Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti: An Academic Exploration of Vedic Monism

"The preceding brief survey of the varying conceptions of God in the Samhitas quite naturally raise two questions. The first is this: Why is it that now one god, now another, is lifted to the loftiest position and celebrated as the supreme divinity? Professor Max Muller has observed this phenomenon, and named it henotheism, but has done little to fathom its mystery. Its true explanation is to be found in the hymns themselves; 'and it is a grand explanation,' declares Swami Vivekananda, 'one that has given the theme to all subsequent thought in India and one that will be the theme of the whole world of religions: Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti—"that which exists is One: sages call it by various names.”

1. Introduction

The ancient Vedic dictum, Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti—That which exists is One: sages call it by various names—stands as one of the most profound and consequential statements in the history of religious thought.[1] Originating from the Rig Veda (1.164.46), this aphorism encapsulates a sophisticated understanding of divine reality that is at once singular and manifold. It posits a fundamental unity of being, a single, ultimate truth that is perceived and described in a multiplicity of ways by enlightened seers. As Swami Vivekananda declared, this is a grand explanation, one that has given the theme to all subsequent thought in India and one that will be the theme of the whole world of religions.[2]

This paper provides a comprehensive academic exploration of this concept, tracing its origins in the Vedic texts, its development through various schools of Indian philosophy, and its enduring influence on the religious and cultural landscape of India. By examining the scriptural context, philosophical interpretations, and historical impact of this powerful aphorism, we can gain a deeper appreciation for the pluralistic and inclusive ethos that has characterized much of Indian spiritual heritage. The Veda, derived from the root word vid meaning to know or knowledge, represents the oldest literary monuments of Hinduism and serves as a foundational source of religious and philosophical wisdom about God, the universe, and humanity.[3]

2. Etymology and Scriptural Context

The phrase Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti appears in the Rig Veda, the oldest of the four Vedas, within a hymn that addresses the nature of divine reality. The complete verse in Sanskrit reads:

The etymology of each component of this phrase reveals its profound meaning:

Sanskrit Term	Meaning	Philosophical Significance
Ekam	One, only, unity	Points to the singular nature of ultimate reality
Sat	Truth, reality, that which is eternally existent	Denotes the ontological foundation of all existence
Vipra	Wise people, sages, human intelligence	Indicates those with spiritual insight and knowledge
Bahudha	In many ways, variously, manifoldly	Acknowledges the diversity of expressions and approaches
Vadanti	They speak, they call, they declare	Refers to the verbal articulation of spiritual truth

Thus, the phrase can be understood as: The reality is one, but the wise speak of it in various ways. This interpretation is not merely linguistic but carries profound theological and philosophical implications. It suggests that the apparent multiplicity of deities and religious expressions in the Vedic tradition does not indicate a fragmented polytheism, but rather reflects the diverse ways in which human consciousness apprehends and articulates the singular divine reality.[3]

3. Henotheism, Kathenotheism, and the Nature of Vedic Worship

The Vedic hymns present a rich tapestry of divine beings, including Indra, Agni, Varuna, Surya, Soma, and many others. To the casual observer, this might appear as straightforward polytheism. However, the German philologist and Orientalist Max Müller identified a unique characteristic of Vedic worship which he termed henotheism, or more precisely, kathenotheism.[4] This refers to the practice of worshipping a single deity as supreme at a particular time, without denying the existence of other gods.

Müller observed that in the Vedas, now one god, now another, is lifted to the loftiest position and celebrated as the supreme divinity.[2] A study of the Rig Vedic hymns reveals that none of the Vedic deities enjoyed permanent prominence. In earlier times, people worshipped Dyaus and Prithvi; then Agni and Surya rose to prominence; subsequently, Varuna became the most important and powerful deity. This phenomenon, where none of the gods enjoys permanent supremacy, is precisely what Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti explains: the conscious search for the unity of godheads in the Vedic tradition represents an unconscious movement toward monotheism.[3]

The thirty-three Vedic gods mentioned in the Rig Veda are classified into twelve Adityas (solar deities), eleven Rudras (abstractions), eight Vasus (elements of nature), and two Ashvins (divine twins). All these gods belong to three cosmic regions: earth, heaven, and the intermediate space. While this classification might suggest polytheism, the deeper insight of the rishis (sages) reveals that all these deities are manifestations of a single transcendental reality.

