Chapter VII

the discovery of the God of Abraham

All of a sudden instead of the 33 gods we abruptly come across the Supreme God Brahman in the Upanisads with total rejection of the earlier gods of the Rig Veda.

Agni   Varuna     SuryaIndra    Vayu    Yama     Soma    and more 




This will tell us the story of interaction between the children of Abraham who were in India and the Aryan immigrants.  Apparently the conquered people of Mohen-Jodero and Harappa conquered the conquering Aryans in their culture and philosophical thoughts and religious concept.
The local residents - the Dasyus - still declared and believed in the God of their Fathers exactly as we see even today in the South Sudanese and Cushite tribals.  They called the creator of the universe as the God of Abraham.
The Aryans removed all their nature gods and accepted the creator of all these cosmic realities - the God of Abraham. It took them over 700 years to come that state if we accept the dates of Upanishads.  It was the teachers, the vanguards of knowledge that brought in the change.  It must have been a slow process to gain acceptance through continued teachings and generations of guru-parampara that did the job.
Vedism brought in by Indo-Iranian Aryans came to an end and the Vedanta was in force.  Vedanta is correctly translated as the “end of the Vedas”.  All the Rig Veda gods and their worship and even the mention of their names came to an end in new Brahminic religion.
Who were these gurus who brought about this dramatic change?
This is recognized in the modern discovery of the coming of the concept of Brahman by the Hindu scholars themselves. 
In 1979 the Oriental Institute at Baroda published a paper entitled "The Hebrews belong to a branch of Vedic Aryans."  This was a follow-up to a previous article on the same topic published by the same author, Prof. Madan Mohan Shukla, in the Vishveshvaranand Indological Journal in 1976.   They claim  the common origin of the Jews and Brahmins. Instead of accepting the origin from the local people who were children of Abraham, they have simply assimiliated them as part of the Aryans.   This may have been in reality true since they might have got intermarried and the difference might have been obliterated in 700 long years of coexistence within inter-tribal, inter-caste physical and intellectual battles.  Here we come across the Dark Dravidian Brahmins side by side with the Light Skinned Aryan Brahmins. Apparently the Vedism died out and a new religion took over.

In fact the following data seems to indicate that the teachers who are called Brahmins were essentially Dravids.
Here is the quote from wikipedia:
“Brahmins have had a continuous presence in Tamil Nadu from the Sangam period (600 BC-300 AD). The 2nd century AD literary work Paṭṭiṉappālai written by the Brahmin poet Uruttirangannanar (Kannan, son of Rudra) records the presence of Brahmins and Vedic rites in Karikala Chola's kingdom. Similarly, other literary works of the Sangam period like the Silappatikaram, Manimekalai and Kuṟuntokai also allude to the presence of Brahmins in the Tamil country.

Though, Tamil Brahmins have been classified as a left-hand caste in ancient times, Schoebel, in his book History of the Origin and Development of Indian Castes published in 1884, spoke of Tamil Brahmins as "Mahajanam" and regarded them, along with foreign migrants, as outside the dual left and right-hand caste divisions of Tamil Nadu “

Population distribution of Brahmins

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/05/genetics-random-truths/#.VhHty2upPIU gives the following DNA analysis of the Brahmins of India.  The first group is certainly of Dravidian pre-Aryan Indian component and second group is the Aryan component.

The language distribution today showing the presence of Dravidian language in the Indus region while most of them are concentrated in South India

Genetics' random truths
By Razib Khan | May 27, 2012
Harappa Ancestry Project
Below is a table constructed from Zack Ajmal’s data.





This seems to indicate the predominance of the South Indian Dravidian component in the Brahmin DNA.  Even the North Indian Brahmins show heavy Dravidian component almost equal to the Aryan component.  The Aryans left Iran and moved into the Indus Valley and coexisted with the Abrahamic tribes and got themselves mixed to become Brahmins, the Kingdom of Priests to the subcontinent of India.  This is why the IE components of the Brahmins is low in terms of the Dravid component.  Even the IE Brahmins are essentially Dravid today, which indicates the post Vedic Brahminic religion was essentially dominated by the Dravids and not the IE Aryans.  Since they were a minority group they just merged into the Dravidic community.

