Editing Nontheistic religion (section)

== Hinduism ==
{{Main|Atheism in Hinduism}}
Hinduism is characterised by extremely diverse beliefs and practices.<ref>Catherine Robinson, ''Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord.'' Routledge Press, 1992, page 17.</ref> In the words of [[R.C. Zaehner]], "it is perfectly possible to be a good Hindu whether one's personal views incline toward [[monism]], [[monotheism]], [[polytheism]], or even [[atheism]]."<ref name="Catherine Robinson 1992, page 51">Catherine Robinson, ''Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord.'' Routledge Press, 1992, page 51.</ref> He goes on to say that it is a religion that neither depends on the existence or non-existence of God or Gods.<ref>R. C. Zaehner, (1966) ''Hinduism'', P.1-2, Oxford University Press.</ref> More broadly, Hinduism can be seen as having three more important strands: one featuring a personal Creator or Divine Being, second that emphasises an impersonal Absolute and a third that is pluralistic and non-absolute. The latter two traditions can be seen as nontheistic.<ref>Griffiths, Paul J, (2005) ''Nontheistic Conceptions of the Divine'' Ch. 3. in  T''he Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion'' by William J Wainwright, p.59 . Oxford University Press .</ref>

Although the Vedas are broadly concerned with the completion of ritual, there are some elements that can be interpreted as either nontheistic or precursors to the later developments of the nontheistic tradition. The oldest Hindu scripture, the [[Rig Veda]] mentions that 'There is only one god though the sages may give it various names' (1.164.46). [[Max Müller]] termed this [[henotheism]], and it can be seen as indicating one, non-dual divine reality, with little emphasis on personality.<ref>Masih, Y. A comparative study of religions, P.164, Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 2000 {{ISBN|81-208-0815-0}}</ref> The famous [[Nasadiya Sukta]], the 129th Hymn of the tenth and final Mandala (or chapter) of the Rig Veda,  considers creation and asks "The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe. "Who then knows whence it has arisen?".<ref>O'Flaherty, Wendy Doniger, (1981)''The Rig Veda: An Anthology of One Hundred Eight Hymns'' (Classic) Penguin</ref> This can be seen to contain the intuition that there must be a single principle behind all phenomena: 'That one' (tad ekam), self-sufficient, to which distinctions cannot be applied.<ref>Collinson, Diané and Wilkinson, Robert Thirty-Five Oriental Philosophers, P. 39, Routledge, 1994 {{ISBN|0-415-02596-6}}</ref><ref>Mohanty, Jitendranath (2000), Classical Indian Philosophy: An Introductory Text, p:1 Rowman & Littlefield, {{ISBN|0-8476-8933-6}}</ref>

