CHAPTER 3: COMPARATIVE INSIGHTS
B. Multiplicity and Hinduism
First for consideration is Hinduism. A polytheistic religion with a history going back thousands of years, precise origins and definitions of Hinduism are impossible to determine.21 The word “Hinduism” is simply a reflection of the religion’s geographic location (across the Indus River from western society in what is modern northwestern and northern India) and provides no content about any practices or beliefs associated with the religion. For this reason, the religion called “Hinduism” today should be thought of as an
21 K. Klostermaier suggests that the original inhabitants of India and their (religious) culture may trace back half a million years, with some practices and beliefs continued among many tribes (K. K. Klostermaier, A SurveyofHinduism [Albany: State University of New York Press, 1989], 31).
umbrella term for various regional traditions and numerous sacred sources. While modern Tamil tribes may preserve some aspects of ancient Dravidian cultural traditions, in the western mind Vedic religion and scripture – which were brought to India by the Āryan invaders (ca. 1500-1200 B.C.E.)22 – most commonly represent Hinduism.23
As an umbrella term for a “wildly diverse Indian religion…which has no founder and no standard scripture or commentary” and one billion adherents from various
geographic, political, and social settings,24 any responsible treatment of “Hinduism” should qualify which specific Hinduism is under discussion. Moreover, in addition to the numerous traditions present today, in the course of the past few thousand years, myths, epics, and other sacred lore were all disseminated by a largely illiterate, rural population, that freely embellished the traditions in artwork or oral retellings,25 which means that a chronological setting should be given for each form of Hinduism treated. Since the following survey is informed by modern English-language treatments that “offer correct information on Hinduism as a whole and also to make a modern westerner understand some of its meaning,”26 this survey represents what amounts to an “orthodox Hindu theology”27 that may not exist in any particular community in India today (or in any particular period) but is very much alive in the scholarly tomes at the Western library and
22 Brahmanism and the Ṛg-Veda may antedate the Āryan invasion of India, but the two are so closely associated with each other that, for practical purposes, Vedic religion can be identified with early official Āryan worship (Klostermaier 1989, 38).
23 However, there has been continual change in Hinduism in the past few millennia as Hinduism
encountered new religions and cultures (e.g., the Islamic and modern Western cultures). Also, according to Klostermaier, a proper and an inclusive definition of Hinduism should also embrace Jainism, Buddhism, and Sikhism, among other sects, within its purview, but today most Hindus define their religion according to the specific group to which they belong, e.g., Śaivas, Vaiṣṇavas, and Śāktas (Klostermaier 1989, 33). Others, he states, define the religion in Indian nationalistic terms as they embrace an attachment to the land or to a common Hindu civilization and history..
24 S. Prothero, ReligiousLiteracy: WhatEveryAmericanNeedstoKnow–andDoesn’t (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 2007) 186.
25 A. L. Dallapiccola, DictionaryofHinduLoreandLegend [London: Thames & Hudson, 2002], 12. 26 Klostermaier 1989, 5.
27 B. Zeller, personal communication, 09/09/2010.
in the minds of the general population in the West. For this reason, in light of the definition of “official religion” provided in chapter 2, this survey represents neither “official religion” nor “non-official religion” but more closely resembles the elitist religion of the scholar-scribes in Mesopotamia. This elitist or orthodox treatment is offered here because this is likely the Hinduism that Assyriologists and scholars in other fields of religious studies presuppose when they briefly reference Indian religious traditions for a Western audience.
This Vedic and Āryan element contains a mythological element, in which divine beings (deva or devatā) arose along with the creation of heaven and earth.28 However, unlike Mesopotamian or classical mythology that center on narratives about divine beings, deities play a secondary role in Vedic mythology because the primary focus is the underlying “all-pervading ultimate power” that the devas symbolically represent.29
Because of this difference between Vedic mythology and classical mythology, K.
