Some great videos on Hindu Philosophy

Today I was trying to understand the differences between different schools of thought in Hinduism. I just came across some great videos of talks given by Dr. Nicholas Sutton, from The Oxford Center for Hindu Studies. There are not many of them, but the ones that are out there provide a really good introduction to Hinduism. I would suggest both a Hindu and a person who is interested in knowing about Hinduism to go through these videos. He is a really good orator. In his talks, you can see his passion for the quest of knowledge and his excellent delivery style. This is one such video:

I have put all his videos on youtube in the same playlist. There is another video which you may find quite interesting. I could only find this on vimeo. In this video (of two parts) Dr. Sutton and Prof. Patrick Olivelle discuss the ideas described in Vedas and Upanishads and how they are perceived by different Hindu philosophical schools of thought.

Prof. Patrick Olivelle and Dr Nick Sutton discuss the Vedas and Upanishads from Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies on Vimeo.

Prof. Patrick Olivelle and Dr Nick Sutton discuss the Vedas and Upanishads. Part two from Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies on Vimeo.

Hinduism: A monotheistic religion!!!

One common thought that arises in every mind when one thinks about Hinduism is that "How can there be millions of Gods: Shiva, Kali, Vishnu, Indra etc etc?". I was jokingly asked by one of my friend "How do you remember the names of so many Gods and worship them. Will you go to hell if you forget to worship any one of them?". A common perception of western society towards Hinduism is that it is a pagan religion with millions of Gods and deities. Let's now explore this view in this article and see up to what extent is it true.

So is Hinduism a polytheistic religion? Well, partly yes. What do I mean by partly yes? If I worship multitude of Gods then why would I not call it a completely polytheistic religion? Well, the reason is that Hinduism is not that simple. There are many Hindus who believe in every religion and the respective Gods and would not even mind praying to them. What?? Yes, It's true. Hinduism is a pluralistic religion i.e. there are many ways to think of One God. What does this mean now? If you look at the ancient texts, you will see a very beautiful but complex concept of that of Brahman. Brahman is described as eternal, formless and genderless being. I like to describe it mathematically in terms of zero and infinity. If you divide any number by zero, the result approaches infinity. In other words, Brahman is infinite yet it is supreme nothingness (0). Also, 0 divided by 0 is undefined. Same way, Brahman cannot be defined precisely.

So now if Brahman is supreme and infinite then who are the other Gods? Here, I would like to cite a famous verse from Isha Upanishad which roughly translates to:
"That(Brahman) is infinity, this(everything else: Gods, humans, worms, etc) is infinity. From infinity comes infinity. If you subtract infinity from infinity, what remains is infinity"

(Well I am mathematically wrong here :) But anyways..) What I mean here is that all the Gods, humans, plants, animals, worms, etc, etc; everything and everyone in this universe is nothing but a part of that Brahman. So technically there are billions, trillions or centillions of Gods. No matter what or who you worship, you are worshiping the same being. (It is advised in the Upanishads, that one should focus on ones own soul and try to identify itself with the Brahman)

I may have written so much about the Brahman here and in my previous posts, yet even I find these concepts difficult to understand. It has been rightly pointed out by the Rishis of the Vedas that no one can ever understand the concept of Brahman completely. It was the same reason why pluralism was brought into existence. When wise men like the Rishis, who devoted their entire life in knowing this Brahman, couldn't understand it completely, then how could a layman understand and appreciate it? It was the same reason why they tried to describe these concept to laymen by giving examples of Gods and other deities. When the laymen began appreciating these concepts, due to their lack of understanding of the formless nature of this being, begun worshiping these deities. Thus came the polytheistic angle to Hinduism. You can clearly see this if you compare the Upanishads and the Puranas, the former being the philosophical texts and the latter texts explaining the concept of divine through stories)

What I find saddening is that this beautiful concept of Brahman is diminishing from the current Indian society, where a majority of people are moving from "pluralistic form of Hinduism"(which is the true form) to the "Religion of Hinduism". I would encourage the readers to explore this concept of Brahman in more detail by going through the Upanishads or even the Bhagvath Geeta.

Discussion on God: Similarities of Hinduism and Abrahamic Religions.

Just like Abrahamic religions, Hinduism also has the concept of "The One God" - also called Paramatma(Sanskrit: Param-Supreme, Atma-Soul). Christians call it - Jehovah, and Muslims call it - Allah. It is eternal and infinite. It has no form. One cannot define it with words because It is perfect. If there is only one God in Hinduism just like the Abrahamic religions, then who are Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Indra, etc from the perspective of Abraham religions. Below, I will post my views i.e.  how I relate these entities to the Abrahamic religions. This is just my personal view and some people may disagree with this. I do not mean to offend anyone, My aim is just to show that all religions are just different ways to reach the same God and they are not that different. So I don't see any point in fighting over religions or in claiming that one religion is superior over other. If, by any chance, I offend anyone by this post then please accept my sincere apologies.