4. Cosmological Hymns: The Purusha Sukta and Nasadiya Sukta

The Vedic corpus contains several profound hymns that explore the origin of the universe and the nature of ultimate reality, providing further insight into the concept of the One.

The Purusha Sukta (Rig Veda 10.90)

The Purusha Sukta describes the Cosmic Being, or Purusha, in terms that reveal both immanence and transcendence:[5]

This hymn presents the Purusha as both the material and efficient cause of the universe—both that out of which creation was made and that by which it was made. The cosmic being pervades all of creation while simultaneously extending beyond it. The statement Though he has become all this, in reality he is not all this represents a definitive rejection of pantheism, affirming that while the divine is present in all things, it is not reducible to or identical with the created universe.

The Nasadiya Sukta (Rig Veda 10.129)

The Nasadiya Sukta, also known as the Hymn of Creation, takes a more speculative and philosophical approach to cosmogony:[6]

This hymn begins with a state of non-duality, where there was neither non-existence nor existence. It famously concludes with a sense of profound mystery and epistemological humility. As the late astronomer Carl Sagan noted, this hymn reflects a tradition of skeptical questioning and unselfconscious humility before the great cosmic mysteries.[7] The Vedic seers, in their contemplation of origins, arrived at a conception of the divine so utterly impersonal and transcendent that they no longer referred to it as he or him, but only as Tad Ekam—That One.

5. Upanisadic Development and the Concept of Brahman

The philosophical insights of the Vedas were further developed and systematized in the Upanishads, which form the concluding portion of the Vedic literature (Vedanta, literally the end of the Vedas). The Upanishads explicitly articulate the concept of Brahman as the ultimate, unchanging reality that underlies all existence.

The Aitareya Upanishad declares: Brahman is One only without a second (1.1.1). The Mundaka Upanishad (3.2.8) uses the beautiful analogy of rivers merging into the ocean to illustrate the ultimate unity of all existence in Brahman: all the rivers of individual existence enter into the one ocean of supreme being and become one with it as their final goal.[3]

The Chandogya Upanishad (6:2:1-2) contains the famous teaching of the sage Uddalaka to his son Svetaketu: In the beginning, there was existence, One only, without a second. Some say that in the beginning, there was nonexistence only and that out of that the universe was born. But how could such a thing be? How could existence be born of non-existence? No, my son, in the beginning there was existence alone—one only, without a second.

The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (5.1.1) offers the famous purna (fullness) mantra:

This paradoxical statement expresses the inexhaustible nature of ultimate reality: Brahman is complete and infinite, and even when the entire universe emanates from it, it remains complete and infinite.

6. Vedantic Schools and Philosophical Systematization

The monistic vision of the Upanishads was systematized by various schools of Vedanta philosophy, each offering a distinct interpretation of the relationship between the individual soul (atman), the world, and Brahman:

School	Founder	Core Teaching
Advaita Vedanta	Adi Shankara (8th century CE)	Radical non-dualism: Brahman alone is real; the world is illusion (maya); the individual soul is identical with Brahman
Vishishtadvaita	Ramanuja (11th century CE)	Qualified non-dualism: Brahman is the only reality, but the world and souls are real as its attributes or modes
Dvaita	Madhva (13th century CE)	Dualism: Brahman, souls, and the world are eternally distinct realities
Shuddhadvaita	Vallabha (15th century CE)	Pure non-dualism: The world is real and is a transformation of Brahman

