In Hinduism, a murti (sometimes spelled murthi) is a physical image of the divine. Most commonly, it’s a sculpture or a painting, but the term can refer to any representation of the divine in any medium.[1] However, a murti isn’t just a representation of a god or goddess; the word murti literally means “embodiment,”[2] and these symbols of the divine are seen as actual incarnations of the depicted god or goddess in matter.[3] The worship of these divine “embodiments” forms one of the staples of Hindu religious practice.[4]
This article has two purposes: first, to simply educate the reader about an important feature of Hinduism, and second, to defend that practice from certain ill-founded criticisms that non-Hindus have often raised against it.
We’ll get to that second point in the last section of this article, after exploring the facts about the role of the worship of murtis in Hinduism. Without further ado, here are those facts.
The Role of Murtis in Hindu Spirituality
Hinduism teaches that the divine is both immanent (within everything) and transcendent (beyond everything). To cite just one example of this teaching from the countless examples of it in Hinduism’s sacred texts, the Shvetashvatara Upanishad says,
He fills the cosmos, yet he transcends it….
Know him to be the supreme pervader,
In whom the whole universe is smaller
Than the smallest atom.[5]
Since everything in the world is believed to manifest the divine in some way or another, a Hindu could, in theory, worship anything as a murti. But in practice, it’s proven to be much more spiritually beneficial for Hindus to direct their worship toward those specific “embodiments” that have been consecrated as murtis. That way, the worshiper’s attention is intensely focused on something that serves as a particularly direct and powerful symbol of the divine, which helps the worshiper to actually experience the divine presence in that thing much more forcefully than if he or she worshiped, say, a shoe or an eating utensil.[6]
Furthermore, worshiping a shoe or a spoon rather than a murti would carry the risk that the worshiper would conflate the world as he or she ordinarily perceives it with the divine. (This would be the grave intellectual and spiritual error known as “pantheism,” the belief that the divine is only immanent and not also transcendent.) Hinduism teaches that even though everything in the world is a manifestation of the divine, a radical transformation in one’s consciousness is required to actually perceive that reality firsthand rather than merely believing it intellectually. This revolutionary transformation is called moksha, the Hindu term for spiritual enlightenment. When a Hindu worships a murti, that murti becomes an island of moksha in the mundane world. From this starting point, the Hindu’s awareness can expand further and further until, at last, moksha is reached and everything is perceived as an “embodiment” of the divine. Only in such rare circumstances does it make sense to actually treat anything and everything as a murti.
Occasionally, something that wasn’t originally a murti can become a murti after someone experiences the divine through that thing.[7] This is especially the case with some exceptionally old murtis that are held to have been created directly by the gods rather than by human hands, and then placed somewhere in nature for humans to find them and begin to worship them.[8] Usually, though, a murti is crafted by humans in accordance with very precise traditional guidelines, and the depicted god or goddess is then ritually invited to inhabit his or her “embodiment.”[9][10]
Hindu temples are defined as the residences of murtis, and thus of the gods.[11] Sometimes murtis are placed in existing temples, and sometimes temples are built around an existing murti.[12] Most Hindus also have small murtis in their homes for daily private worship.[13]
The centerpiece of those worship rituals is called puja. In its simplest form, puja consists of five phases. First, the murti is anointed with a sweet-smelling paste. Second, fresh flowers are offered to the murti. Third, burning incense is passed in front of it. Fourth, burning camphor or ghee (clarified butter) is passed in front of it. Finally, vegetarian food like a sweet or a piece of fruit is offered to the murti. All of this is done prayerfully, and the worshiper repeatedly bows to the murti along the way. However, some puja rituals are considerably more elaborate than this, especially the larger, grander rites that are performed by priests in a temple rather than by laypeople in their homes.[14]
Naturally, Hindus recognize that the deity doesn’t need any of the things that are offered to it in puja. The point is to purify the devotee’s heart and bring him or her closer to the deity; the offerings are means to that end.[15]
Besides puja, another important Hindu spiritual practice involving murtis is darshana, which literally means “seeing” or “viewing” and refers to simply laying eyes on a murti. Through darshana, the worshiper has a personal audience with the deity. The act facilitates intimacy between the deity and the devotee in much the same way that staring deeply into another person’s eyes does. For this reason, the eyes of murtis are often sculpted or painted in such a way that they catch and hold the gaze of the worshiper from anywhere in the room.[16]
Why Murtis Are Not “Idols” or “Icons”
As you probably already know, the three “Abrahamic” religions – Islam, Christianity, and Judaism – forbid the practice of worshiping images of the divine. The specifics of what is and isn’t permitted in this regard vary considerably between these three religions, but that’s the bottom line in all three cases.
