Brahma and Abraham

[GrandizerII]

Josephus is quoting Clearchus, so the first two quotes are not independent quotes and might as just quote Clearchus only, who by the way was quoting Aristotle.

Again, the point isn't that there was no link between Judaism and Hinduism, but that it's a fucking stretch to say that the character of Abram/Abraham (who is depicted as a mortal subservient to God) is modeled on a character that is depicted as God/one of the gods in their respective account. The accounts of these two characters are radically different, no matter how one spins it.

[The Grand Nudger]

No, it's not. Gods become men and men become gods and gods become demons and imps and leprechauns in confluence of cultures. That's how we got jesus..and the devil. They're archetypes, not people, Grand. Geographic and ethnic purity of religious myths is the fucking stretch (the abrahamic stretch, no less). Abraham isn't a person, he's a pseudo-genealogical construct for a cultural tradition and nation.

Abrahamic religions reject this relationship dogmatically, as a matter of faith, but not fact. Meanwhile, since hindus don't need to deny any possible relationship between their ideology and the western ideologies they influenced, they're fine with noting those archetypal and narrative similarities.

I suspect that you're getting ahead of yourself, and looking to head off some poor argument (or argument you percieve to be poor). Do that when it happens. It's going to be tough. At this level, though, it borders on impossible. Cultures with a long history of contact, which other cultures believed were related, and which the culture in question believed was related enough to write it down in their own (granted, a-factual "history"), just somehow ended up with a whole gaggle of the same stories and characters..but it wasn't on account of syncretism.

Maybe an angel flew down and related the details to some illiterate in a cave.

[Ranjr]

It looks like there are enough misses in the match to brand this as sharpshooter fallacy.

Although, it's clear Judaism borrowed from other cultures.  "Satan" enters the Hebrew bible as any adversary, then by Chronicles develops into the god of evil, arch rival to god.  Scholarship links this development to Babylonian influence.  

So while it may be a stretch to say Abraham is based on Brahma, it's clear some concepts and story elements were borrowed.  That's an undeniable part of literature.

[GrandizerII]

No, it's not.  Gods become men and men become gods and gods become demons and imps and leprechauns in confluence of cultures.  That's how we got jesus..and the devil.  They're archetypes, not people, Grand.  Geographic and ethnic purity of religious myths is the fucking stretch (the abrahamic stretch, no less).  Abraham isn't a person, he's a pseudo-genealogical construct for a cultural tradition and nation.

Abrahamic religions reject this relationship dogmatically, as a matter of faith, but not fact.  Meanwhile, since hindus don't need to deny any possible relationship between their ideology and the western ideologies they influenced, they're fine with noting those archetypal and narrative similarities.

I suspect that you're getting ahead of yourself, and looking to head off some poor argument (or argument you percieve to be poor).  Do that when it happens.  It's going to be tough.  At this level, though, it borders on impossible.  Cultures with a long history of contact, which other cultures believed were related, and which the culture in question believed was related enough to write it down in their own (granted, a-factual "history"), just somehow ended up with a whole gaggle of the same stories and characters..but it wasn't on account of syncretism.  

Maybe an angel flew down and related the details to some illiterate in a cave.

Syncretism can be true, Abraham can be an archetype, the character Abraham may not have been created ex nihilo, but it still wouldn't get you to "the character Abraham is based on the character Brahma". I'm not getting ahead of myself here, you're the one twisting the message behind the OP so you can become right.

[The Grand Nudger]

It will, though, Grand, because that's all that comparative myth is saying when it makes that claim. It's saying that we can see the relationships between human cultures and their development. That they are clearly represented in our literary traditions and in our beliefs about the world around us. That we've been collaborating.

It's not saying, for example, that some ancient hebrew sat down with a copy of somebody else's myths and scribbled out some names and authors, replaced it with their own, and called it a day.

[GrandizerII]

It will, though, Grand, because that's all that comparative myth is saying when it makes that claim.  It's saying that we can see the relationships between human cultures and their development.  That they are clearly represented in our literary traditions and in our beliefs about the world around us.  That we've been collaborating.

It's not saying, for example, that some ancient hebrew sat down with a copy of somebody else's myths and scribbled out some names and authors, replaced it with their own, and called it a day.

It (the OP) is about a specific comparison that came into existence because some specific modern people with specific keen interests in mind figured that the names "Abraham" and "Brahma" sound so similar as to not be a coincidence, and therefore they concluded Abraham must be based on Brahma.

The general point you're making may be true or not, but it being true does not therefore mean the specific claim being made in the OP is true. It's not saying the nebulous construct "Adam/Noah/Abraham/Isaac/Jacob/Joseph/whatever" are based on "Brahma/Vishnu/Shiva/whatever". It's making a very specific comparison, and whether the authors of Genesis copied down accounts from prior myths or not, evidence for that specific claim is lacking, and the comparison is desperate and unwarranted.

[The Grand Nudger]

I take it that you didn't click the link, or research this in any way. The notion that the two myths are related isn't modern, and the modern assessment of that relationship isn't based on the names sounding similar.

The literary evidence for the claim isn't lacking at all, it's the existence of that literary evidence that requires explanation. It won't get us to some hebrew copying a myth, because that's not what it's about. That's what you're arguing against, as I've repeatedly suggested - and have at it.

[GrandizerII]

I take it that you didn't click the link, or research this in any way.  The notion that the two myths are related isn't modern, and the modern assessment of that relationship isn't based on the names sounding similar.

Ok, done with you. You're full of shit.