Let me start by discussing the Trimurti's in Hinduism i.e. Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. Brahma is the creator of all the material beings/things, Vishnu is the protector or the maintainer, and Shiva is the destroyer. I personally feel that, if you compare these entities with the Abrahamic religions, you can relate them to the Arch-Angels. For example, the story of Raphael signalling the beginning of the Armageddon, is comparable to that of Shiva doing the Tandava Nritya. Similarly it is said that Michel is the protector, leader of the Gods armies against evil; and thus is comparable to Vishnu. It is said that whenever there is degradation of moral values in the society, Lord Vishnu takes a human form to protect the righteous people from the evil and restore morality. Gabriel is said to have revealed the Koran to Muhammed and as far as I know he is associated with birth. I see him as Brahma,  the creator of the material world and the one who revealed the Vedas to the mankind. 

You can think of the Demi-Gods or the Devas (Indra, Agni, etc) as Angels(like Uriel, Ridwan, etc) . It is said that they live in the Swarga, which is similar to the heaven of Abraham religions. People like Buddha, Adi -Shankaracharya, Madvacharya, and other Gurus or Yogis who taught the people the moral principals and showed them different ways to reach God can be thought of as Prophets/children of God just like Mohammed, Jesus etc .

To summarize,
Hinduism == Abrahamic Religions
Paramatma == Jehovah, Allah
Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva == ArchAngels (Gabriel, Michael, Raphael) 
Indra, Vayu, Agni, etc == Angels(like Uriel, Ridwan etc)
Avatars == Angels taking human form
Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, Adi Shankaracharya are all Gurus or Prophets or children of God .

To conclude,
All religions are nothing but different ways to reach same God and they are not that different if you look at it with an open mind. I would appreciate if you provide your views on the same.

Animal Sacrifices in Vedas

The core of Hinduism is in the Vedas (Samhita, Bhramanas, Aranyakas and Vedantas). These are also one of the most criticized books of Hinduism due to the mention of animal sacrifices. But do they really suggest the people to perform this? I have two theories about this: 

1. Vedic knowledge was entirely based on symbolism. That's why it is always said that the Vedas are the most complex scriptures in Hindu philosophy and that one should try to learn Vedas only under the guidance of a qualified Guru. Over time people started misinterpreting the concepts in the Vedas by taking the literal meaning out of the verses. Thus animal sacrifices came into existence.

2. If you take it in literal sense then Vedas do really talk about animal sacrifices to please Demigods like Indra, Agni, etc who will shower material wealth and help a person reach heaven(Swarga) after death. But they also say that heaven is not the ultimate place (I will come to it later). As for the sacrificed animals, it is said in the Vedas that they will take birth in the Human form during the next reincarnation. 

Human form is given the highest importance in all the Hindu scriptures, as only in this form one gets free will and can perform good deeds(karma). Vedas say that the aim of a human must be to achieve Moksha or liberation from the cycle of life and death. Even in the Bhagvata Geeta, which is sometimes called the summary of Vedas, it is said that one should always strive for Moksha. They say that one must try to perceive the truth i.e. God is in everyone and everything and only do good deeds or karma. 

Human beings have free will. So it is up to us to choose what we want - The temporary pleasures of heaven or the ultimate goal of Moksha?. In other words, the choice is left to us, the humans. 
___

Either ways Vedas do not promote animal sacrifices. It's the misguided Brahmins who promote it for personal gains by alluring normal people with the promises of material gains.

Origin of The Vedic Civilization: Native Aryans or Aryan Invasion?

Hinduism, whose basis is mainly the Vedas, originated in the Indus-Saraswati basin. But the origin of the people who wrote the Vedas, or the ancient Aryans, is hard to say.

There are three different theories:
1. The ancient Aryans migrated to India wiping out the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) and brought their religion to the subcontinent.
2 The IVC was wiped out due to natural calamities some time during 1500 BC. The Aryan Migration happened much later.
3. The Aryans were native to India and the Vedic religion originated here.

The problem with all these theories is the lack of archaeological and contradicting literary(mainly the Vedas, which has a lot of description of the geography and the culture of the subcontinent) and other evidences . Let's look these theories, in detail, along with the evidences supporting and contradicting them:

Theory 1 & 2: Archaeologists have found a lot of evidence to support the existence of the IVC which flourished along the banks of river Indus around 3000 BC - 1500 BC. However, they haven't found any archaeological evidence which can point towards the reasons for it's decline. There is also no evidence of an Aryan invasion. The Aryan invasion theory is based entirely on comparative philology.  However, one thing is certain from the archaeological evidences i.e. the Indus valley civilization did exist and it was quite different from Vedic civilization. All the archaeological evidences in hand, suggest that the Indus valley people and the Vedic people never came into contact. But, there is also no evidence of a Vedic civilization as such. In other words, most of the archaeological data that we have is either related to IVC or to the period after the start of Mauryan Dynasty (the timing of which is also debatable but is widely accepted to be around 350 BC), by which time the Vedic religion was mature and strongly assimilated into the society. So one cannot derive the origin of the Vedic religion or it's originators i.e. the Aryans, just based on just archaeology. Also note that the Vedas claim that the Vedic people are natives of India and there is no mention of any migration, neither do they hint the existence or ruins of any other civilization similar to that of IVC.