When people from historically Christian, Islamic, or Jewish societies talk about Hindu murtis, they often refer to them as either “idols” or “icons.” Neither of these words are fitting in a Hindu context.
“Idol,” of course, is a pejorative word for something that’s worshiped instead of the divine. In an Abrahamic context, that includes the worship of images, because to worship an image is to go against the divinely-ordained rules of those religions, and thus to place an obstacle between the worshiper and God. In a Hindu context, however, the term “idolatry” doesn’t fit the worship of murtis, because when a Hindu worships a murti, he or she is worshiping the depicted god or goddess through the murti, not worshiping the murti instead of a god or goddess or in violation of Hinduism’s own divinely-ordained guidelines. To gloss all image worship in all religions as “idolatry” is applying an Abrahamic standard to other religions, which is no more fitting than applying Hindu standards to Abrahamic religions.
(For an argument that all traditional religions are indeed revealed by the same divine source, see Why All Religions Are True.)
The term “icon” is better because it isn’t pejorative, but it’s still glossing Hindu practices with a Christian term that’s loaded with particular theological implications that are specific to Christianity and don’t apply to Hinduism. For example, in Christianity, icons are venerated but not worshiped,[17][18] whereas in Hinduism, murtis are worshiped.
For a religion to permit and encourage image-worship is to emphasize divine immanence, and for a religion to forbid image-worship is to emphasize divine transcendence. Since, as all religions teach, the divine is both immanent and transcendent, both of these modes of worship are fitting in their appropriate contexts. It would be wrong for a Muslim to worship or even create an image of Allah (the very thought is practically blasphemous), or for a Christian to worship an icon of Christ or a saint rather than merely venerating it. And for the same reason, it would also be wrong for a Muslim or a Christian to tell a Hindu that he or she shouldn’t worship murtis.
Why, then, do some religions ban the worship of images while others enthusiastically embrace it? All that I personally can say with confidence on this point is that the divine knows what each person and people needs, and so has given some people a religion that features image worship, and has given others a religion that forbids it. For a Muslim, a Christian, or a Jew, following the divine will and drawing closer to it means abstaining from worshiping images, whereas for a Hindu, following the same divine will and drawing closer to it means worshiping images. Each person should faithfully adhere to the teachings of the religion that the divine has placed before him or her, and not worry too much about the beliefs and practices of others who are faithfully adhering to the teachings of their own divinely-revealed religion, whatever it may be.
References:
[1] Klostermaier, Klaus. 2007. A Survey of Hinduism. State University of New York Press. p. 264.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid. p. 267.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Easwaran, Eknath (transl.). 2007. “Shvetashvatara Upanishad.” In The Upanishads. Nilgiri Press. p. 167-171.
[6] Rodrigues, Hillary P. 2017. Introducing Hinduism. Routledge. p. 246.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Klostermaier, Klaus. 2007. A Survey of Hinduism. State University of New York Press. p. 265.
[9] Ibid. p. 264-265.
[10] Rodrigues, Hillary P. 2017. Introducing Hinduism. Routledge. p. 246.
[11] Ibid. p. 249.
[12] Ibid. p. 246-247.
[13] Ibid. p. 247.
[14] Ibid. p. 247-248.
[15] Ibid. p. 246, 252-253.
[16] Ibid. p. 249-252.
[17] Ware, Timothy. 1964. The Orthodox Church. Penguin Books. p. 40.
[18] Eire, Carlos M.N. 2016. Reformations: The Early Modern World, 1450-1650. Yale University Press. p. 30-31.