निराकर शिव और योगी शिव ~ आर्य समाज

वेदों के शिव.

नमः शम्भवाय च मयोभवाय च नम: शंकराय च मयस्कराय च नमः शिवाय च शिवतराय च. [यजु० १६/४१]

अर्थ- जो मनुष्य सुख को प्राप्त कराने हारे परमेश्वर और सुखप्राप्ति के हेतु विद्वान् का भी सत्कार कल्याण करने और सब प्राणियों को सुख पहुंचाने वाले का भी सत्कार मङ्गलकारी और अत्यन्त मङ्गलस्वरूप पुरुष का भी सत्कार करते हैं,वे कल्याण को प्राप्त होते हैं। (इस मन्त्र में शंभव, मयोभव, शंकर, मयस्कर, शिव, शिवतर शब्द आये हैं जो एक ही परमात्मा के विशेषण के रूप में प्रयुक्त हुए हैं।)

या ते रुद्र शिवा तनूरघोराऽपापकाशिनी। तया नस्तन्वा शन्तमया गिरिशन्ताभि चाकशीहि। [यजु० १६/२]

हे मेघ वा सत्य उपदेश से सुख पहुंचाने वाले दुष्टों को भय और श्रेष्ठों के लिए सुखकारी शिक्षक विद्वन्! जो आप की घोर उपद्रव से रहित सत्य धर्मों को प्रकाशित करने हारी कल्याणकारिणी देह वा विस्तृत उपदेश रूप नीति है उस अत्यन्त सुख प्राप्त करने वाली देह वा विस्तृत उपदेश की नीति से हम लोगों को आप सब ओर से शीघ्र शिक्षा कीजिये।

या ते रुद्र शिवा तनू: शिवा विश्वाहा भेषजी। शिवा रुतस्य भेषजी तया नो मृड जीवसे। [-यजु० १६/४९]

हे राजा के वैद्य तू जो तेरी कल्याण करने वाली देह वा विस्तारयुक्त नीति देखने में प्रिय ओषधियों के तुल्य रोगनाशक और रोगी को सुखदायी पीड़ा हरने वाली है उससे जीने के लिए सब दिन हम को सुख कर।

स ब्रह्मा स विष्णु: स रुद्रस्स: शिवस्सोऽक्षरस्स: परम: स्वराट्।

स इन्द्रस्स: कालाग्निस्स चन्द्रमा:।।. [ -कैवल्यो० १/८]

वह जगत् का निर्माता, पालनकर्ता, दण्ड देने वाला, कल्याण करने वाला, विनाश को न प्राप्त होने वाला, सर्वोपरि, शासक, ऐश्वर्यवान्, काल का भी काल, शान्ति और प्रकाश देने वाला है।

प्रपंचोपशमं शान्तं शिवमद्वैतम् चतुर्थं मन्यन्ते स आत्मा स विज्ञेयः।।७।।

[-माण्डूक्य०]

प्रपंच जाग्रतादि अवस्थायें जहां शान्त हो जाती हैं, शान्त आनन्दमय अतुलनीय चौथा तुरीयपाद मानते हैं वह आत्मा है और जानने के योग्य है।

यहां शिव का अर्थ शान्त और आनन्दमय के रूप में देखा जा सकता है।

सर्वाननशिरोग्रीव: सर्वभूतगुहाशय:। सर्वव्यापी स भगवान् तस्मात्सर्वगत: शिव:।।

[श्वेता० ४/१४]

जो इस संसार की उत्पत्ति, स्थिति और प्रलय का कर्ता एक ही है, जो सब प्राणियों के हृदयाकाश में विराजमान है, जो सर्वव्यापक है, वही सुखस्वरूप भगवान् शिव सर्वगत अर्थात् सर्वत्र प्राप्त है।

सूक्ष्मातिसूक्ष्मं कलिलस्य मध्ये विश्वस्य सृष्टारमनेकरुपम्।

विश्वस्यैकं परिवेष्टितारं ज्ञात्वा शिवं शान्तिमत्यन्तमेति।।

[श्वेता० ४/१४]