The only mention of Brahmins in Rig Veda is in the mandala X which was the latest portion probably written during or after the acceptance of the God of Abraham as their own. 
Abrahamic people were called to be a blessing to all nations. They were supposed to be a  "Chosen People of God” : Brahmins, consider themselves as the "Chosen People of God". The Hebrews started their corporate career in history as a "Kingdom of Priests" (Exodus/19/6). We may safely assume that the name Brahmin or Brahmanan mean, the people who profess the God of Abraham.

In this connection the detailed study of Dr. G. Singh find relevance.  Here are the five Reality and Facts he presents in his article on “Brahmins are not “Vedic Aryans”.

Brahmins are not "Vedic Aryans"
by Dr. G Singh
”Reality and Facts:

1) From geographical information in the RigVeda, the Vedic Period (1500-500BC) was confined to the
northwest.  The hyms composed by Vedic mystics/poets of the northwest (Saptha Sindhva) tell that the Vedic peoples worshipped non-Brahmanical Gods (Indra, Varuna, Mitra), ate cows, elected their chiefs, drank liqor, considered the Punjab rivers to be sacred, and refer to people living to the south in the gangetic region as "Dasyas"!  None of the gangetic Brahmanical gods (e.g Ram, Krishna, Vishnu, Brahma, etc.) are mentioned in RigVeda hyms nor do they appear in connected Aryan Avestan texts and Hittite tablets.  Avestan terms for soldiers ("rathaestar") and citizens ("vastriyo") are similar to Vedic-derived terms (kshatriyas, vasihyas) but the Avestan term for priest ("athravan") is not even close to "Brahmanas".
Moreover, central Gangetic religious texts like the Mahabharta and VarnaAshramDharma of Manu call the Vedic Aryans in Saptha Sindhva "mlechas", "sudras" and "vratyas"; "forbid Brahmins” from even visiting the northwest country ("Vahika-desa"); and depict dark Dravidian Gods like Krishna fighting and defeating Vedic Aryan gods like Indra (Mahabharta).
Similarly, the RigVeda contains taboos and injunctions against the "dasya-varta" region to the south of Saptha Sindhva and praises Indra (god of thunderbolt) for victories over "dasya-purahs" (dasya cities)....
2) A few Vedic tribes from Saptha Sindhva broke RigVedic norms and migrated southward.  These numerically outnumbered groups expanding into the trans-gangetic region near the end of the Vedic period (8-6th century BC) tried to use the indigenous Dravidian priesthood to entrench themselves as the new ruling order.  Within a few generations of acquiring control over the foreign Gangasthan, the minority Vedic tribes were usurped by the indigenous "borrowed" priesthood; their Aryan religion, gods and customs mostly deposed and supplanted with indigenous gangetic gods and mythologies;......
The religious and political revolt against Brahmanical hegemony started by Rama (Bhagwatism) and the Buddha (Sakamuni) - Vedic and Saka princes - in the 7-6th century BC checked Brahmanical hegemony in Gangasthan and provided the masses relief from its perversions (e.g. Manu's  code and laws) until its revival and expansion by Shankarcharya of Malabar and cronies between 8-11th century AD.  Later, in revisionist Brahmanical texts, attempts were devised to "absorb" both anti-Brahmanical movements into Brahmanism and eliminate them as threats by claiming both Rama and Buddha to be reincarnations of Vishnu.  The oldest Brahmanical texts including the Ramayana date to the 11th century AD (written in Devnagri, created in the 11th century) while the older Buddhist Ramayanas (e.g. Tibetan, 8th century) have vastly different storylines.
3) Despite the colonial racial complexes developed by Poorbia Brahmanists during British rule and their revisionist and fantastical 19th century "One Hindu Nation" propaganda, there is overwhelming historical and archeological evidence of Brahmanism (so-called "Hinduism") being of Dravidian origin from the historically and geographically separate gangetic region (Gangasthan).  Social customs, dress, cuisine, dance, ethnicity, cultural heritage, ethos and political history of the two regions are very different.
4) As discussed below, the northwest country ("Saptha-Sindhva" in Rig Veda, "Sakasthana" on Saka inscriptions/coins) was politically independent from rest of southasia over 97% of its history from the start of  its Vedic period to the Afghan conquest (500 BC - 1200 AD).  Between 500 BC-1200 AD, it was under the political rule of Saka tribes and dynasties who form 65% of the present northwest population based on ethnological information collected in colonial censuses.  Saka priests were known as "Magas" (Sun priests who prayed to the sun for bountiful harvests) who, along with Buddhist masters of Sakasthan, found themselves out of work when Buddhism and its institutions declined during 8-10th century.  Many of them eventually became recruited into the "Brahmin" fold (e.g. Saraswat, Dakaut divisions) while gangetic emigrants form the "Gaur" division of Brahmins.  These Saka converts to Brahmanism did not intermarry Brahmins from other regions and divisions, ate meat and were occupationally lax.  Although they were indoctrinated into the gangetic caste ideology, they have always been regarded as a "lower grade" by the easterly orthodox Brahmins.  Brahmins as a whole in southasia are ethnically, culturally and racially a diverse heterogenous group geographically distributed up to Indonesia, Burma and Thailand, while the Saka-Vedic population is predominantly confined to the northwest country where they form the majority.
5) Brahmins collectively are not of one racial or ethnic origin as fantasized under 19th century Poorbia Brahmanist racial dogma ("Vedic Aryan").  In the south, they take on the physical traits of south Indians, in Nepal they look Nepali, in Burma and Thailand they are mongoloid, in Gangasthan they look Bhiya, and in the Punjab many share a Punjabi ethnicity derived from their Maga and Buddhist predecessors while others are undoubtedly post 9th century AD migrants from Malabar (Shankarcharya's revivalist horde) and the gangetic region.

