distinguish between popular religion and formal theology, as well. Most people are not philosophers or religious scholars. Just as in Christianity, most people mix folklore, myths, theology, &c pretty indiscriminately.
I think most common Indians do believe in actual living deities.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram Thorbjorn ji

Thanks @Hinduism♥Krishna I can refer to that also. That will be useful to quote for a person who was asking about Krishna. I think he is calling her.

jai jai , ..... do I hear the sweet sound of Krsnas Flute , ....

are deities Real ? ......yes as we have deified not just individual manifest beings but also we have deified individual elemental powers , ....

but I am not sure about this hard and soft polytheism ? to me there is only one God many gods , ..expansions of the same , ..but each with dfferent character thus as individual as their functions .

Textual Sources , ...

almost the entire 7th chapter of the Gita , ...

''O conquer of wealth , there is no truth superior to Me , ...Everything rests upon Me , as pearls are strung upon a thread '' ...O son of Kunti I am the taste of water , the light of the sun and the moon , I am the AUM in all Vedic mantras , I am the sound in either and the the ability in man.'' ......''I am the original fragrance of the earth , I am the heat in Fire , I am the life of al that lives ,........'' ..''the original seed of all existance'' .....

and so it continues so for me there is no doubt ....but there is one final clarification ...

''I am , in one sence everything , ...but I am independent ''.....

 

[Chakra]

Do you just want verses that show that the Devas are NOT the same, and thus there exists a hierarchy among them? Let me know if this is what you want.

 

[James Field]

Do you just want verses that show that the Devas are NOT the same, and thus there exists a hierarchy among them? Let me know if this is what you want.

Are there any such verses ? If so, could you put them up here ?

 

[Chakra]

Are there any such verses ? If so, could you put them up here ?

Vedas are full of them. I will PM them to you soon.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Beginning of RigVeda, First book, first hymn, first verse:

"I laud Agni, the chosen Priest, God, minister of sacrifice, the hotar, lavishest of wealth;
Worthy is Agni to be praised by living as by ancient seers. He shall bring hitherward the Gods."

So the fire-God Agni is one and he is requested to make the other Gods come to the devotee's ritual.

 

[James Field]

So I wonder if terms like "monotheism" and "polytheism" are really applicable to Hinduisn

 

[Aupmanyav]

Oh, there is nothing to wonder. These are the general concepts about God according to Wikipedia. And this is what is acceptable or not acceptable, IMHO, in Hinduism.

Acceptable: Atheism, Deism, Henotheism, Monotheism, Omnism, Panentheism, Pantheism, Polytheism, Theism, Transtheism.
Not acceptable: Agnosticism, Apatheism, Ignosticism.
One has to take a stand, for or against. We do not allow fence-sitters.

 

[Kirran]

I think there's a distinction to be made in the explanation you put in the OP, @Thorbjorn.

Somebody could believe that Thor=Zeus=Indra, but that Indra=/=Ganesha. As in, these could be the same pantheon of individual deities being worshipped under different names in different cultures, but that ultimately their individual existences remained true.

I don't believe this myself, though. I'm such a soft polytheist as to be practically woolly.

 

[Aupmanyav]

To my knowledge, there is only one case in Hindu pantheon, that is Brahma, also variously known as Prajapati, Brahmanaspati, Brahaspati (in the Vedas), Vidhata, the creator and the writer of fate. Though not the same but still the same. Saraswati is another example, a divine river, a worldly river, and the Goddess of language and knowledge (as Vac in the Vedas) or as a form of the Mother Goddess, Durga. Exist both in indegenous and Aryan pantheons. Rudra merged with Shiva, and Avataras merged with Vishnu completely. Indra/Ganesha are completely different.

 

[Kirran]

To clarify what I meant: Kartikeya is known as Murugan, Skanda etc in different areas of India, and I suspect has different attributes emphasised in different cultures. But he's still the same deity. So why not Mars and Ares as well?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Kartikeya/Murugan has nearly the same attributes, that of being the commander of the army of Gods. He is sometimes worshiped in South India and North India too as a bachelor and giver of wisdom, though later he is supposed to have married twice (to Valli and Devasena, Indra's daughter).