परमात्मा अत्यन्त सूक्ष्म है, हृदय के मध्य में विराजमान है, अखिल विश्व की रचना अनेक रूपों में करता है। वह अकेला अनन्त विश्व में सब ओर व्याप्त है। उसी कल्याणकारी परमेश्वर को जानने पर स्थाई रूप से मानव परम शान्ति को प्राप्त होता है।

नचेशिता नैव च तस्य लिंङ्गम्।।

[श्वेता० ६/१]

उस शिव का कोई नियन्ता नहीं और न उसका कोई लिंग वा निशान है।

योगदर्शन में परमात्मा की प्रतीति इस प्रकार की गई है-

क्लेशकर्मविपाकाशयैरपरामृष्ट: पुरुषविशेष ईश्वर:।। १/१/२४

जो अविद्यादि क्लेश, कुशल, अकुशल, इष्ट, अनिष्ट और मिश्र फलदायक कर्मों की वासना से रहित है, वह सब जीवों से विशेष ईश्वर कहाता है।

स एष पूर्वेषामपि गुरु: कालेनानवच्छेदात्।। १/१/२६

वह ईश्वर प्राचीन गुरुओं का भी गुरु है। उसमें भूत भविष्यत् और वर्तमान काल का कुछ भी सम्बन्ध नहीं है,क्योंकि वह अजर, अमर नित्य है।

महर्षि दयानन्द सरस्वती जी ने भी अपने पुस्तक सत्यार्थप्रकाश में निराकार शिवादि नामों की व्याख्या इस प्रकार की है--

(रुदिर् अश्रुविमोचने) इस धातु से 'णिच्' प्रत्यय होने से 'रुद्र' शब्द सिद्ध होता है।'यो रोदयत्यन्यायकारिणो जनान् स रुद्र:' जो दुष्ट कर्म करनेहारों को रुलाता है, इससे परमेश्वर का नाम 'रुद्र' है।

(डुकृञ् करणे) 'शम्' पूर्वक इस धातु से 'शङ्कर' शब्द सिद्ध हुआ है। 'य: शङ्कल्याणं सुखं करोति स शङ्कर:' जो कल्याण अर्थात् सुख का करनेहारा है, इससे उस ईश्वर का नाम 'शङ्कर' है।

'महत्' शब्द पूर्वक 'देव' शब्द से 'महादेव' शब्द सिद्ध होता है। 'यो महतां देव: स महादेव:' जो महान् देवों का देव अर्थात् विद्वानों का भी विद्वान्, सूर्यादि पदार्थों का प्रकाशक है, इस लिए उस परमात्मा का नाम 'महादेव' है।

(शिवु कल्याणे) इस धातु से 'शिव' शब्द सिद्ध होता है। 'बहुलमेतन्निदर्शनम्।' इससे शिवु धातु माना जाता है, जो कल्याणस्वरूप और कल्याण करने हारा है, इसलिए उस परमेश्वर का नाम 'शिव' है।

निष्कर्ष- उपरोक्त लेख द्वारा योगी शिव और निराकार शिव में अन्तर बतलाया है। 

~ arya smaj

आदम और आदिनाथ।

1. Both Adipurana and Genesis narrate the beginnings of humanity in a paradise/garden where nature, abundance and harmony rule.

2. Nudity plays an important part of both genesis and adipuran, yet in different ways. In Genesis, they were nude. In the jainism genesis: nudity is a symbol of holiness and asceticism practiced by Adinath.

3. Lets note the phonetic connection between the names Adam and Adinath. Adinath means the Original or First Master. Adinath is not the first human (but his father is the first human being born with a navel chord), he is rather the first prophet.

4. Adam has sons Cain and Abel which fight each other to death. Adinath has Bharata the first emperor that is the first “Khan” / Cain, and Bahubali. Abel is a very likely shortened corrupt form of Bahubali.

