xunzian

Joseph Campbell said that, philologically, if one were to try and render 'Brahma' into ancient Hebrew, the best way to do it would be as 'Abraham'.

Heck, look at the two words. It isn't too hard to swallow. I think it makes a certain degree of sense. Also, since the Middle East has had contact with India for a long time, I think it is reasonable to think that some Indian ideas would have migrated into Jewish religion. Especially since nearly every religion has contamination from other religions in it (Heck, most of the Greek religion was borrowed from other Middle Eastern religions). So, I think that is follows.

Sven

I see no one assuming this about you in this thread. You indeed seem to be paranoid.

Smullyan-esque

No one has said that. *I* said you were a fundamentalist. The word "Christian" was not part of it. You are a fundamentalist Hindu.
Aren't YOU the one who said "Please stop asking for special rules" :rolling:

We wouldn't want you to be faced with HARD arguments, like "they are all just figments of imagination". Let's just stick to the easy strawmen, so you can look good...
That doesn't make them correct.
Maybe they run YOUR world, Biomystic. MY world is not really a theocracy (yet), despite repeated attempts by the fundamentalist Christians.
You know? I think Gandalf was a Hindu deity of some sort, too! I bet if you put that powerful mind of yours to work, you could show us all the error of our ways, and we would never read Tolkien again!

In fact, I bet ALL fictional characters are related, to some extent. Weird, huh?

seven8s

No, that would be wired'.

Toto

Taking this seriously:

I see one very basic problem. Hebrews do not speak an IndoEuropean language. How do you explain the importance of just 2 names having some similarity to Hindu names, when the languages do not show any such similarity? If the Hebrews came from an Indo-European speaking area, why do they speak a Semitic language?

Biomystic

Why is the Sanskrit word for "King" "melik", the same as the Hebrew word for "King" melech? If you go to the Hindu Sword of Truth websites there you will find the Hindu's opinions that Muhammad's Islam is full of Sanskrit words.

I don't know the derivation of the Canaanite language but isn't it in the Indo-European languages? The Canaanites invented the original root alphabet we still use today. Hebrew is a Canaanite dialect so it all hinges on the origins of the Canaanite language.

Here's a scenario. A Brahmin community is forced out of the Sarasvati river system and moves south west into Iran but they are strangers in the land and soon all their high caste Brahmin wealth is used to survive with and peters out.

They continue migrating southwest becoming nomadic shepherds along the way but the survival lifestyle has erased the intellectual community and with no books they lose their memories of India and the Vedic religion except for key figures like Brahma and Sarasvati, and also a key memory that they were once big shots in India.

They learn the languages and culture of the places they have moved to. They learn the Canaanite language and religion but still have vague memories of a god of creation and a son of this god. But with no temples, no idols, no scrolls or and a rough survival of the fittest lifestyle, the only thing they remember separating them from others is this idea religion should be "real" and not filled with gods and fantasies. So they make gods into Hebrews and meld them into the geneologies of biblical Hebrew families. They are in the Canaanite culture and political system but retain the Brahmin superior caste memory and stay aloof from Canaanite society and religion. Or at least the priests do. The lay Hebrews join in Canaanite society and it drives the old priests nuts.

But their memory of India is by this time a 1000 years old and they think only Abraham came in from the east. Which Brahma did, in disguise..

Toto

Canaanite Language is classified as Semitic, not Indo-European.

Smullyan-esque

Don't you think it is awfully presumptuous of you to make bold, dramatic claims about something you haven't even studied?!?! Or did you think it wasn't important to study the language that you were making claims about?
Scenarios prove nothing except that you have an active imagination. You need something else. Hint: it rhymes with "schmevidence".
Now you are saying that Jesus was some sort of racial memory of Hindu beliefs? Or do you think Christians think Abraham was the son of God? This "scenario" wasn't really thought out all that carefully, was it?
So you are racist, too? You think Brahmins have a superior memory? Or is it that you think their caste has some sort of genetic memory? What sort of wacky class-conscious racism did you pick up from Hinduism?
So, it appears that you DO think Brahma is a real being. Unless you are being metaphoric. The lack of clarity argues for the former.

premjan

It is not an impossible scenario, but in its present form, it is more suitable for a speculative historical fiction (something like the Satanic Verses) which parodies what we consider as real history. 'Malik' may be a semitic or Persian / Turkish import to Hindi as it doesn't sound like a Sanskrit word somehow - do you have an exact etymology? Maybe the Hebrew and Hindi word have the same root despite the fact that it is not originally from Sanskrit. The opposite speculation - of the word Malik being borrowed from the semites is also made:
http://www.boloji.com/rt3/rt223.htm
You see that it is more plausible that Melech should lead to Mleccha (a pejorative) rather than Malik (a term for a superior, or God) or possibly led to both borrowings. Some people think that maybe the Vedic "Asuras" were followers of Assur, the God of the city of Assyria. So the borrowing could be in both directions. The Indus Valley was supposedly known as "Meluhha" to the Assyrians and Egyptians. Any idea of the root for that?

The story you have made up is appropriate for the gypsies, but needs more verification for the Jews. The gypsies are of more recent (Indic) origin and there are enough clues to trace their language and culture to the Punjab. In the case of Hebrews adopting the local semitic language and discarding Sanskrit, you would expect a singnificant number of Sanskrit loanwords in their language nevertheless, as occurs among Tamil Brahmins - their Tamil is Sanskritized (though in the case of the Hebrews the link is no doubt more tenuous).

By caste memory, I think it is not meant that so-called ex-Brahmin Jews have a superior memory, but that they retain some cultural links to their past. The attitude of cultural superiority is certainly parallel between the two groups but for that matter, it can be found in many other cultural groups as well (e.g. Zoroastrians, Assyrians, maybe the descendants of the Pharaonic Egyptians etc.).

Another problem for your theory is that the Brahmins tend to be occupationally specialized and graft themselves as scholars onto the local cultures (at least that is the pattern in India). They would be less likely to turn to sheepherding than to employ themselves as priests for the sheepherders. Moreover, Hindus definitely don't believe in a theocracy (rule is for a different caste and only rarely in history have Brahmins been rulers), whereas Jews probably don't have a problem with the concept.

Amaleq13

I think premjan is correct. The phrase was poorly structured and should be understood to mean "memory of superior Brahmin caste status".

That's a fascinating notion. Who writes about it?