Abraham...Ancestor of the Brahmins?

reply to post by IAF101


You make some good points....


Except here

Perhaps the biggest problem to your hypothesis is the fact that Brahmins are the corner stone of the Hindu religious faith and thus they would be central to practices like worship (which would always be idol worship!), ritual sacrifices, the funeral rites ( which would involve cremation) and marriages etc. Most Brahminical practices would be antithetical to Abraham's kindred let alone be relegated to the station of being responsible for their proper execution.

The Rabbinic sages said he sent them off for the very reason that they werent fit to inherit the spiritual purpose for which he felt endued. He gave a higher knoweldge to Isaac, and a lesser knowledge of the cosmos, to the sons of Keturah; from which hinduism ultimately built itself from. Additonally, Keturah is identified with Hagar - the Egyptian. (making a possible connection between egypt, and india) who Sarah had considered of a lesser moral quality(having come from Egypt) as well as with her son, Ishmael.

Also, could you provide a link that the brahmins only recently became the top class? From my understanding, their supremacy has been from the very beginnings.

Perhaps it could be a case similar to the western nobility. For instance, a Frankish house, evolves into a house of burgundy, which than become a house of Braganza. In each stage, theres a direct father son lineage, except it eventually intersects with every other families. A case being any current member of the capetian dynasty - juan carlos of spain for instance. Hes of the house of borboun, which is derived from the Robertians, who themselves can be traced back to the Frankish king, Merovach.

Also, im not very educated in Hindu thought, though i do believe Brahma symbolizes the highest power - akin to G-d in Abrahamic theology. Wouldnt this make the Brahmins a natural fit for being the upper class?

Finally, this isnt my theory. I read it somewhere else, and presented it here, to see what people thought of it.

reply to post by IAF101


Where on earth did you get 600-500 BCE?

The first kingdom of Israel began in 1000 BCE. The Torah was given at sinai circa 1400 BCE. Abraham lived circa 1700 BCE. This is common knowledge, and accepted by scholars. Seeing the Vedas were written a few hundred years later, youve actually made it a little more plausible that the Brahmins could be the very children of Keturah Abraham sent off to the east (and therefore wrote the Vedas based on this knoweldge given as a gift from abraham).

I said indus valley; not indus valley civilization, which im well aware was many hundreds of years before Abraham was born.

Originally posted by phatpackageThere is no creedence in any of the mainstream books or bibles!

Our entire culture, civilization, legal system, infrastructure, arts and sciences have their roots in religious scripture.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Ok that does not make it right & fair!

I stand 100% by my comments about the Indian caste system. Although I do concede that lots not all Indians believe the caste system is just!

Originally posted by dontreally
In Genesis Abraham is said to have sent off his wife Keturah, and her children (who are also his children) to the lands of the East - Kedem.

Many in the Jewish tradition have speculated what these lands of the east refer to. Before Abraham sent them off, he gave them presents. These presents are interpreted as occult or spiritual knowledge.

Now, is it coincidence that in Indias Caste system, the highest class are the Brahmins? Brahmin and Abraham, are etymologically very close. Is it possible that they are the descendants of Abrahams 2nd wife, Keturah?

Dontreally, I don't think so. Hinduism (Vedic society) is much, much older than Judaism.

According to David Frawley, the Western archeologists really screwed up the timing & age of Vedic society because of their own Fundamentalist Christian viewpoint (they did NOT believe human life existed prior to 6000 BC).

The Rig Veda is about 12,000 years old.

See a book entitled "The Celestial Key to the Vedas: Discovering the Origins of the World's Oldest Civilization."
The author, Dr. B.G. Siddharth is an ASTRONOMER and Director of the B.M. Birla Science Center.

SeaWind

Originally posted by dontreally
The Rabbinic sages said he sent them off for the very reason that they werent fit to inherit the spiritual purpose for which he felt endued. He gave a higher knoweldge to Isaac, and a lesser knowledge of the cosmos, to the sons of Keturah; from which hinduism ultimately built itself from. Additonally, Keturah is identified with Hagar - the Egyptian. (making a possible connection between egypt, and india) who Sarah had considered of a lesser moral quality(having come from Egypt) as well as with her son, Ishmael.

There is absolutely no reference of anything that Abraham said or even the God of the Torah in any form in the Vedas or in Hindu scripture to given a hint of these so called Keturah hypothesis any credibility. Further, the Vedas themselves existed as an oral tradition for millenia before they were finally written down into books unlike the Torah that was complied from other books that to create a single religious text. Thus, the stark difference between Hindu scripture with their lyrical quality and the conventional Middle Eastern theologies with their prose style quality.
As for the Egypt connection, which Egypt are you talking about specifically, because the Egyptian civilization is divided into many periods and by the time of the Exodus, the Babylonians were the most powerful force in the region. The Ancient vedic cultures did trade with other nearby culture but had little cultural contact or appreciation with far away cultures like the Egyptians or the Babylonians. The Vedic civilization was mostly concentrated around the tributaries to the Indus and the Ganges plains. Further, the Indo-Aryan philosophy that is found in the books like the Veda and the Avesta (the Zorastrian holy book) find a lot in common with nearby cultures like the Mittani and other Central Asian cultures but also shared a common theme with Eastern European cultures like the Etruscan civilization. For example the concept of the holy trinity is absent in the Torah/Judaism while it is very central in the Vedas/Hindus, the Zorastrians and could be found as far off as Early Greece and much later in Rome where we find the trinity concept as well.