5. Cain kills Abel. In adipuran Abel beats Cain in a duel (Bahubali beats Bharata) but he renounces his victory and gives his kingdom to his greedy brother.

6. Seth: After quiting his kingdom in favour of Bharat: Bahubali or Abel becomes an ascetic, hence dying to the world and he becomes the first Siddha. Sounds familiar? maybe like Seth?, which in the middle east version is a different third son. Siddha means the perfect one, and such appelation exists for him in gnostic texts.

7. The Tree symbol: middle east Adamic versions have the tree of knowledge. In the apocryphon of John its two trees: the tree of knowledge and the tree of life. Adipuran has gargantuan trees called kalpavrisha (trees of desire fulfillment) big enough to hide the sky and the planets, which provided humanity every they could need. Tree has been always a positive symbol in the lushy india, and the land where it became a symbol of evil was eventually turned into a desert.

8. The downfall of humanity: both stories end with the degeneration of humanity. But in the adipurana its not caused by eating from a tree. Its caused by the creation of the priestly caste; since the ascetics that followed Bahubali didn’t accept gifts from Bharata and his people, he created his own sect of pseudo ascetics that would accept gifts. And these became the rishis or first brahmins.. whose dependence of people degenerated in evil practices of social control, racial supremacy, meat eating and others. This is a more down to earth version of the downfall.. which probably explains why this is seems more of a hidden in plain sight, incovenient to the powers-that-be history.

9. Archon sabotage: this point links the adipuran or jain genesis to the gnostic genesis instead of the torah version, where celestial beings called archons corrupt humanity. Bharata (Cain) develops a bloodthirsty greed for conquering his brothers’ kingdoms after he receives a powerful weapon from the gods: the chakra or disk. Its the weapon which urges him to the fratricide conquer.

10.

Ismaili gnosticism: acknowledges Adam as an ancient indian prophet. In fact it prophesizes that the last Imam will “preach the religion of Adam”.

11. Addendum: Adinath’s significant other doesn’t have the protagonic but tragic role of Eve in Genesis. However Eve can be linked to the very ancient Goddess of the Mango Tree called Ambha also worshipped by Jains. Which was anachronistically glued to Adam in the middle east versions of the story

◆◆◆◆◆

The father of the human world is Adam, Aadam, Adideva or Adinatha/Rishabha. Every religion in the world believes in the first father (Adipita) of the human world. Adinatha/Rishabha is the root of all major religions like Hinduism as Adibramh and Jainism as Adinatha/Rishabhdeva.

Lord Adinatha is considered as the Adipurusha [ first attained Enlightenment & illuminate to world by his illuminating rational knowledge ], the first Tirthankara and first ruling King. According to Jain tradition, Adinatha lived hundreds of thousands of years ago. Although historians have been skeptical of this claim, evidence found at the archeological sites at Mohanjodaro and Harrappa of the Indus Valley Civilization proves that he predated this 5000-year-old civilization.

Lord Adinatha was born into the royal family of Ayodhya as the son of King Nabhiraja and Queen Maru Devi. He was married to two wives: Sumangla and Sunanda. Sumangla gave birth to Bharat, who later became a chief emperor king . Sunanda gave birth to a child who came to be known as Bahubali.It is believed that Adinatha had one hundred sons and two daughters, who were named Brahmi and Sundari.

Jain tradition holds that all civilization developed from the teachings of Adinaths. He was the first king to establish the institutions of marriage, agriculture, the arts, and weaponry (swordsmanship, archery, etc). After organizing and instructing the society in various disciplines, he ruled for thousands of years. (The system of measuring time during that period is still unknown.) After this, he divided his kingdom among his sons and departed to take up an ascetic way of life. When Adinaths renounced his kingdom, thousands of people followed him into the ascetic life.