Theory 3: This is the most favorable theory based on literary, geological, genetic and astronomical evidences but lacks major archaeological support.

Geological and literary evidences:
Vedas regard the river Saraswati to be the most important one, even more than Indus. However, it doesn't exist anymore as it dried up long time ago. It was the mightiest river during the Vedic times, with some hymns of Rigveda even mentioning that at one place the river stretched 14 kms wide. This river, if you go by literary evidence, began to dry up during the time of Mahabharata  Geologists have confirmed, using satellite imagery, that this river did exist in almost the same location as mentioned by the Vedas, and dried up completely around 1900 BC. This literary and geological evidence creates a lot of controversy as it suggests that the Vedas originated much before 1900 BC. Also, there have been significant discoveries of ruins of ancient cities that existed on the banks of this rivers.

Astronomical evidences:
Ancient Aryans were intensely fascinated with the celestial objects. Most of the literary works have a lot of mentions of planets, stars, and other celestial events. Prof. Narahari Achar, a famous astrophysicist from University of Memphis, simulated the celestial events mentioned in the Mahabharata and placed it's time around 3000 BC. Just for the sake of argument, if Mahabharata was indeed true and if it happened around that time then this puts the Vedic civilization and the Vedas much more behind in the history.

Genetic Evidences:
Some of the studies conducted by highly notable people in this field: Oppenheimer (2003), Cavalli-Sforza et. al.(2003), Sahoo et al.(2006) etc suggest that there was a migration out of India, rather than into India. Sahoo even goes on to state that : "It is not necessary, based on the current evidence, to look beyond South Asia for the origins of the paternal heritage of the majority of Indians at the time of the onset of settled agriculture. The perennial concept of people, language, and agriculture arriving to India together through the northwest corridor does not hold up to close scrutiny. Recent claims for a linkage of haplogroups J2, L, R1a, and R2 with a contemporaneous origin for the majority of the Indian castes’ paternal lineages from outside the subcontinent are rejected, although our findings do support a local origin of haplogroups F* and H. Of the others, only J2 indicates an unambiguous recent external contribution, from West Asia rather than Central Asia."

Conclusion:
The Vedic religion originated in the Indus Saraswati basin but the origin of the people who created this religion and time of creation is highly debatable. The archaeological evidence can only prove the existence of Indus Valley Civilization and cities on the banks of river Saraswati, but it can neither prove the Aryan Invasion theory nor the connection of Vedic and Indus civilization. One can only speculate the invasion/migration of the Aryans based on comparative philology. However, some of the more recent genetic studies indicate that there was indeed a migration but not into India, but out of India. The literary evidences and recent geological studies indicate that the river Saraswati did exist and dried up around 1900 BC suggesting that the Vedas originated much before 1900 BC.

I leave it up to the reader to decide whether the Aryans were native to India or migrated from the Central Asia, and the time of composition of the Vedas.

References:

Puri (2001) : Origin and course of Vedic Sarasvati River in Himalaya, Geo. Survey of India.

Tripathi, Bock, Rajamani, Eisenhauer (2004):Is River Ghaggar, Saraswati? Geochemical constraints, Current Science Vol 87. No. 8 :

http://www.iisc.ernet.in/~currsci/oct252004/1141.pdf

Frawley David, Science of the sacred, 2010:

http://gosai.com/sites/gosai/files/books/science-of-sacred-2010.pdf

Achar Narahari(2003), Date of the Mahabharata War based on Simulations using Planetarium Software.:

http://www.omilosmeleton.gr/pdf/en/indology/narahari01.pdf

Sahoo. et al. (2006), A prehistory of Indian Y chromosomes: Evaluating demic diffusion scenarios, PNAS: http://www.pnas.org/content/103/4/843.full

Cavalli-Sforza et al. (2003), Application of molecular genetic approaches to the study of human evolution, Nature Genetics: http://www.facstaff.bucknell.edu/sdjordan/PDFs/Cavalli%20Sforza%202003%20Nat%20Gen.pdf

Oppenheimer, Stephen (2003): The Real Eve: Modern mans journey out of Africa.

Griffith Ralph, Translation of Rig Veda:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/