The gods in the Indian religions, especially the gods of Brahmanism, are loose in morals.

Their deeds are,

like the Homeric gods' pranks, not always virtuous. The Brahmana* books tell us many stories
concerning the gods' indiscreet deeds of envy, jealousy, hostility, infidelity, greed, arrogance, cowardice,
and adultery. The gods of India are not different from average creatures, and are by no means the
supreme authority of morality. Generally speaking, one may say that Indians who worship such gods are
little awakened to any sense of morality. In the Rg-Veda*, only Varuna* is the god of morality. But, as
the Brahmanas* and the books of the later periods tell us, even this god gradually changed his character
and lost his strict morals. It is natural, therefore, that Indians of the later ages sought the basis of their
morals apart from the gods' authority. And they came to conceive that the moral law should be
observed not because of the gods' authority but because of retribution according to Karma.34 Many
gods of Brahmanism were adopted in the Buddhist myths and were transformed into Buddhist gods. In
the Buddhist concept, these gods, Previous Released By -TSJ5J- Next Previous Released By -TSJ5J- Next
Page 167 though they possess super-human powers, themselves are bound to a life of ignorance and are
waiting to be saved by the teachings of the Buddha. The Jains, too, refused to regard the gods as the
Absolute Being. The concept of the Supreme Lord had taken a fixed form in India by the time the
Christian era began. But one of the most outstanding philosophical schools of India, the Non-dualist
(advaita) school in the Vedanta *, asserted that the highest God (Isvara*) is no other than the Absolute,
the Brahman, clouded with ignorance (ajñana*), and, because of this ignorance, is bound to the world of
illusion like other beings. The schools of Hinduism urge us to have faith in the Supreme Lord, but, as we
see in their myths relating to this Supreme Lord, he is more likely to be a human being than the Absolute
Supreme Being. It is safe to generalize here and say that most Indians find the sanction of their morality
in the law (dharma) which transcends the gods. This Indian concept stands in striking contrast to the
Western idea that places the sole source of morality in the one Lord. The ancient Greeks and Romans
used their words for god ( and deus, respectively) in a rather loose way. In their thinking the
philosopher-emperors, and other men of outstanding intellect who have contributed greatly to the
happiness of people by delivering them from their errors and tribulations, thus leading them nearer to
the divine life— such men (whether real or fictional, as it often turned out) were the godlike saviors of
mankind.35 A savior for the Indians, was not the (Godsavior) of the ancient Greeks. For Indians, on the
contrary, a savior is a master of the universal law. Whether the savior is a human being or a divine being
does not matter. He is a savior by the authority of the Absolute that stands higher than the gods. He is
an incarnation of the Absolute, but not necessarily a god or the only son of God. The Indian concept of
God has produced an idea of the savior quite different from that of Western religions. The difference
between the Western and Indian concepts of God is clearly observed also in the literary styles. The
Greek writers were careful to make their gods speak in a manner appropriate to the dignity of gods, and
succeeded in producing satisfactory images to that effect. But, Indian authors, for instance, the authors
of the Upanisads*, could not or, more properly speaking, did not care for such ways of expression. Like
the Indian artists in their works of sculpture, the Indian writers scarcely attempted to idealize the gods
or to describe them as being more sublime than human beings.