Despite their differences, all these schools are rooted in the foundational Vedic concept of a single ultimate reality. As Swami Vivekananda explained, drawing from the Upanishadic consciousness: God is one; as that of one ocean and as the rivers are many, the manifestations of gods are many. As the different rivers are satisfying the needs of people and leading towards the One ocean, so also ultimately God is one but the many gods are the mere manifestation that is satisfying the needs of different temperaments of people.[8]

7. Religious Pluralism and the Rejection of Pantheism

The principle of Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti has profound implications for religious pluralism. It suggests that the various religious traditions and their diverse conceptions of the divine are not mutually exclusive errors, but rather different approaches to the same ultimate truth. This insight has fostered a spirit of religious tolerance in India that has allowed for a remarkable diversity of beliefs and practices to coexist.

However, it is crucial to distinguish this Vedic monism from pantheism. The Purusha Sukta's declaration—Though he has become all this, in reality he is not all this—represents a clear rejection of the idea that the universe is identical with God. As Swami Prabhavananda explains: There is, properly speaking, whatever appearances may sometimes suggest to the contrary, no pantheism in India. The Hindu sees God as the ultimate energy in and behind all creation, but never, either in ancient or in modern times, as identical with it.[2]

The Atharva Veda further reinforces this monotheistic understanding: The reality is neither two, nor three, nor four, nor five, nor six, nor seven, nor eight, nor nine, nor ten. He is, on the contrary, One and Only One. There is no God except Him. All deities residing within Him and are controlled by Him. So He alone should be worshipped, none else. (13.4.16-20)[3]

The Yajur Veda similarly declares: There is One and only One Creator and Maintainer of the entire world. He alone is sustaining the earth, sky and other heavenly bodies. He is Bliss Himself! He alone deserves to be worshipped by us. (13.4)[3]

8. Conclusion: The Enduring Legacy

The principle of Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti has had a profound and lasting impact on the religious and cultural ethos of India. It has fostered a spirit of religious tolerance and pluralism, allowing for a diversity of beliefs and practices to coexist harmoniously. As Swami Prabhavananda notes, it is because India has been so permeated with this spirit that she has known relatively little of the religious fanaticism, persecution, and wars that have plagued other parts of the world. Characteristically, India has sought the truth in every faith—even in faiths not her own.[2]

The Vedic consciousness of God, as expressed in Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti, corresponds beneficently to the varied stages of religious attainment among human beings. As the orthodox Hindu understanding holds, the Vedas minister to all according to their needs: to those at a lower stage of spiritual development, they offer polytheism; to those at a higher stage, monotheism; and to those at the pinnacle of spiritual realization, a notion of God so utterly impersonal and transcendent as to be suited only to the greatest saints in their most strenuous moments of contemplation.[2]

This Vedic insight continues to be a source of inspiration for interfaith dialogue and a more inclusive understanding of religious truth in the contemporary world. The recognition that the one ultimate reality can be approached through multiple paths and described in various ways remains a powerful and relevant message for a world grappling with religious diversity and conflict. In the words of the Chandogya Upanishad: He, the One, thought to himself: Let me be many, let me grow forth. Thus out of himself he projected the universe; and having projected out of himself the universe, he entered into every being. All that is, has its self in him alone. Of all things, he is the subtle essence. He is the truth. He is the Self. And that, THAT ART THOU.[3]

References

[1] Minz, Florence, and Shruti Mishra. "Ekam Sad Vipra Bahudha Vadanti: A Vedic Consciousness of God." Department of Philosophy and Religion, Banaras Hindu University, 2020.
[2] Prabhavananda, Swami. The Spiritual Heritage of India: A Clear Summary of Indian Philosophy and Religion. Vedanta Press, 1979, pp. 32-35.
[3] Minz, Florence, and Shruti Mishra. "Ekam Sad Vipra Bahudha Vadanti: A Vedic Consciousness of God." Department of Philosophy and Religion, Banaras Hindu University, 2020, pp. 129-138.
[4] Macnicol, Nicol. The Religious Quest of India: Indian Theism; From the Vedic to the Muhammadan Period. Oxford University Press, London, 1915.
[5] "Purusha Sukta." Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation.
[6] "Nasadiya Sukta." Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation.
[7] Sagan, Carl. "The Edge of Forever." Cosmos: A Personal Voyage, episode 10, PBS, 30 Nov. 1980.
[8] Vivekananda, Swami. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. Vol. 1, p. 347; Vol. 8, pp. 141-142.