Klostermaier argues that unlike Roman and Greek (and Mesopotamian) pantheons, there is no Vedic pantheon, simply transcendent power (i.e., mana-power and asura-power).30
While Klostmaier’s assessment may be accurate and the gods are understood by many religious adherents as symbols of supernatural creative forces, the myths and hymns surrounding the devas still portray these divine beings as entities that intervene in the present world, as they had in other points in history. For example, the god Śiva is provided with 1000 names in the Mahābhārata litany of Śaivite (Śiva-related) devotion
28 Klostermaier 1989, 109. Literally, derived from the root *div, deva means “shiny” or “exalted,” but the term may also refer to any supernatural being (Dallapiccola 2002, 57). According to the Rgveda, there are 33 devas that preside over heaven, earth, and water. (As seen below, this is the same Indo-European root whence the Greek god Zeus derives.)
29 Klostermaier 1989, 127.
30Manus-power refers to thinking powers of the mind or cognition (Dallapiccola 2002, 131), and asura- power refers to spiritual or divine power (p. 33).
and appears in numerous narratives where he engages in battles with enemies, who may take on the guise of tigers, elephants, or serpents.31 Moreover, Śiva is described in Śaiva
Āgamas scripture as taking on the appearance of 28 avatāras. These avatāras, or the bodily form of a god when he or she has descended to earth,32 are of particular interest since they represent the forms of the deity throughout history.
In addition to the 28 local avatāras of Śiva, the only other Hindu deva from classical Hindu mythology described as having an avatāra is Viṣṇu.33 Like Śaivite devotion, Vaṣṇavism, which has sources from both Vedic religion and Dravidian
traditions, has developed a rich mythology in Hinduism.34 Primary among this mythology is Viṣṇu’s role as a savior, which is reflected in the Bhagavadgītā, Ṛg-Veda, Purāṇas, and other epics.35 According to the Bhagavadgītā, Viṣṇu comes down to the earth in the
31 Klostermaier 1989, 135. The Mahābhārata is one of two Sanskrit epics from ancient India and is likely the world’s longest poem with 110,000 couplets divided into 18 sections (Dallapiccola 126).
32 Klostermaier 1989, 512. The word avatāra (“descent”) – from the root tṛi (“to cross over” or “to save”) with the prefix ava (“down”) – on a basic level may refer to any deity’s appearance on earth, but it usually refers to an appearance of Viṣṇu (E. G. Parrinder, AvatarandIncarnation: TheWildeLecturesinNatural andComparativeReligionintheUniversityofOxford [New York: Barnes & Noble, 1970], 19). The avatāra-phenomenon is relatively late in the tradition first appearing in the fourth century B.C.E., so the word of interest in the Vedas and classical Upanishads is prādurbhāva, meaning “manifestation” (p. 20). The avatāra tradition is clearly formulated for the first time in the Bhagavadgītā and is elaborated upon in the Purāṇas (Dallapiccola 2002, 33).
Zeller notes from his own ethnographic work in the United States that avatars can include any object, like shade-providing clouds or bees near a sacred site (Zeller 2010). These conceptions are
definitely in contrast with the orthodox view summarized in the present study, highlighting all the more the differences in divine conceptions between the religious elite and the general population.
33 M. Biardeau, “Avatars,” in Mythologies: Dictionnairedesmythologiesetdesreligionsdessocieìteìs traditionnellesetdumondeantique (comp. Y. Bonnefoy; trans. D.White; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), 2:849.
34 Klostermaier 1989, 228.
35Bhagavadgītā means, “Song of the Lord,” and is found in the sixth book of the Mahābhārata (Dallapiccola 2002, 37). It likely dates to the fourth century B.C.E. or later, though these dates are uncertain. The Ṛg-Veda (“Veda of Praise”) is the oldest and most important of the four Vedas, which is a collection of hymns in honor of the primary Aryan deities (p. 165). The Ṛg-Veda is often dated between 1500-1200 B.C.E. (p. 166). Purāṇas are old stories that retell the creation, destruction, and recreation of the world, along with genealogies of the gods and patriarchs (p. 157). They likely date to the early centuries C.E. (p. 158). Significantly, the Vedas are songs to the gods rather than messages from the gods to men (Parrinder 1970, 15).
form of an avatarā whenever dharma is in danger.36 Viṣṇu is said to have ten embodiments (daśāvatāras) in mythology, which includes both theriomorphic and anthropomorphic forms.37 With each avatāra, the deity defeats the threatening foe and saves the good. For instance, as the fish matsya, he defeats the (evil) asuras and returns the Vedas to the Brahmins; as the unicorn ekaśriṅga, he saves Manu (the first man and progenitor of mankind) from the flood that destroyed the rest of mankind; and as the dwarf vāmana, he defeats the king of the earth Bali, which allows the exiled devas to return to earth.