Whenever they went for alms, people offered them gold, jewels, ornaments, etc. But no one offered them food. Thus, many of his followers could not tolerate the starvation. They began asking for food, and then they left to form their own groups. This was the beginning of many sects. (According to the Jain faith, Tirthankaras remained silent until they achieved perfection.)

Tirthankara (Prakrit Language: Tirtha = ford ), also called Jina (victor, winner or conqueror), literally meaning 'ford-maker', who (re-)establishes the religion and the Sangh (the four fold order/community of ascetics and lay followers). 

Adinatha also went without food for an enitre year. Then he went to his grandson Shreyan's kingdom (Hastinapur, India). His grandson offered him sugarcane juice, which he accepted. Hastinapur is still considered a holy place, and even today Jains make pilgrimages to this site to break ritual fasts (with sugarcane juice).

After becoming enlightend (Perfect), He broke his silence and preached for many years, telling how to escape the cycle of brith and death and achieve eternal bliss. Tirthankara/Lord Adinatha achieved Nirvana on the mountain of Kailash in the Himalayas when he was in complete Samadhi. Samadhi: a state of intense or ecstatic meditation.

The symbol of Adinatha is A Bull (Rishabh). He became popular by this symbol and is now known as Rishabha Deva.

◆◆◆◆◆◆

The Hidden Indian Story of Adam

Original Shaman
Original Shaman

May 24, 2019·3 min read

I will try to keep it short. My flat earth research rabbithole resulted in finding an interesting and working explanation of the firmament/celestial sphere as an optical aberration.. the same power that produces synchronicities guided me in the journey, AND it turns that this rabbithole had a few child sub-rabbitholes.. I can’t exactly remember how a research on the flat earth transformed into a research about Adam.

For me — like everything that is hidden at plain sight — its fascinating to find that Adam is also the father of humanity for jains and hindus.. its the former (jains) who preserved the story: called the Adi Purana.. roughly translated as the book of the beginning.. idiomatically we could call it the Genesis and it would be ok :)

So to keep it short, I will just list the parallelisms, facts, phonetic and semantic connections between the Adam of middle east religions and Adinath from indian. It should be evident that its the same character.

Paradise Lost: Both Adipurana and Genesis narrate the beginnings of humanity in a paradise/garden where nature, abundance and harmony rule.

The First: Lets note the phonetic connection between the names Adam and Adinath. Fortunately the meaning of ancient indian words can be known; Adinath means the Original or First Master. Adinath is not the first human (but his father is the first human being born with a navel chord), he is rather the first prophet.

Nudity plays an important part of both genesis and adipuran, yet in different ways. In the jainism genesis: nudity is a symbol of holiness and asceticism practiced by Adinath.

Cain and Abel: Adam has sons Cain and Abel which fight each other to death. Adinath has Bharata the first emperor.. that is the first “Khan” / Cain, and Bahubali.. phonetic connection here; Abel is a very likely shortened corrupt form of Bahubali.

Cain and Abel conflict: In middle east version, Cain kills Abel. In adipuran.. Abel beats Cain in a duel(Bahubali beats Bharata) but he renounces his victory and gives his kingdom to his greedy brother.

Seth: After quiting his kingdom in favour of Bharat: Bahubali or Abel becomes an ascetic, hence dying to the world.. and he becomes the first Siddha. Sounds familiar? maybe like Seth?, which in the middle east version is a different third son. Siddha means the perfect one, and such appelation exists for him in gnostic texts.

The Tree symbol: middle east Adamic versions have the tree of knowledge. In the apocryphon of John its two trees: the tree of knowledge and the tree of life. Adipuran has gargantuan trees called kalpavrisha (trees of desire fulfillment) big enough to hide the sky and the planets, which provided humanity every they could need. Its interesting to note that the tree has been always a positive symbol in the lushy india, and the land where it became a symbol of evil was eventually turned into a desert.

