The Rig Veda is the most ancient of the Hindu scriptures, composed between 1500 and 1000 B.C. As you can see from the creation hymn, its verses are obscure enough to be the foundation for commentaries claiming the full spectrum of theologies including :
monism (everything including creation is God)
monotheism (there is one God distinct from creation)
polytheism (there are many gods)
henotheism (adherence to one particular god among the many)
agnosticism (there may be a God, but we have no way to know for sure)
atheism (there is no God)
So actually, there are many, many hinduisms...
How did this incredible diversity come about?
Ancient Hindus believed that the universe was held together and kept in order by the words, sacrifices and rituals of the Brahmin priests. If they said the sacred mantra prayers pronouncing the syllables in just the right way with just the right elements then they were believed to have power to move both humans and gods. Thus, the successful functioning of both one’s individual life as well as the cosmos itself became dependent upon costly priestly rituals which became more and more elaborate. Recognizing this, some philosophers began to question the control of the priesthood and sought to unite with that supreme power beyond through personal, direct experience. They became wandering ascetics, internalizing the sacrifices and rituals that earlier had been restricted to Brahmin priests. They went to live in forests and caves to seek the meaning of life and truth of reality, sacrificing the comforts of home and family. They sought not for the mere disconnected pleasure of learning, but in a desperate search for truth and salvation. During this time, many individuals claimed to find insights into the nature of reality. Those who rejected the Vedas altogether, such as the Buddhists and Jains, were no longer considered to be within the Hindu fold. Others however, no matter how varied their conclusions, remained in the sphere of Hinduism as long as they still accepted the authority of the Vedas.
How did they unify so many various beliefs?
One of the first and most influential philosophers to achieve this was Shankara (788-820 A.D.) His approach was to view two levels of truth, relative and ultimate. The many personal gods of hinduism were seen to be true on the lower level of relative truth, but ultimately God was unknowable and impersonal and undifferentiated Oneness. He taught non-dualism, meaning that there is no difference between humans, God and the universe. This allowed the masses who enjoyed worship of personal deities to continue in their ignorance on that lower level while those who sought to go deeper would seek to experience the ultimate truth of the all-embracing One.
This form of Hinduism is the most influential here in the West, impacting most forms of New Age philosophies. Since all is One, there is no distinction between good and evil. The thread of morality in this system comes from an impersonal law of karma, cause and effect. Good actions produce good results, and bad actions bring bad results. This carries over from lifetime to lifetime, since they believe in reincarnation. Bad karma may send the soul into one of the many hells, where it suffers temporarily until rebirth in the next life. Good karma may lead to reincarnation in one of the heavens where the gods enjoy leisurely pleasures, but this too is only temporary and keeps you within the cycle of ignorance and suffering. As long as you have karma, good or bad, you will be reincarnated accordingly. Salvation is release from this continual cycle of rebirths through realizing that you are not a separate ego (individual identity) but instead merely one with the One.
This belief is fairly common in the Santa Cruz area, to one degree or another. It is seen as a hopeful philosophical and spiritual foundation for unity and world peace. It allows one to agree with people of other faiths by seeing their beliefs as true in the relative sense, though perhaps not in the ultimate sense.
Unfortunately, the presumption of this belief system is subtle and often slips through unnoticed. It has the appearance of humility by accepting all religions into its fold, yet absorption is not the same as tolerance. It does not accept other religions in and of themselves, but forces each particular faith to surrender its claims to truth and bow to theirs. Ultimately, it rules out the possibility of God being personal and knowable. It claims that the majority of India’s worshipers who follow personal gods (as well as Jews, Muslims and Christians) are all ignorant, on a lower level of spiritual insight.
It is interesting to note: Here in the West, we often claim to worship a personal God outside of ourselves but live as if we ourselves were God. In India, they claim that they themselves are God, yet cannot repress their longing to worship personal gods outside of themselves!
Shankara’s belief was that God is so far beyond any human conceptions that it is best to not even allow linguistic descriptions. Later philosophers challenged this, saying that it makes God so far removed and unknowable that he becomes obsolete. They came up with alternate theories claiming God to be personal and knowable, some still holding to the monism of all being God and others taking a more monotheistic approach claiming creation to be distinct from God. This laid a philosophical framework for what has become by far the most popular expression of Hinduism in India: Bhakti Yoga. This path can be described as “salvation through devotion to God.” Though philosophically monistic, most Indians are henotheistic in practice. They choose one of the many gods on which to focus their worship, while knowing that ultimately all gods are part of the same all-encompassing One.
This is also a common practice in the Santa Cruz area. Folks will place their faith in one religion or another, yet all the while believe that it is only one path of many. Their ultimate goal is self-realization. Therefore, they may jump from one religion to another and mix and match various traditions to create a personal path most effective toward this underlying goal.