One, Two, Three, What're We Fightin' For?!?! (repost)

In carefully examining the conflicts of this world, and especially the religiously motivated conflicts, it has become clear that there are hidden motives, ancient grudges over arguments from ages ago that have created the ground on which these battles are fought. I have concluded from my studies that one of the fundamental disagreements that has brought about much of these conflicts was between Siva and Brahma. It seems very likely that this conflict, whether between "individuals" or "tribes" or aspects of human consciousness, led to the migration of the purported forebearer(s) of Judaism, and thus to whatever degree, of Christianity and Islam, out of the parlance of Indus Valley civilization and to the Middle East.

This conflict, as I perceive it's likely beginnings, is couched in a myth regarding Brahma's desire for his daughter, and Siva's righteous retribution for said transgression. As a beautiful maiden Brahma had directly created early on in the show sought to evade the lustful gaze of Brahma (technically her father), he grows a fifth head to seek to continue to gaze upon her. Siva comes to Brahma and with his fingernail (according to at least one version) severs Brahma's fifth head as due punishment for his transgression, and to stop him from harassing his daughter. Brahma, Abraham; severing of a fifth head, circumcision.

This seems very likely connected to the story of Abraham, who fled towards the west after some conflict with the people of his homeland which was quite certainly part of Indus Valley culture (even as the Torah recounts, Abraham came from Ur of the Chaldese, quite near modern India), and established a new religion based upon a rite of severing the foreskin of the phallus--obviously analogous to a head being severed.

The names "Abraham," "Sarai" (Abraham's wife) and "Hagar" (Sarah's maidservant who gave birth to Abraham's first son and the purported progenitor of the Arab peoples, Ishmael) all have their obvious origin in myths and place-names relating to preceding analogous Indian mythic figures: Brahma, his consort Saraswati (also the name of a river, once thought mythical by western scholars until said river was discovered by satellite photography), and Ghaggar (the name of a river that was a tributary to the Saraswati River).

Now in analyzing the name "Abraham" according to Sanskrit, the "A" at the beginning of his name would designate "not," as "adharma" means "not just." Thus "Abraham" would designate either "not-brahma" (perhaps as intention to hide shame of the creator aspect of the Trimurti), or "not-brahman," meaning "not according to/abiding by the laws of nature." This would certainly fit with the hypothesis that Abraham's departure from Ur of the Chaldese was related to this unrighteous action of Brahma, i.e., Brahma's desire for, or as some versions of the myth would indicate, rape of his daughter. Not a very auspicious beginning for the three most popular religions of the "Western" world.

I do not explicate this hypothesis to condemn anyone, nor to shame the members of these religions (though perhaps to humble them a bit), but to attempt to reveal a long hidden truth that has long been suppressed by the "Western" world. To issue a few important disclaimer, I ought to note that according to geneological research my mother and one of my sisters did shortly after the death of one of my mother's parents, I may be decended, through a line of mothers, to a woman whose name indicated she may have been Jewish. This being the case, I would, by matrilineal descent, be considered Jewish by that groups delineation of descent. I was a Christian minister, though I have renounced my ordination and baptism, not out of utter disdain but out of a sense that I do not belong to said religion. I have prayed with and fasted with Muslems on Friday during Ramadan (and by the way, their pronunciation of "Amin" is much closer to the original "AUM" than the "Amen" of Christians, and even than the "AUM" I have heard uttered by many a purported practitioner of Hinduism). I am not a member of any of these groups (i.e., the Abrahamic religions), but maintain compassion and due respect (and in some cases, due contempt) for each. I do have sympathies for all groups whose intentions include righteous action and compassionate works.

Now as to the exact conclusions to be drawn from the aforementioned synthesis of mythological constructs, I cannot explicate fully in the scope of this entry. Indeed, other hidden agendas and subtle twists to this story may yet elude my study of this story that has become a drama writ large on the world stage, and which has indeed cost many lives, directly or otehrwise.

As to whether Abraham was an historical figure, or represented a sect or tribe of Brahmins(possibly promoting marital/sexual practices obviously and properly deemed unrighteous by the establishment), or some other figuration, I cannot say. This ought not, in my opinion, condemn any group of people, as none of the sects deriving from this "genesis" promote any sort of practice that promote incest, unless at some esoteric or occulted level of which I am unaware. It is, however, more than moderately likely that what I have here reported is true and accurate to the origins of these mythological constructions that have so impacted the world for four millenia, and specifically regarding the true origin of the rite of circumcision. In other words, circumcision is about the creator's wrongful desire. Draw what conclusions you will, dear reader, but recognize the razor's edge that is delineated by this revelation of truth. (see post, "Hidden Origins of the West" for information regarding the more general derivition of Judaism, Christianity and Islam from the Hindu Trimurti)