Derivation of the word “Brahman”

While the Dravids belong to the tribe of Abraham along with the others, the name Hebrew is not really applied to them.

After Noah landed, he had a son named Shem, from whom came the man whom the Bible names Eber. (Ever, Aver, Ab-ra). Eber is said to have resisted Nimrod's command to build the Tower of Babel: In an act of outrageous disloyalty to Nimrod, Eber crossed over from Babylon to the land across the river - The Rivers of Euphrates and Tigris.In this wilderness, Ever and his people retained the Hebrew language while back in Babylon the rest of the languages were confused. Dravids claim that this original language was Tamil.  The name 'Hebrew' rested on Abraham, whose name comes from that of his Great-Grandaddy Eber
Abraham and his sons distinguished themselves as men who would migrate away rather than fight over territory. One of this group is the Dravids of the Harappa and Mohen Jodeira area.  Just as Abraham, and all this children 'crossed over' from their homeland to new territory rather than fight, the Aryans who left their home land of Iran when the tribes were in fight could very well may be called Hebrews in the wider sense. Iranian Aryans worshipped Asuras and Indian Aryans worshipped Devas when the two groups seperated.

Abraham migrated from place to place and coexisted peacefully with the locals as the Bible clearly shows.  The only time he went to war was when his nephew was taken captive.  This peaceful coexistence was typical of the Hebrews until their coming to take over Canaan and the formation of the Kingdom as Jews.  This peaceful character of Abraham was passed onto the children of of his cousin sister Keturah.  Archealogy shows that the Mohenjodero Harappa remained peaceful until the coming of the Aryans. They apparently knew no war.

Archaeologists have long wondered whether the Harappan civilization could actually have thrived for roughly 2,000 years without any major wars or leadership cults. Obviously people had conflicts, sometimes with deadly results — graves reveal ample skull injuries caused by blows to the head. But there is no evidence that any Harappan city was ever burned, besieged by an army, or taken over by force from within. Sifting through the archaeological layers of these cities, scientists find no layers of ash that would suggest the city had been burned down, and no signs of mass destruction. There are no enormous caches of weapons, and not even any art representing warfare.
That would make the Harappan civilization an historical outlier in any era. But it's especially noteworthy at a time when neighboring civilizations in Mesopotamia were erecting massive war monuments, and using cuneiform writing on clay tablets to chronicle how their leaders slaughtered and enslaved thousands.

What exactly were the Harappans doing instead of focusing their energies on military conquest? “

Who are the Hebrews, the Israel, and the Jews?