The downfall of humanity: both stories end with the degeneration of humanity. But in the adipurana its not caused by eating from a tree. Its caused by the creation of the priestly caste; since the ascetics that followed Bahubali didn’t accept gifts from Bharata and his people, he created his own sect of pseudo ascetics that would accept gifts. And these became the rishis or first brahmins.. whose dependence of people degenerated in evil practices of social control, racial supremacy, meat eating and others. This is a more down to earth version of the downfall.. which probably explains why this is seems more of a hidden in plain sight, incovenient to the powers-that-be history.

Archon sabotage: this point links the adipuran or jain genesis to the gnostic genesis instead of the torah version, where celestial beings called archons corrupt humanity. Bharata (Cain) develops a bloodthirsty greed for conquering his brothers’ kingdoms after he receives a powerful weapon from the gods: the chakra or disk. Its the weapon which urges him to the fratricide conquer.

Ismaili gnosticism: acknowledges Adam as an ancient indian prophet. In fact it prophesizes that the last Imam will “preach the religion of Adam”.

Addendum: Adinath’s significant other doesn’t have the protagonic but tragic role of Eve in Genesis. However Eve can be linked to the very ancient Goddess of the Mango Tree called Ambha also worshipped by Jains. Which was anachronistically glued to Adam in the middle east versions of the story

https://medium.com/@originalshaman/the-hidden-indian-story-of-adam-d846d2a1ba51

◆◆◆◆◆

Root of Human World, #Antiquity of Jainism

The father [root] of the human world is #Adam, #Aadam, Adideva or #Adinatha/Rishabha. you can give him by any name. Every #religion in the world believes in the first father (Adipita) of the human world. Adinatha/Rishabha is the root of all major religions like #Christian as Adam, #Muslim as Aadam, #Hinduism as Adibramh and Jainism as Adinatha/Rishabhdeva.

Lord Adinatha is considered as the Adipurusha [ first attained Enlightenment & illuminate to world by his illuminating rational knowledge ], the first Tirthankara and first ruling King. According to Jain tradition, Adinatha lived hundreds of thousands of years ago. Although historians have been skeptical of this claim, evidence found at the archeological sites at Mohanjodaro and Harrappa of the Indus Valley Civilization proves that he predated this 5000-year-old civilization.

Lord Adinatha was born into the royal family of Ayodhya as the son of King Nabhiraja and Queen Maru Devi. He was married to two wives: Sumangla and Sunanda. Sumangla gave birth to Bharat, who later became a chief emperor king . Sunanda gave birth to a child who came to be known as Bahubali.It is believed that Adinatha had one hundred sons and two daughters, who were named Brahmi and Sundari.

Jain tradition holds that all #civilization developed from the teachings of Adinaths. He was the first king to establish the institutions of marriage, agriculture, the arts, and weaponry (swordsmanship, archery, etc). After organizing and instructing the society in various disciplines, he ruled for thousands of years. (The system of measuring time during that period is still unknown.) After this, he divided his kingdom among his sons and departed to take up an ascetic way of life. When Adinaths renounced his kingdom, thousands of people followed him into the ascetic life.

Whenever they went for alms, people offered them gold, jewels, ornaments, etc. But no one offered them food. Thus, many of his followers could not tolerate the starvation. They began asking for food, and then they left to form their own groups. This was the beginning of many sects. (According to the Jain faith, Tirthankaras remained silent until they achieved perfection.)

*Tirthankara (Prakrit Language: Tirtha = ford ), also called Jina (victor, winner or conqueror), literally meaning 'ford-maker', who (re-)establishes the religion and the Sangh (the four fold order/community of ascetics and lay followers).

Adinatha also went without food for an enitre year. Then he went to his grandson Shreyan's kingdom (Hastinapur, India). His grandson offered him sugarcane juice, which he accepted. Hastinapur is still considered a holy place, and even today Jains make pilgrimages to this site to break ritual fasts (with sugarcane juice).

After becoming enlightend (Perfect), He broke his silence and preached for many years, telling how to escape the cycle of brith and death and achieve eternal bliss. Tirthankara/Lord Adinatha achieved Nirvana on the mountain of Kailash in the Himalayas when he was in complete Samadhi. *Samadhi: a state of intense or ecstatic meditation.