---

Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti—“that which exists is One: sages call it by various names.”

“In the following famous hymn, the Purusa Sukta, the Supreme Being, or God, is represented as at once concrete ('infinite heads', 'unnumbered eyes') and in the highest degree abstract—'beyond all predicates'. He both is and is not the created universe, for while the created universe is a part of his being it is not the whole of it:

The Universal Being has infinite heads, unnumbered eyes, and unnumbered feet. Enveloping the universe on every side, he exists transcending it. All this is he—what has been and what shall be. He is the lord of immortality. Though he has become all this, in reality he is not all this. For verily he is transcendental. The whole series of universes—past, present, and future—express his glory and power; but he transcends his own glory. All beings of the universe form, as it were, a fraction of his being; the rest of it is self-luminous, and unchangeable. He who is beyond all predicates exists as the relative universe. That part of him which is the relative universe appears as sentient and insentient beings. From a part of him was born the body of the universe, and out of this body were born the gods, the earth, and men.1

In the passage, it may be observed in passing, there is a definite rejection of pantheism: 'Though he has become all this, in reality he is not all this.' The words are characteristic of all Indian thought, and will be echoed and re-echoed in later pages of this book. There is, properly speaking, whatever appearances may sometimes suggest to the contrary, no pantheism in India. The Hindu sees God as the ultimate energy in and behind all creation, but never, either in ancient or in modern times, as identical with it.

It is a far cry from the rain-god Indra, with his golden armour, to a Universal Being who envelops and transcend the world; but a step still remained to be taken, and this also the Samhitas took. Indra and the Universal being had one thing in common: they were both personal gods. It is true that the Universal being was said to be 'beyond all predicates', but also, in almost the same breath, he was said to posses heads, and eyes, and feet, and to transcend 'his own glory'.

'Who has seen the first-born, when he that had no bones bore him that had bones? Where is the life, the blood, the self of the universe? Who went to ask of any who knew?2 Thus from the conception of God as a personal being the Vedic seers passed on to almost their final conception of him as utterly impersonal, so remote indeed from resemblance to anything human that no longer will they refer to him as 'he' or 'him', but only as TAD EKAM—in English, THAT. It is under this designation that he appears in the hymn of creation, called the Nasadiya hymn:

Existence was not, nor its opposite,
Nor earth, nor heaven's blue vault, nor aught beyond,
The subtle elements that are the veil
Of this so insubstantial world, where then
Might they find out a place? By whom be known?
The deep abyss of waters—where was that?
Death was not yet, nor deathlessness; the day
Was night, night day, for neither day nor night
Had come to birth. Then THAT, the primal font
Of life—breathless—to its own maya joined—
Brooded eternally, Itself beside,
In the wide universe there nothing was.
In the beginning gloom—gloom hidden in gloom!
From its cause undistinguished stood the world:
But lo, thereafter, from its darkling state—
Yet undistinguished from its cause—it rose,
By the pure will of THAT made manifest.
Whence came this will? From out a seed it came
Asleep within the heart of THAT—the seed
Of vanished worlds that have in order wheeled
Their silent courses from eternity:
The manifest in the unmanifest they found—
The sages, searching deep within themselves....
Ah, what are words, and what are mortal thought!
Who is there truly knows, and who can say,
Whence this unfathomed world, and from what cause?
Nay, even the gods were not! Who then can know?
The source from which this universe hath sprung,
That source, and that alone, which bears it up—
None else: THAT, THAT alone, lord of the worlds,
In its own self contained, immaculate
As are the heavens, above, THAT alone knows
The truth of what itself hath made—none else!3