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm all kinds of terrible and bad things, I'm sure - but it remains a fact that the notion that they are related is not modern, and that the modern assessment of that relationship is not based on names sounding similar.

[Drich]

glob.. your either retarded or really really stupid.. brahma was a god.. abraham was the patiphemelus of a race of people. if you want to be technical he was the grand father of the man who would become the first in a line of 13 tribes. meaning no special powers no ablity to create destroy or even give law abraham was not even a prophet. just a man who found favor with god.

Here's a post about comparative mythology.

Was Abraham modeled on Brahma? Or are similarities just coincidences?

there are no commonalities.

Here are few excerpts from a blogpost, for more click on the link below


The similarities between the names of Abraham and Brahma have not gone unnoticed.

because none exist.

Abraham is said to be the father of the Jews, and Brahma, as the first created being, is often seen as the father of mankind...’

the first created being is adam not abraham. abraham came 1000/1500 years after the first created being.. being the father of the nation of israel means he was the first in his blood line. one of many many/thousands if not million of blood lines.

We might also note that the name of Brahma’s consort Sarasvati seems to resonate with that of Abraham’s wife, Sarah [… each one’s identity as a wife and/or sister].

ah, no. sarah was 1/2 sister. https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotiona...ms-sister/

Also, in India, the Sarasvati River includes a tributary known as the Ghaggar…. According to Jewish tradition, Hagar was Sarah’s maidservant…. Both Brahmins … and Jews see themselves as the ‘chosen people of God.’ The Hebrews began their sojourn through history as a ‘kingdom of priests’ (Exodus 19:6). Likewise, Brahmins are also a community of priests.

ah.. no. sarah being abraham's 1/2 sister meant they were born in the same area/family which was modern day saudi arabia.

Abraham/Sarah and Brahma/Saraswati are not the only overlapping figures between Hindu and Hebrew traditions. Ajit Vadakayil points out that there is also Adam/Eve and Adhama/ Havyavati, along with Noah and Nyuha or Manu (Blogspot.com). As well, the Hebrew religion is one among a group of traditions (including Islam and Christianity) that believe that Abraham is their father. As well, since Brahma has will-born sons, Brahmanaspati (Lord of the Brahman Priests) and Brihaspati (Lord of the Burden Carriers), their relationship with Abraham cannot be answered so simply as the introductory title is asking.

you have yet to make a single connection between abraham and brahma let worry about these guys before you crap up another connection..

The Ten Common Themes between Brahma (with his wish born sons) and Abraham

1.) Divine Eternal Lineage of Brahma and Abraham

ah. nope.. abraham was born and died was not devine in any sense but a regular man who god found favor in.

i. Brahma as Father of All (RV7.97b), while Abraham as Father of many nations (Gen 17:5)

abraham father the jews and supposedly islam.

ii. Brahma is Creator of Universe (BG14.1-4, AV18.1.47, AV19.22.21), while Abraham’s descendants number as the stars of the sky.

this is where i call your retardation into question.. it is also said his descendants were as numerous as sand at the beach does this now mean he has a like to poseidon or aquaman? to number as many as the stars means so many you can not count them. not that he had power from the stars...

Brahma bore all Gods (CU8.15.1), Celestial Beings and Enlightened Ones out of his body (RV1.40.5,7; MunU1.1.1-2), while God makes Abraham fruitful and the Genesis text literally reads: ‘kings come out from him’ (Gen 17:6).

omg... his son isaac was the only child he saw.. isaac was not a king..

Brahma and Sarasvati dwelt 100 years together then bore their first son, while Abraham was 100 when Sarah, at 90, bore Isaac

brah was married for 100 years.. abraham was married 70 to 80 years tops... that a 20 year difference.

2.) The Priestly Offering of the Son of Brahma and Abraham

abraham sacrificed a goat not his son.

i. Brahma’s son (or grandson), Daksha, is killed at the offering sacrifice before all the gods, while Abraham almost offers his son Isaac.

those two stories are opposites.. one the son dies as an offering the other the son lives.. oh and one of the sons is a grandson.. again it is literally the opposite of what happened.

ii. At the pleading of his father, Brihaspati (born from Brahma’s body, RV3.23.1) Daksha is resurrected with the head of a ram, while Abraham finds a ram caught in a bush to sacrifice in place of his son Isaac (Gen 22:1-13).

now your just being a dishonest liar.. finding a goat is no where near resurrecting a severed goat's head.. heck i found a goat before on the side of the road once.. (out in the country) never once resurrected a severed goat head... never even seen it on youtube or the like.

3.) The Wife and Sister of Brahma and Abraham: Sarasvati and Sarah

again not sister, but 1/2 sister. 1/2 a truth is still a whole lie.

i. Brahma’s wife and sister is Sarasvati (SV7.96.2), Her beauty is so great that Brahma grew 4 faces to view her from the every direction (AV19.17; KenU3), while Abraham’s wife, Sarah, is also called his sister (Gen 20:12) and is beautiful (Gen 12:14).

what hero or in this case god gets the ugly chick? like some god/father of everyone married some half monkey monster woman?

ii. Compared to Brahma with faces of the four directions is Abraham who when called by God was to look North, East, West and South to the promised land, the 4 directions (Gen 13:14).

glob... even you know that was stupid. everyone has access to the 4 directions if they live in this world.

https://www.boloji.com/articles/15119/ab...hma-part-i

doesn't matter who wrote this blog it is still full of crap and out right dishonesty.. but i bet it tickled your ears didn't it?