The symbol of Adinatha is A Bull (Rishabh). He became popular by this symbol and is now known as Rishabha Deva.

--- www.jinvaani.org @ Jainism' e-Storehouse ---

#Jainism #Jain #Digambara #Nirgrantha #Tirthankara #Adinatha #MahavirBhagwan #Rishabhdev #AcharyaVidyasagar #LordMahavira #Ahinsa #Nonviolence

https://www.facebook.com/JainismPhilosophy/photos/a.580231378683374/1295120403861131/?type=3&scmts=scwspsdd

◆◆◆◆◆◆◆◆

Ram, Abraham and Ibrahim - Javed Jamil, Jhunjhunwala

Ram and Abraham/Ibrahim (peace be upon him): One Person, Two Names

Dr. Javed Jamil

23 Feb 2018

  

Ram of Valmiki Ramayana same as Abraham of Bible

 

Rama is perhaps the most important and revered figure for Hindus. Abraham is the patriarch of all Semitic religions and is the symbol of monotheism for Jews, Christians and Muslims. Interestingly when we read the story of Abraham in Bible and the story of Ram in Valmiki Ramayana, the resemblances are so striking that one cannot remain but convinced that they are one and the same figure. I had prepared a small paper on the subject in 1990 but deferred its publication because I thought the time was not right for it. I discussed the issue with Mr. Bharat Jhunjhunwala, renowned Economist and Hindu philosopher, and when he studied the matter, he was more than convinced about the oneness of both the figures and started working on a book about the common prophets of Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Hinduism. The difference between him and me remains regarding the location of the figure we call Ram-Abraham. While he thinks, Ram-Abraham was born in India – though not in Northern but South India – I think the Biblical place is the real location. Let me quote here the important parts of the story from Bible. I am not quoting the Ram story because it is very well known to most of us and it is too long to be reproduced here. However I will show the relevant similarities where required. Here are the parts of Bible that more or less sum up the moot points in the story of Ram:

Genesis 11

1. When Terah had lived seventy years, he became the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran. 27 Now these are the descendants of Terah. Terah was the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran was the father of Lot. 28 Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his birth, in Ur of the Chalde'ans. 2

Terah took Abram his son and Lot the son of Haran, his grandson, and Sar'ai his daughter-in-law, his sonAbram's wife, and they went forth together from Ur of the Chalde'ans to go into the land of Canaan; but when they came to Haran, they settled there. 32 The days of Terah were two hundred and five years; and Terah died in Haran.

Genesis 12

1Now the LORD said to Abram, "Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. 2 And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. 3 I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you I will curse; and by you all the families of the earth shall bless themselves." 4 So Abram went, as the LORD had told him; and Lot went with him.

And Abram took Sar'ai his wife, and Lot his brother's son, and all their possessions which they had gathered, and the persons that they had gotten in Haran; and they set forth to go to the land of Canaan. When they had come to the land of Canaan, 6 Abram passed through the land to the place at Shechem, to the oak of Moreh.

10Now there was a famine in the land. So Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine was severe in the land. 11 When he was about to enter Egypt, he said to Sar'ai his wife, "I know that you are a woman beautiful to behold; 12 and when the Egyptians see you, they will say, 'This is his wife'; then they will kill me, but they will let you live. 13 Say you are my sister, that it may go well with me because of you, and that my life may be spared on your account." 14 When Abram entered Egypt the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful. 15 And when the princes of Pharaoh saw her, they praised her to Pharaoh. And the woman was taken into Pharaoh's house. 16 And for her sake he dealt well with Abram; and he had sheep, oxen, he-asses, menservants, maidservants, she-asses, and camels. 17 But the LORD afflicted Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sar'ai, Abram's wife. 18 So Pharaoh called Abram, and said, "What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? 19 Why did you say, 'She is my sister,' so that I took her for my wife? Now then, here is your wife, take her, and be gone." 20 And Pharaoh gave men orders concerning him; and they set him on the way, with his wife and all that he had.