Upon his descent into this world, Viṣṇu’s chosen avatāra remembers its divine origins and focuses on its ultimate warrior-like goal of maintaining the proper balance of
dharma in the world.38 Significantly, each of these theriomorphic avatāras is related to a particular cosmic period, or yuga,39 which is the equivalent of one lifetime of or 100 years of the Brahma.40 The anthropomorphic forms of Viṣṇu (Rāma and Kṛṣṇa), on the other hand, are not limited to a specific yuga.41 Rāma, a locally worshiped divine king (who likely predates the Āryan tradition42), is only identified as an avatāra of Viṣṇu
36 Klostermaier 1989, 515. Dharma is the sum of the righteousness that deals with law, ethics, customs and morals (Dallapiccola 2002, 59).
37 Klostermaier 1989, 228-230. The animal forms include matsya (the fish), kūrma (the tortoise), kūrma (the boar), and ekaśriṅga (the unicorn/horse-headed), while the anthropomorphic forms include Rāma and Kṛṣṇa, as well as the dwarf vāmana and the man-lion nṛsiṅha. Other traditions also include historical persons as avatāras of Viṣṇu, including the Buddha and Kapila. The mythological order of these avatāras is matsya, kūrma, kūrma, nṛsiṅha, vāmana/trivikrama, Parashurāma (Rāma with the battleax), Rāma- Chandra (the moon-god), Balarāma (Rāma the Strong), Kṛṣṇa, the historical Buddha, and Kalki
(Dallapiccola 34). Typically, the animal avatāras are involved with creation myths or creator gods, whereas the anthropomorphic avatāras battle demons (Parrinder 1970, 24f.).
38 Biardeau 1991, 852.
39 Biardeau 1991, 849. Four yugas comprise each cycle of creation, and a complete cycle is about 4.32 million years (Dallapiccola 2002, 210). One avatāra, Kalki, is the only one whose arrival takes place in the future (Klostermaier 1989, 230). His eschatological victory will be over kali, the embodiment of strife, and all evil influences.
40 Biardeau 1991, 850. 41 Klostermaier 1989, 230. 42 Klostermaier 1989, 467 n. 13.
relatively late, but is worshiped by millions at his sacred site in Ayodhyā for his heroic deeds as Viṣṇu:
The Lord of Jānakī, who is intelligence itself and, though immutable, being requested by the devas to remove the afflictions of the world, took the illusory form of a man and was apparently born in the solar dynasty. After attaining to fame eternal, capable of destroying sins by killing the foremost of the demons, he again took up his real nature as Brahman (Bālakaṇḍa I, 1 of Adhyātma
Rāmāyaṇa).43
Of particular interest here is the explicit comment that even this Rāma avatāra is merely temporary, even if he may re-manifest himself in multiple yugas. The other
anthropomorphic (and most popular) form is Kṛṣṇa.44 According to Klostermaier, many worshipers consider the Kṛṣṇa avatāra more than just another of the ten traditional
avatāras who comes to liberate the world of evil; they consider this form the primary appearance of the god himself, the svayambhagavān, which is the eternal body of this Lord.45 This beloved form is the subject of numerous myths and narratives, ranging from stories of his infancy and birth miracles to his founding of the Bhāgavata religion.46
Today, Vaiṣṇavism has a fully developed systematic theology, and the deity is described as the ruler and lord of all and the preserver of all life: Īśvara.47 As Īśvara, he not only comprises the world, he animates it as well, and he is simultaneously unbound by time and space. Within this realm of complicated high theology, the daśāvatāras are
43 Klostermaier 1989, 231. Translation of this fifteenth-century C.E. text is Klostermaier’s.
44 Whether Kṛṣṇa is an avatāra of Viṣṇu in the Bhagavadgītā is disputed since Viṣṇu is not actually mentioned in the avatāra passages (Parrinder 1970, 32), but epithet placements and apposition in chapter 11 are the primary statements behind this equation.
