Prof Chandradhar Sharma writes in Indian Philosophy a Critical Survey, pages 3-5,
It is said that we can notice a transition from the naturalistic and
anthropomorphic polytheism through transcendent monotheism to immanent
monism in the pre-Upanisadic philosophy. The personified forces of
nature first changed into real gods and these later on, became mere
forms of one personal and transcendental God, the ‘Custodian of the
Cosmic and Moral Order, who Himself, later on, passed into the
immanent Purusa. Then gradually polytheism yielded place to monotheism
and the latter to monism. Max Müller introduces ‘henotheism' as a
transitional stage from polytheism to monotheism. Henotheism means
‘belief in one only God, because the Vedic Aryans regarded any god
they were praising as the most supreme and the only God. If this
western interpretation is taken literally and in its entirety, we have
no hesitation in saying that it is based on an ignorance of the Vedic
literature. Neither polytheism nor henotheism nor even monotheism can
be taken as the key-note of the early Vedic philosophy.
Instead of taking the trouble of coining the word ‘henotheism', Max
Muller could have simply said that the gods are regarded as mere
manifestation of the Supreme God so that when any god was praised he
was not praised in his individual capacity, but merely as the
manifestation of the Supreme God. Let us take some illustrations. ‘The One Real, the wise declare as
many.1 ‘Purusa is all this, all that was, and all that shall be.2 ‘The
real essence of the gods is one.3 ‘The same Real is worshipped as
Uktha in the Rk, as Agni in the Yajuh and as Mahâvrata in the Säma.4
‘Aditi, the Boundless, is the sky, the air, the mother, the father,
the son, all the gods and all the men, all that is, all that was and
all that shall be.5 ‘He is the Custodian of the Rta (Truth), the
binding Soul of the universe, the unity-in-difference in the cosmic
and the moral order’.6 The gods also are the guardians of the Truth
(rtasya gopä); even the rivers flow in this Rta (rtamarpanti
sindhavah). ‘Only the wise, the wide awake, the mindful, know the
ultimate Abode of the Lord.7 ‘We make sacrifices to the ultimate Lord
of the universe, who runs through every particle of this universe, the
whole existence, and who is Blissful and ndescribable. ‘Desireless,
self-possessed, immortal, self-proved, ever full of Bliss, inferior to
none, ever-young and everlasting is He, the Soul of this universe;
through His knowledge alone can one spurn death. ‘There was neither
Being nor non-Being, neither air nor sky, neither death nor
immortality, neither night nor day; That One breathed calmly,
self-sustained; nought else beyond it lay.7 ‘The Indescribable is the
ground of all names and forms, the support of all the creation. ‘All
the gods form the body of this World-Soul. ‘He is immanent in all this
creation and yet He transcends it.8. References : 1 ekam sad viprä bahudhä vadami.— Rgveda, I. 164. 46. 2 Puruça cvedam sarvam yad bhûtam yachcha bhavyam.— Ibid, X. 90. 9 Ibid, III. 55. 3 Aitareya Aranvaka, III. 2. 3. 12. 4 Rgveda, I. 89. 10. 4 Ibid, 5 X . 190. 1. 1 Viçnoryat paramani padam.— Ibid, I. 22. 21. 6 kasmai D eviya haviçâ vidhema.— Ib id ,X . 121. 1. tameva vidvàn na bibhâya mytyor àtmànam dhiram ajaram yuvânam.— Atharvaveda, X . 8. 44. tameva viditvâ 'timftyumeti nänyab panthä vidyate ayanäya.— Yajurveda. 7 nâsadâsit no sadâsït tadânïm. — Rgveda, X. 129. 4 Atharvaveda, X I. 9. 1. 8 Nirukta, V II. 4. 9. 6 pâdo'sya vishvi bhutâni tripädasyä'mrtam divi.— Rgveda, X. 90. 3
Prof S Dasgupta writes in Indian Philosophy, A Critical Survey, Vol 1 , part 8
But whether we call it Henotheism or the mere temporary exaggeration of the powers of the deity in question, it is evident that this stage
can neither be properly called polytheistic nor monotheistic, but one
which had a tendency towards them both, although it was not
sufficiently developed to be identified with either of them. The
tendency towards extreme exaggeration could be called a monotheistic
bias in germ, whereas the correlation of different deities as
independent of one another and yet existing side by side was a
tendency towards polytheism. Growth of a Monotheistic tendency;
Prajāpati, Viśvakarma: This tendency towards extolling a god as the
greatest and highest gradually brought forth the conception of a
supreme Lord of all beings (Prajāpati), not by a process of conscious
generalization but as a necessary stage of development of the mind,
able to imagine a deity as the repository of the highest moral and
physical power, though its direct manifestation cannot be perceived.
Thus the epithet Prajāpati or the Lord of beings, which was originally
an epithet for other deities, came to be recognized as a separate
deity, the highest and the greatest.
Thus it is said in R. V. x. 121: In the beginning rose Hiranyagarbha, Born as the only lord of all existence. This earth he settled firm and heaven established: What god shall we adore with our oblations ? Who gives us breath, who gives us strength, whose bidding All creatures must obey, the bright gods even; Whose shade is death, whose shadow life immortal: What god shall we
adore with our oblations ? Who by his might alone became the monarch
Of all that breathes, of all that wakes or slumbers, Of all, both man
and beast, the lord eternal: What god shall we adore with our
oblations ? Whose might and majesty these snowy mountains, The ocean
and the distant stream exhibit; Whose arms extended are these
spreading regions: What god shall we adore with our oblations ? Who
made the heavens bright, the earth enduring, Who fixed the firmament,
the heaven of heavens; Who measured out the air’s extended spaces:
What god shall we adore with our oblations ?
Similar attributes are also ascribed to the deity Viśvakarma
(All-creator)[The Rigveda, by Kaegi, p. 89, and also Muir’s Sanskrit
Texts, vol. iv. pp. 5-1]. He is said to be father and procreator of
all beings, though himself uncreated. He generated the primitive
waters.
It is to him that the sage says,
Who is our father, our creator, maker, Who every place doth know and
every creature, By whom alone to gods their names were given, To him
all other creatures go to ask him[R. V. x. 82. 3.].