 

The LORD said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, "Lift up your eyes, and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward; 15 for all the land which you see I will give to you and to your descendants for ever. 16 I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if one can count the dust of the earth, your descendants also can be counted. 17 Arise, walk through the length and the breadth of the land, for I will give it to you." 18 So Abram moved his tent, and came and dwelt by the oaks of Mamre, which are at Hebron; and there he built an altar to the LORD.

Genesis 17

1 When Abram was ninety-nine years old the LORD appeared to Abram, and said to him, "I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless. 2 And I will make my covenant between me and you, and will multiply you exceedingly." 3 Then Abram fell on his face; and God said to him, 4 "Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. 5 No longer shall your name be Abram, but your name shall be Abraham; for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations. 6 I will make you exceedingly fruitful; and I will make nations of you, and kings shall come forth from you. 7

Genesis 21

So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin of water, and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, along with the child, and sent her away. And she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beer-sheba. 15 When the water in the skin was gone, she cast the child under one of the bushes. 16 Then she went, and sat down over against him a good way off, about the distance of a bowshot; for she said, "Let me not look upon the death of the child." And as she sat over against him, the child lifted up his voice and wept. 17 And God heard the voice of the lad; and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven, and said to her, "What troubles you, Hagar? Fear not; for God has heard the voice of the lad where he is. 18 Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him fast with your hand; for I will make him a great nation." 19 Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the skin with water, and gave the lad a drink. 20 And God was with the lad, and he grew up; he lived in the wilderness, and became an expert with the bow. 21 He lived in the wilderness of Paran; and his mother took a wife for him from the land of Egypt. 2

Genesis 23

1 Sarah lived a hundred and twenty-seven years; these were the years of the life of Sarah. 2 And Sarah died at Kir'iath-ar'ba (that is, Hebron) in the land of Canaan; and Abraham went in to mourn for Sarah and to weep for her. 3 And Abraham rose up from before his dead, and said to the Hittites, 4 "I am a stranger and a sojourner among you; give me property among you for a burying place, that I may bury my dead out of my sight." 5 The Hittites answered Abraham, 6 "Hear us, my lord; you are a mighty prince among us. Bury your dead in the choicest of our sepulchres; none of us will withhold from you his sepulchre, or hinder you from burying your dead." 7 Abraham rose and bowed to the Hittites, the people of the land. 8 And he said to them, "If you are willing that I should bury my dead out of my sight, hear me, and entreat for me Ephron the son of Zohar, 9 that he may give me the cave of Mach-pe'lah, which he owns; it is at the end of his field. For the full price let him give it to me in your presence as a possession for a burying place." 10 Now Ephron was sitting among the Hittites; and Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the hearing of the Hittites, of all who went in at the gate of his city, 11 "No, my lord, hear me; I give you the field, and I give you the cave that is in it; in the presence of the sons of my people I give it to you; bury your dead." 12 Then Abraham bowed down before the people of the land. 13 And he said to Ephron in the hearing of the people of the land, "But if you will, hear me; I will give the price of the field; accept it from me, that I may bury my dead there." 14 Ephron answered Abraham, 15 "My lord, listen to me; a piece of land worth four hundred shekels of silver, what is that between you and me? Bury your dead." 16 Abraham agreed with Ephron; and Abraham weighed out for Ephron the silver which he had named in the hearing of the Hittites, four hundred shekels of silver, according to the weights current among the merchants. 17 So the field of Ephron in Mach-pe'lah, which was to the east of Mamre, the field with the cave which was in it and all the trees that were in the field, throughout its whole area, was made over 18 to Abraham as a possession in the presence of the Hittites, before all who went in at the gate of his city. 19 After this, Abraham buried Sarah his wife in the cave of the field of Mach-pe'lah east of Mamre (that is, Hebron) in the land of Canaan. 20 The field and the cave that is in it were made over to Abraham as a possession for a burying place by the Hittites

Genesis 25

These are the days of the years of Abraham's life, a hundred and seventy-five years. 8 Abraham breathed his last and died in a good old age, an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people. 9 Isaac and Ish'mael his sons buried him in the cave of Mach-pe'lah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, east of Mamre, 10 the field which Abraham purchased from the Hittites.