The famous hymn has provided the basis for a great deal of philosophic speculation. For in it God is represented (it may be observed) as both the material and the efficient cause of the universe—both that out of which it was made and that by which it was made. In it also is that extraordinary conception of the universe, alluded to in the preceding chapter, as continually alternating between the phase of expression and the phase of potentiality; birth, existence, destruction—then a state of quiescence—then again birth, existence, destruction; and so on forever.

The preceding brief survey of the varying conceptions of God in the Samhitas quite naturally raise two questions. The first is this: Why is it that now one god, now another, is lifted to the loftiest position and celebrated as the supreme divinity? Professor Max Muller has observed this phenomenon, and named it henotheism, but has done little to fathom its mystery. Its true explanation is to be found in the hymns themselves; 'and it is a grand explanation,' declares Swami Vivekananda, 'one that has given the theme to all subsequent thought in India and one that will be the theme of the whole world of religions: Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti⁴—"that which exists is One: sages call it by various names.”'⁵

The subject is worth pausing with, for in the quoted words lies the secret not only of an aspect of the Vedic hymns but also—as Swami Vivekananda suggest—of an aspect of the religious life of India throughout her long history. Casual visitors to this ancient land carry away with them the impressions of an elaborate polytheism. True it is that India has always many gods—but in appearance only. In reality she has had but one god, though with prodigal inventiveness she has called him 'by various names'. Indra, Varuna, Hiranyagarbha—Rama, Krsna, Siva: What does it matter? Whichever of these or of many others the Hindu chooses for his adoration, that one becomes for him God himself, in whom exists all things, including, for the time being, all other gods. It is because India has been so permeated with the spirit of Ekam sat vipra bahuda vedanti that she has known relatively little of religious fanaticism, of religious persecution, of religious wars. Characteristically she has sought the truth in every faith—even in faiths not her own.

But there was a second question: Why is it that in the Vedic hymns we find elementary ideas of God as well as the most advanced? To the Western scholar there is no mystery, for he is accustomed to think of all things in terms of evolution, as he conceives evolution, and in the simpler anthropomorphic notions he sees the first stages of growth which slowly ripens to abstraction. But not so the orthodox Hindu. What he sees in the graduated scale of Vedic conceptions is a beneficent correspondence to varied stages of religious attainment. Some men are but barbarians in spiritual things; others are seers and sages. The Vedas (and this, say the orthodox, was a clear purpose of the exalted rsis) minister to all according to their needs. Some they teach to fly; some they must first teach to walk. To those at a low stage they offer polytheism, even at times materialism; to those at a higher stage monotheism; and to those at the top of the scale a notion of God so utterly impersonal, so devoid of anything describable in human terms, as to be suited only to the greatest saints, and to these only in their most strenuous moments.

For it would appear, in general, that even the greatest of Hindu saints have found the conception of God an abstract reality too rarefied for constant use. Occasionally they rise to it, but not for long. Like more ordinary mortals they too have yearned for a notion of divinity close to their minds and hearts, something they could readily love, and meditate upon, and worship.”

Swami Prabhavananda, The Spiritual Heritage Of India: A Clear Summary of Indian Philosophy and Religion
Vedanta Press (June 1979) pp. 32-5

1. Rg-Veda., x. 90. 1-5;
2. Rg-Veda, 1. 4. 164. Quoted by S. Radhakrishna, Indian Philosophy, vol. 1, p. 93 (London, Allen & Unwin, 1923).
3. Rg-Veda, x. 129. 1-7, Swami Prabhavananda and Frederick Manchester (trans.), Voice of India, vol. III, no. 1.
4. Ibid., i. 164
5. Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, vol. 1, p. 347.