45 Klostermaier 1989, 231.
46 “Vishnu himself, who is worshiped by all the worlds, was born of Devakī and Vasudeva [his human mother and father], for the sake of the three worlds. He who is without birth and death, the splendid creator of the universe, the Lord and invisible cause of all, the unchanging and all-pervading soul, the center round which everything moves….that originator of all beings ‘appeared’ (prādurbhūta) in the family of the Andhaka-Vrishnis for the increase of right” (Mahābhārata, Adi Parva 58 51, etc; 59 83; Parrinder’s translation, Parrinder 1970, 21).
47 Klostermaier 1989, 233.
just one (vibhava) of five major form-categories Viṣṇu has.48 However, these high theological speculations are not comparable to any mainstream aspect of religion
encountered in Mesopotamian religion, and for this reason, these speculations are of little interest to the present discussion. Moreover, aside from the fifth form-category, the
ārcāvatāra, these other categories do not attempt to describe the deity’s physical manifestations and are, thus, irrelevant.
For consideration, then, are the daśāvatāras of the vibhava form and the
ārcāvatāra. If these categories may be aligned with their Mesopotamian counterparts, then the avatāras and ārcāvatāra of Viṣṇu should be compared with local cult
manifestations of the deities and their cult objects, respectively. Local manifestations in Mesopotamia (e.g., Ištar-of-Arbela and Ištar-of-Nineveh) can be included among the cult objects, especially in the form of anthropomorphic cult-statues, but this Mesopotamian category also reflects the humanoid image of the deity in contemporary existence in the divine world, interacting with gods and other divine beings. Likewise, avatāras are envisioned as a very physical presence in this world, but these physical presences can serve as the visual inspiration of an ārcāvatāra, be it as a figurine at a family cult or at a larger temple cult. Additionally, the ārcāvatāra may take the physical form of a plant (i.e., the tulasī plant or the śālagrāma), just as the Mesopotamian deity may be
represented by a standard or other non-anthropomorphic cultic paraphernalia. Moreover, as is explored below for Mesopotamian local manifestations of a god, the various
48 In addition to vibhava, Viṣṇu’s transcendent form is para; his powers are vyūha; his antaryāmin resides within the hearts of humans; and his visible images, which act as the deity’s physical presence on earth, are
ārcāvatāra (Klostermaier 1989, 234).
avatāras of Viṣṇu likely existed independently of a Viṣṇu cult and only later became identified as Viṣṇu avatārs because of that cult’s popularity.49
Despite these similarities between local manifestations of gods in Mesopotamian and Hindu religion, however, it must be reiterated that avatāras of a given deity (i.e., Viṣṇu and Śiva) only exist one at a time, or one during a given epoch in history. Each
avatāra may be worshiped at that point in history, but worshipers recognize that specific
avatāra are not current embodiments of the deva they represent. As mentioned above about Rāma: “After attaining to fame eternal…he again took up his real nature as
Brahman” (Bālakaṇḍa I, 1). If Mesopotamian conceptions of local manifestations are comparable to Hindu avatāras, then this inability of avatāras to coexist is beyond our comparison. The appearance of divine names, such as Ištar-of-Nineveh and Ištar-of- Arbela, side-by-side in state treaties and hymns of praise or the appearance of their statues together in cultic rituals (i.e., BM 121206 ix) indicates that these manifestations exist at the same time. Indeed, while many argue that Ištar-of-Nineveh is a manifestation of the same goddess as is Ištar-of-Arbela, surely, no one would argue that Ištar-of-
Nineveh can only exist when Ištar-of-Arbela has relinquished her form, as is the case with the various avatāras of Viṣṇu.