  • The name is derived, from Eber (Genesis 10:24), the ancestor of Abraham. The Hebrews are metaphorically or literally "sons of Eber" (10:21). Then it applies strictly to all children of Eber. This applies to the sons of Abraham who occupied Harappa also
  • You can trace the name of a Hebrew root-word 'Abhar’ signifying "to pass over," and hence regard it as meaning "the man who passed over," which when applied to the Jews refers to River Euphrates (beyond the River); from beyond "the region" or "country beyond," viz., from the land of Chaldea. This then can be applied to any of the nomadic people who crossed over their region into another world to settle down.  In that sense it could very well be applied to the Aryan immigrants who came to the Ur of the Dravids in Pakisthan.

The Change as we have seen took place around 600 BC.  Hence

In his History of the Jews, the Jewish scholar and theologian Flavius Josephus (37 - 100 A.D.), wrote that the Greek philosopher Aristotle had said: "...These Jews are derived from the Indian philosophers; they are named by the Indians Calani." (Book I:22.)

Clearchus of Soli (Greek: Kλέαρχoς, Klearkhos) was a Greek philosopher of the 4th–3rd century BCE, belonging to Aristotle's Peripatetic school. He was born in Soli in Cyprus. He wrote extensively on eastern cultures, and is thought to have traveled to the Bactrian city of Ai-Khanoum (Alexandria on the Oxus) in modern Afghanistan.Clearchus of Soli wrote, "The Jews descend from the philosophers of India. The philosophers are called in India Calanians and in Syria Jews. The name of their capital is very difficult to pronounce. It is called 'Jerusalem.'

The full quotation evidently shows that there were jews in India who were known as “calani”
Here's the quote from JSTOR-accessible scholarly journal article: E. Silberschlag (1933). "The earliest record of Jews in Asia Minor". Journal of Biblical Literature 52 (1): 66-77. ISSN 00219231. On pages 67-68, it quotes Josephus in Contra Apionem (1.176-183), quoting from "Thackeray's translation made for the Loeb Classical Library" (p. 67, footnote 5) as stating that:
"It would take too long to repeat the whole story, but there were features in that man's character, at once strangely marvellous and philosophical, which merit description. 'I warn you, Hyperochides,' he said, 'that what I am about to say will seem to you as wonderful as a dream.'

Hyperochides respectfully replied, 'that is the very reason why we are all anxious to hear it'. 'Well,' said Aristotle, 'in accordance with the precepts of rhetoric, let us begin by describing his race, in order to keep to the rules of our masters in the art of narration.' 'Tell the story as you please,' said Hyperochides.

 'Well,' he replied, 'the man was a Jew of Coele-Syria. These people are descended from the Indian philosophers. The philosophers, they say, are in India called Calani;[FOOTNOTE 6] in Syria by the territorial name of Jews; for the district which they inhabit is known as Judaea. Their city has a remarkably odd name: they call it Hierusaleme. Now this man, who was entertained by a large circle of friends and was on his way down from the interior to the coast, not only spoke Greek, but had the soul of a Greek. During my stay in Asia, he visited the same places as I did, and came to converse with me and some other scholars, to test our learning. But as one who had been intimate with many cultivated persons, it was rather he who imparted to us something of his own."

  •  "Megasthenes, who was sent to India by Seleucus Nicator, about three hundred years before Christ, and whose accounts from new inquiries are every day acquiring additional credit, says that the Jews 'were an Indian tribe or sect called Kalani...'" (Anacalypsis, by Godfrey Higgins, Vol. I; p. 400.)
  • Martin Haug, Ph.D., wrote in The Sacred Language, Writings, and Religions of the Parsis, "The Magi are said to have called their religion Kesh-î-Ibrahim.They traced their religious books to Abraham, who was believed to have brought them from heaven." (p. 16.)

In fact one of the magi who visited Bethlehem came from Kerala

Placing Abraham in India can only be done with lot of twisting of words and assumptions that cannot be supported simply because of the time.  Abraham was born arounf 2000 BC and the tribe of Judah did not came into existence after His great grandson Judah.  Brahminism came only by 600 BC.
So we should take any attempt to make Abraham comin

So we should take any attempt to make Abraham coming from Brahminism with caution unless we are willing to make heavy tolerant terminologies.  The following are interesting attempts, but cannot be true in history.