Originally posted by dontreally
Also, could you provide a link that the brahmins only recently became the top class? From my understanding, their supremacy has been from the very beginnings.

This is a very detailed subject and Hinduism isn't very well researched on the Internet so I was not able to get a more authoritative and unbiased article on the rise of the Brahmins through the Hindu Caste system by pushing out the Kastriya/Warrior castes. Here is one link of an article written by a so-called "rationalist" who anti-faith bias could skew the conclusions but the facts are sound and it is interesting how the Brahmins used their hold over the Thread ceremony (a "baptizing" ceremony as it were) to supplicate the Kshatriyas/warriors and take supremacy.

www.hindubooks.org...

Originally posted by dontreally
Perhaps it could be a case similar to the western nobility. For instance, a Frankish house, evolves into a house of burgundy, which than become a house of Braganza. In each stage, theres a direct father son lineage, except it eventually intersects with every other families. A case being any current member of the capetian dynasty - juan carlos of spain for instance. Hes of the house of borboun, which is derived from the Robertians, who themselves can be traced back to the Frankish king, Merovach.

Unfortunately, it is a little more involved than that. If these Abraham's kindred were to have come to India, they would not be able to marry the local Brahmins to attain the caste by even proxy as marriage is very rigidly endogamous (confined to one's own caste) in India - even to this day despite many strict laws against caste discrimination. If they had to evolve into Brahmins they would had to have been accepted by all the other castes as Brahmins and would have had to had the support of the Kastriyas/warriors to do so, at least initially. Further, there is a difference between regular brahmins and the sages or Rishis that work on books like the Vedas. These are those recluse brahmins who go into the forests to meditate and emerge after a couple of decades of meditation who normally gain the respect of the Brahmanical orders to compose works of wisdom that would be transcribed as "wisdom".

Originally posted by dontreally
Also, im not very educated in Hindu thought, though i do believe Brahma symbolizes the highest power - akin to G-d in Abrahamic theology. Wouldnt this make the Brahmins a natural fit for being the upper class?

You are confused with the language. Bramhan is different from Bramhin, what you describe is the former. The pronunciation of things don't imply similarity, further your pronunciation would be drastically different from the correct Sanskrit pronunciation. The root word here is "Bb-ruh" which means "infinite". So one is describing an infinite plane of existence where all things are born of and the other represents the priest/scholarly caste.
And no there is no single "God" like the Abrahamic theology would subscribe. There is the Rta, the universal nature or the universal consciousness that Gods facilitate in some form or the other.

Wiki these to learn more : Bramhan, Rta, Dharma, Varuna-Mitra. I'm really not very good at explaining these amorphous concepts against each other in just a few words. They would need more detailed explanations to be properly understood.

Originally posted by dontreally
Where on earth did you get 600-500 BCE?

The first kingdom of Israel began in 1000 BCE. The Torah was given at sinai circa 1400 BCE. Abraham lived circa 1700 BCE. This is common knowledge, and accepted by scholars.

The Torah is widely accepted by scholars to have been compiled at around 500-450 BC from various books independently in what is known as the Documentary Hypothesis. The oldest book to be added into the Torah, called the Jahwist is one of the major sources of the book of Genesis and the book of Exodus in the Torah. It was dated to have been composed in 950 BC.

This is where I took my 500-600 BC time frame since that is scientifically more accepted. Theologically, many dates are given or believed to be true but not corroborated. The Rigveda is thus similarly believed to have been transcribed sometime in 1400 BC but theologically it is considered to be "timeless" by the Hindus as "sruti" or heard knowledge from the universe.

reply to post by phatpackage


Really? Have you been to India? Yes it is gross (castes) but no different than anywhere else. The difference is they admit it. Look at Iraq. The us has made much more human despairity than any caste system. I personal find it strange but so do I that people starve and freeze under bridges and a lot of them veterans. That should be the name of our untouchable caste. Veterans. Now to me that's the worlds worst caste system.

reply to post by IAF101


Hinduism is monotheistic. All the gods are part of one all powerful being.

reply to post by SeaWind


That may be an opinion, but it is not the majority one. I always find it amazing how biased some scholars can be in saying the Vedas are 12,000 years old, based on absolutely nothing, but the Torah was just recently written. It really is amazing.

Also, Christian fundamentalism - not having any understanding of Hebrew or the Torahs esoteric knowledge, naturally would misunderstand the nature of the 6000 year duration of the world.