It is with the [[Upanishads]], reckoned to be written in the first millennia (coeval with the ritualistic [[Brahmanas]]), that the Vedic emphasis on ritual was challenged. The Upanishads can be seen as the expression of new sources of power in India. Also, separate from the Upanishadic tradition were bands of wandering ascetics called Vadins whose largely nontheistic notions rejected the notion that religious knowledge was the property of the Brahmins. Many of these were [[shramana]]s, who represented a non-Vedic tradition rooted in India's pre-Aryan history.<ref>Jaroslav Krejčí, Anna Krejčová (1990) Before the European Challenge: The Great Civilizations of Asia and the Middle East, p:170, SUNY Press, {{ISBN|0-7914-0168-5}}</ref> The emphasis of the Upanishads turned to knowledge, specifically the ultimate identity of all phenomena.<ref>Doniger, Wendy, (1990) ''Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions'', P. 441, Merriam-Webster, {{ISBN|0-87779-044-2}}</ref> This is expressed in the notion of [[Brahman]], the key idea of the Upanishads, and much later philosophizing has been taken up with deciding whether Brahman is personal or impersonal.<ref>Smart, Ninian (1998) The World's Religions P.73-74, CUP {{ISBN|0-521-63748-1}}</ref> The understanding of the nature of Brahman as impersonal is based in the definition of it as 'ekam eva advitiyam' (Chandogya Upanishad 6.2.1) – it is one without a second and to which no substantive predicates can be attached.<ref>Wainwright, William J. (2005) Ch.3 Nontheistic conceptions of the divine. ''The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion'' p.67 OUP, {{ISBN|0-19-513809-0}}</ref> Further, both the [[Chandogya]] and [[Brihadaranyaka]] Upanishads assert that the individual [[Ātman (Hinduism)|atman]] and the impersonal Brahman are one.<ref>Jones, Richard H. (2004) ''Mysticism and Morality: A New Look at Old Questions'', P. 80, Lexington Books, {{ISBN|0-7391-0784-4}}</ref> The [[Mahāvākyas|mahāvākya]] statement [[Tat Tvam Asi]], found in the Chandogya Upanishad, can be taken to indicate this unity.<ref>Brown, Robert L, (1991) ''Ganesh: Studies of an Asian God'', SUNY Press, {{ISBN|0-7914-0656-3}}.</ref> The latter Upanishad uses the negative term [[Neti neti]] to 'describe' the divine.
[[File:Patanjali Statue.jpg|270px|thumb|right|[[Patañjali]] statue in Pantanjali Yog Peeth Haridwar]]
Classical [[Samkhya]], [[Mimamsa]], early [[Vaisheshika]] and early [[Nyaya]] schools of Hinduism do not accept the notion of an omnipotent creator God at all.<ref>Larson, Gerald James, Ch. Indian Conceptions of Reality and Divinity found in ''A Companion to World Philosophies'' By Eliot Deutsch, Ronald Bontekoe, P. 352, Blackwell, {{ISBN|0-631-21327-9}}</ref><ref>Morgan, Kenneth W. and Sarma, D S, Eds. (1953) Ch. 5. P.207 Hindu Religious Thought by Satis Chandra Chatterjee, ''The Religion of the Hindus: Interpreted by Hindus'', Ronald Press. {{ISBN|81-208-0387-6}}</ref> While the Sankhya and Mimamsa schools no longer have significant followings in India, they are both influential in the development of later schools of philosophy.<ref>Flood, Gavin D, ''An Introduction to Hinduism'',(p.232) CUP, {{ISBN|0-521-43878-0}}</ref><ref>Larson, Gerald James,(1999) ''Classical Samkhya'', Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, {{ISBN|81-208-0503-8}}</ref> The Yoga of [[Patanjali]] is the school that probably owes most to the Samkhya thought. This school is dualistic, in the sense that there is a division between 'spirit' (Sanskrit: [[purusha]]) and 'nature' (Sanskrit: [[prakṛti]]).<ref>Feuerstein, Georg (1989), ''Yoga: The Technology of Ecstasy'', Tarcher, {{ISBN|0-87477-520-5}}</ref> It holds Samadhi or 'concentrative union' as its ultimate goal<ref>King, Richard (1999) ''Indian Philosophy: An Introduction to Hindu and Buddhist Thought'', p:191, Edinburgh University Press, {{ISBN|0-7486-0954-7}}</ref> and it does not consider God's existence as either essential or necessary to achieving this.<ref>Clements, Richard Pauranik, ''Being a Witness in Theory and Practice of Yoga'' by Knut A. Jacobsen</ref>

The [[Bhagavad Gita]], contains passages that bear a monistic reading and others that bear a theistic reading.<ref>Yandell, Keith. E., ''On Interpreting the "Bhagavadgītā"'', Philosophy East and West 32, no 1 (January 1982).</ref> Generally, the book as a whole has been interpreted by some who see it as containing a primarily nontheistic message,<ref>Catherine Robinson, ''Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord''. Routledge Press, 1992, page 45, 98, 115, 136.</ref> and by others who stress its theistic message.<ref>Catherine Robinson, ''Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord.'' Routledge Press, 1992, pages 47, 51.</ref> These broadly either follow after either [[Adi Shankara|Sankara]] or [[Ramanuja]]<ref>Flood, Gavin D, ''An Introduction to Hinduism'', (pps 239-234) CUP, {{ISBN|0-521-43878-0}}</ref> An example of a nontheistic passage might be "The supreme Brahman is without any beginning. That is called neither being nor non-being," which Sankara interpreted to mean that Brahman can only be talked of in terms of negation of all attributes—'Neti neti'.<ref>[[Swami Gambhirananda]], (1995), [http://www.gitasupersite.iitk.ac.in/ ''Bhagavadgita: with the Commentary of Sankaracharya''], Ch. 13. Vs. 13, Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta {{ISBN|81-7505-150-7}}</ref>

The [[Advaita Vedanta]] of [[Gaudapada]] and [[Adi Shankara|Sankara]] rejects theism as a consequence of its insistence that Brahman is "Without attributes, indivisible, subtle, inconceivable, and without blemish, Brahman is one and without a second. There is nothing other than He."<ref>Richards, John, [http://www.realization.org/page/namedoc0/vc/vc_10.htm ''Viveka-Chudamani of Shankara'' Vs 468.]</ref> This means that it lacks properties usually associated with God such as omniscience, perfect goodness, omnipotence, and additionally is identical with the whole of reality, rather than being a causal agent or ruler of it.<ref>Wainright, William, (2006), [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/concepts-god/ ''Concepts of God''], Stanford Encyclopedia of Religion</ref>