Voltaire was of the opinion that Abraham descended from some of the numerous Brahman priests who left India to spread their teachings throughout the world; and in support of his thesis he presented the following elements: the similarity of names and the fact that the city of Ur, land of the patriarchs, was near the border of Persia, the road to India, where that Brahman had been born.
Bactria (a region of ancient Afghanistan) was the locality of a prototypical Jewish nation called Juhuda or Jaguda, also called Ur-Jaguda. Ur meant "place or town." Therefore, the bible was correct in stating that Abraham came from "Ur of the Chaldeans." "Chaldean," more correctly Kaul-Deva (Holy Kauls), was not the name of a specific ethnicity but the title of an ancient Hindu Brahmanical priestly caste who lived in what are now Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the Indian state of Kashmir.

"The tribe of Joud or the Brahmin Abraham, was expelled from or left the Maturea of the kingdom of Oude in India and, settling in Goshen, or the house of the Sun or Heliopolis in Egypt, gave it the name of the place which they had left in India, Maturea." (Anacalypsis; Vol. I, p. 405.)
Brahman and the God of Abraham

Yes Brahman is the God of Abraham. The Upanishadic period describes Brahaman correctly as the One God. It is exactly as the Kabbalah presents today.

According to the Upanishads, the Ultimate Reality is Brahman. Brahman is the indescribable, inexhaustible, omniscient, omnipresent, eternal and absolute principle who is without a beginning,
without an end , who is hidden in all and who is the cause, source, material and effect of all creation  
As such Brahman is the essence of all existence. The Upanishads describe Him as the One and indivisible, eternal universal self, who is present in all and in whom all are present.
 "Brahman, its secret name is Satyasya Satyam, 'the Truth of truth.'
[Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2.1.20]
"Now, therefore, this is the instruction about Brahman: You ask anything, the answer is Neti, neti — Not this, not this" because Brahman cannot be defined with any property.
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2.3.6 Chandogya Upanishad 3.14.1: This is  nirguna Brahman, that is the Brahman without attributes, and this is held to be the ultimate and sole reality.

Since such a being cannot be a person with a purpose cannot or will not create.  Hence somehow this person became or evolved into a Saguna Brahman, a person of all attributes.  This is the Brahman that is made known to the seekers.

This is the same YHVH who declares “I am that I am” “ehyeh ašer ehyeh” the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob who appeared to Moses

In the Hellenistic Greek literature of the Jewish Diaspora the phrase "Ehyeh asher ehyeh" was rendered in Greek "ego eimi ho on ", "I am the BEING".

Septuagint Exodus 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I am HE WHO IS (ho ōn): and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, HE WHO IS (ho ōn) hath sent me unto you.   

Philo : And God said, "At first say unto them, 'I am (egō eimi) THE BEING', (ho ōn, nominative of ontos) that, when they have learnt that there is a difference between THE BEING (ontos, genitive of ho ōn) and that-that-is-not (mee ontos), they may be further taught that there is no name whatever that can properly be assigned to Me (ep' emou kuriologeitai), to whom (hoi) only (monoi) belongs (prosesti) the existence (to einai). (Philo Life Of Moses Vol.1 :75)   

ho Ōn, "He who is" (Philo, Life of Moses I 75)the Self-Existent" (II 161)
to Ōn, "the Being who is" (Philo, Life of Moses II 67),
tou Ontos, "of Him that is" (II 99)  "of the Self-Existent" (II 132)

This usage is also found in the New Testament:
Rev 1:8 I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, the BEING (ho ōn), and THE WAS (ho ēn), and THE IS TO COME (ho erchomenos), the Almighty (ho pantokrator).[6]
Rev 4:8 holy, Lord God Almighty, the WAS (ho ēn), and the BEING (ho ōn), and the IS TO COME (ho erchomenos).