And btw, it was 5771 years ago that the world was created. The Torah describes two different creations, in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. The former is the creation of the universe, and the latter, man on earth. Basically, it describes a world which began 5771 years ago, but the kabbalists accept the existence of other worlds prior to the beginning of this world.

reply to post by IAF101


The DH isnt widely accepted by scholars. Sure, some subscribe to it, but it doesnt make it true.

reply to post by Movescamp

Really? Have you been to India?

Point is irrelevant. I have studied Indian history at University level so yes I am extremely well informed on the subject!

Yes it is gross (castes)

Thank You - Point Proven!

but no different than anywhere else. The difference is they admit it. Look at Iraq.

In Australia we have no official caste system of sorts! So everywhere as you put it no!

That should be the name of our untouchable caste. Veterans. Now to me that's the worlds worst caste system.

Not in Australia. Our war heroes are well respected & appreciated here! I cannot speak for other countries but that argument is wrong where I live! Back on subject the thread was about India not any other country, you were the one who mentioned Iraq!

reply to post by phatpackage


Really? When I was in Australia I noticed a lot of racism towards aborigine. In fact they lived in slums and have severe poverty. Not to mention the concentration camps of the not to distant past so yeah you have an unofficial caste system.

I also have been to India and all the book learning in the world doesn't come close to expierance in anything. It's the combination of both that provide wisdom which is quite different than knowledge.

I mention Iraq because I am a vet and I see to many vets in America slip through the cracks.

Have you ever been to the slums? It may not be incoded in religion but more privileged people certainly don't go there. There have been many university papers written about Australia's hidden empire.

D.p.

reply to post by Movescamp

Really? When I was in Australia I noticed a lot of racism towards aborigine. In fact they lived in slums and have severe poverty. Not to mention the concentration camps of the not to distant past so yeah you have an unofficial caste system.

Incorrect no official or unofficial caste system here! No not ever!

combination of both that provide wisdom which is quite different than knowledge.

In this case it is not about wisdom! It is just question if it existed! It did case closed!

I mention Iraq because I am a vet and I see to many vets in America slip through the cracks.

I won't argue with you on this one about America! but thread was in relation to India & ancient Jews!

There have been many university papers written about Australia's hidden empire.

Articles written by the far left Unversity students in Australia are seen as a joke, inaccurate lacking integrity. Ask your average Aussie not an ATS member!

Have you ever been to the slums?

Yes but this thread is not about my personal experience in the slums!

reply to post by phatpackage


First off you are in total denial the aborigone are definitely a lower caste in your Australia. I can provide plenty of evidence concentration camps etc I believe the term for aborigine in your country in the unmentionables. I also served with Ausies in Iraq so I have spoken a plenty. None of them "liberal".

Secondly if you were so scholarly you would know their is relevance. The Dravidian people who the castewas originally created for (to eugenically separate inter breeding with Aryans) are from Australia. The Hindu empire went all the way to Indonesia.

Point of fact the article is not about India it's about The word Brahmin and
Abraham.

It's quite obvious to me Sanskrit is The oldest language so obviously it came before Aramaic. However the the link is zorastrianism and Sumer which is really the first in line for the Jewish religion. Many concepts of later judiasm came from Sumer.

reply to post by dontreally


i've always found this fascinating. if we can show that both the abrahamic religions and buddhism flowed from hinduism then 80% of the world has some religious connection which is really cool.

the

Abraham --- Brahman
his wife Sarah ----- Saraswati

is pretty interesting.

reply to post by Movescamp

First off you are in total denial the aborigone are definitely a lower caste in your Australia.

Incorrect. They are not a "Caste" of any sort. Some Aboriginals live in poverty but they are not deemed untouchable, as many other groups of people. Some are poor because of circumstance & others are poor because of their actions and poor decisions (Black & white). I personally have never discriminated or treated an Aboriginal any different to other groups in Australia & nearly all Aussies are the same way! It would be offensive & out of line for you to assume otherwise!

I believe the term for aborigine in your country in the unmentionables.

That is not a mainstream term in Australia! Both sides have offensive names for each other but that is not one of them! As both sides do it, it would extremely wrong to say one side is right & one is wrong!

reply to post by snusfanatic


Very true. Also sumer being the behinds of abrahamic religion is also where the Aryan culture in India came from. They were the first Brahmins.

reply to post by phatpackage


Really. Have aborigines eve forced whites to live in the bush? How about aborigines putting whites in concentration camps? Look at statistics from your own government. Why is the poverty level so much higher in aborigines. It must be their decisions because they are black? You my friend are stating back handed racist things and you may not even know it.

It's pretty main stream if soldiers use the term unmentionables.

Also their is no official caste in India. It's been gone longer than the concentration camps in your country.

Castes exsist everywhere. They may not be ingrained in the religion but the heart and definition is segregated racism. Whites felt the same way 60 years ago in America hence different drinking fountains. Your country too. Only it was more like 30 years ago there.