Hindu deities and Brahman

[ZarryT]

To what degree does each variation on Hindu philosophy hold that deities are actual, individual deities as opposed to archetypes of universal principles and further human psychology?

[myguru12]

Myguru.in - A treasure of hindu spiritual stuff which indcludes Aarti, Hindu spiritual Gurus details, Stuti, Chalisa, Horoscope, Bhajan, Mantra, Spiritual Articles, Hindu Baby Names, spiritual readings, Pilgrimage in India, Hindu diety details, Diety Wallpapers, upcoming fast and festivals, hindu festivals details, E Greetings, Spiritual greetings, Spiritual Videos, good thoughts etc.

[Eastern Mind]

To what degree does each variation on Hindu philosophy hold that deities are actual, individual deities as opposed to archetypes of universal principles and further human psychology?

Vannakkam Zarry: Tough question, because there are so many variations. :)

I personally hold that deities are actual and individual, but also at the same time principles, especially God. Siva is Brahman as well.

Other deities are emanations of Siva, and just as real independently, ... I'm only talking from within a particular belief within Saivism though.

Aum Namasivaya

[Shuddhasattva]

You write "as opposed to" but I am unable to see the contradiction. Deities are commonly regarded as both actual individuals and manifestations of universal principles.

[philosoraptor]

To what degree does each variation on Hindu philosophy hold that deities are actual, individual deities as opposed to archetypes of universal principles and further human psychology?

In the Upanishads and the Puranas, the devas are regarded as actual individuals, many adminstering over various aspects of the creation. Aside from Brahman, the devas are considered posts which can be assigned to a jivatman who has good karma - this is stated in Vishnu Purana 3.7.6. The Bhagavata Purana actually speaks of 14 sets of devas, one for each time period known as a manvantara. In each manvantara there is a different Indra, a different Agni, a different set of saptarishis, etc.

I have not read anything in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, the Chandogya Upanishad, the Prasnopanishad, the Isopanishad, the Katha Upanishad, the Kena Upanishad, the Mundakopanishad, the Ramayana, the Bhagavad-Gita, the Bhagavata Purana, the Vishnu Purana, or the Varaha Purana that even remotely suggests that the devas are merely "archetypes of universal principles." This latter idea appears to be a modern invention originating within the last 2-3 centuries in the post-colonial period. My theory is that some Westernized, Hindu thinkers invented this idea when they were confronted with the proselytizers of monotheistic religions like Christianity. Instead of endorsing traditional Hindu ideas, they were ashamed of the "polytheism" and started to claim that the multiple devas were just symbolic in some way, and that Hinduism is therefore monotheistic and thus on par with Christianity.

As I've indicated elsewhere, neither "monotheistic" nor "polytheistic" correctly captures the sense of what sanAtana-dharma Hinduism is. There are multiple, real deities in the Vedic pantheon - that is undisputably true. But there is also a conception in the Vedas of a single, all-powerful Brahman who is the master of those devas - this is also undisputably true.