The identiy is obvious.  The idea is totally alien to the Vedic thought pattern which appears in the Rig Veda.  If our evidence of the Dravids are correct, they held this view from the time of Abraham which is around 2000 BC, and the Dravids must have been in India from around 1950 BC.  But the take over of Aryan Cult by Dravids took place a 1000 years later and when it took place it totally wiped out the Aryan Vedic religion and their gods. Attempts to revive the Vedic religion as the religion of India is a recent nationalistic aspiration started with the freedom movement. In spite of that the old gods remain dead.  The Vedic religion took a new name “Sanatana Dharma” the Universal Way, a name not heard of in earlier time.  However the concept of Supreme God considerd as a God of Heaven is seen all over the world and still alive and exists in the cradle of humanity in Africa.

Nasadiya Sukta

Then was not non-existent nor existent:
there was no realm of air, no sky beyond it.
What covered in, and where? and what gave shelter?
Was water there, unfathomed depth of water?
Death was not then, nor was there aught immortal:
no sign was there, the day's and night's divider.
That One Thing, breathless, breathed by its own nature:
apart from it was nothing whatsoever.
Darkness there was: at first concealed in darkness this
All was indiscriminated chaos.
All that existed then was void and formless:
by the great power of Warmth was born that Unit.
Thereafter rose Desire in the beginning, Desire,
the primal seed and germ of Spirit.
Sages who searched with their heart's thought discovered
the existent's kinship in the non-existent.
Transversely was their severing line extended:
what was above it then, and what below it?
There were begetters, there were mighty forces,
free action here and energy up yonder
Who verily knows and who can here declare it,
whence it was born and whence comes this creation?
The Gods are later than this world's production.
Who knows then whence it first came into being?
He, the first origin of this creation,
whether he formed it all or did not form it,
Whose eye controls this world in highest heaven,
he verily knows it, or perhaps he knows not.
Rig Veda Mandala 10, Hymn 129 : Creation,
as translated by Ralph T. H. Griffith (1896).

Appearance of Brahmi Script

Early Indian script was in Brahmi and the script appeared in India almost as abruptly as the appearance of the Upanishads and the concept of Brahman. The Brahmi script certainly made its full appearance in the 6th century BC at the same time as the Brahman.

The name Brahman as supreme being and the name of the script Brahmi in which the philosophies came in writing obviously suggest a connection.

Variants of the scripts appeared in various places suggesting a local impact into the process of writing.  Philosophical development in the thinking process can only achieved side by side with the logic, literature, language and writing.   The earliest inscription written in Brahmi date back to the 6th century BC in srilanka among the Tamils. Brahmi quickly became the official script of religious texts and cults, and therefore spread over all India.  Buddhism which was the major rational science of the period extensively used Brahmi in its varying forms.
In the Buddhist texts uses seven principal scripts namely Gupta Brahmi Scripts, Kharosti, Later Gupta Brahmi , Siddhamatrika, Central Asian Brahmi with its several variations, Newari and Old Bengali or Gaudi. Because of this Buddhism practically displaced Vedism until the coming of Thomas.   Pali manuscripts in these scripts are found on palmleaves. Except for limited document in Kharosti script all the scripts be it of Sanskrit or Pali evolved out of Brahmi script, which we find in Asoka Edicts. 
Though there had been intense argument about the origin of the Brahmi scripts it boils down to two levels:
1. It evolved out of the Indus Valley language
2.It evolved out of the Semitic languages of Aramea.
Coming to understand that Indus Civilzation before the coming of the Aryans was indeed of semitic, sons of Heber – the Hebrew, the people of Abraham-– the Dasyus of the Aryans they were Aramaen.  
During the offering of the tithe, the temple service the nation of Israel made the following confession:
Deuteronomy 26: 4-5 "Then the priest shall take the basket from your hand and set it down before the altar of the LORD your God. "You shall answer and say before the LORD your God, 'My father was a wandering Aramean, and he went down to Egypt and sojourned there, few in number; but there he became a great, mighty and populous nation.  

Brahmi Script in Asoka Pillar. dated to 250–232 BCE.
Sanskrit as a language is absent in the Asoka Pillar.
Sanskrit appears only in the 3rd century AD after another 500 years.
Thus Brahmi was derived from contemporary Semitic scripts, and it is connected to and as-yet undeciphered Indus script because the Indus people were originally the Abrahamic people. The modern Dravidian language scripts are all derivative of the Brahmi.