Now it can be seen that all the major events of Ram’s story are there in Bible:

 

1. The original name of Abraham in Bible is Abram, which in Hebrew means Father Ram.

 

2. Abraham was also exiled; he went along with his wife Sara (Sita) and his nephew Lot (Lakshaman)

3. On exile his wife Sara was kidnapped by Firaun (Pharaoh), the king of Egypt. In Arabic, if the fa of Firaun is removed, what remains is Ravan. In Bible, however, Pharoah releases Sara without any war because her captivity brings miseries to Pharaoh and he gets convinced that this is due to Sara. There are some Ram katahas that also do not describe any war between the two.

3. Abraham’s wife was also expelled. The difference is that while in Valmiki Ramayana, the kidnapping and expelling of the same wife is described, in Bible two wives are involved. In several Ramkathas, Rama is shown to have more than one wife.

4. Abraham too had two famous sons: Ismail and Ishaq like Ram’s two sons Luv and Kush.

5. When we study the description of places given in different directions by Sugriva to Vanar Sena, this description does not fit if we try to put it around Ayodhya. But if we put it around Egypt (see the old map in Biblical books) it is very much consistent with that.

6. In Bible, the birth place of Abraham is Ur, a place in Iraq, close to which Euphrates River flows. While the direction of the flow of Saryu in Valmiki Ramayana is opposite to that of the Saryu River outside today’s Ayodhya, it is the same in case of Euphrates.

7. The Black African race which Ram came into contact with during exile appears to have been described as vanars in Valmiki Ramayan.  

8. I think, after Abraham's death, some people of his time migrated to India and carried the story of Abraham along with them, and then parts of stories became associated with Indian places. Aryans are historically known to be of Iranian origin who migrated to India with considerable force. With Abraham/Ram’s origin in Iraq, which was earlier part of Persia, it is quite possible that his story came to India along with Aryans. Interestingly, nothing much is known to Indians about the descendants of Rama. Though some smaller castes trace their origin to Lav and Kush, there is no dominant caste with those roots. This appears to be because Aryans migrated to India and then lost contact with the descendants of Ram/Abraham. In Arabia, Palestine and other parts of West Asia, on the other hand, the majority traces their origin to Abraham and his sons. Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon, Jesus all these big names belong to the Isaac family and Muhammad belongs to the Ishmael family.

 

Now it will be even more interesting to look at from the work of Bharat Jhunjhunwala:

 

First, he has compared the genealogy of the figure in Ramayana and Bible. The genealogy is ample proof of both being the same figure:

Biblical Name

Indian Name of Rama’s Line

Reu or Raghai

Raghu

Serug

Shighrag

Nahor

Nahusa

Terah

Dasaratha

Abram

Rama

Issac

 

Jacob

 

Joseph

 

 

 

I will like to quote here some parts from Mr. Jhunjhunwala’s article:

“From Ur of the Chaldeans to Haran

The Bible tells us Terah had three sons—Abraham, Nahor and Haran. Haran’s son was Lot. Haran died in Ur of the Chaldeans. Terah migrated from Ur to Haran with Abram, Nahor and Lot. Terah died at Haran (Gen 11.27-32).

The Indian version is identical except that Dasaratha had four sons—Rama, Lakshmana, Bharata and Shatrughna. We shall show later that the description of Lakshmana matches that of Biblical Lot. The difference is that Terah had 3+1 accompaniments while Dasaratha had 4.

Valmiki says Dasaratha reestablished Ayodhya, the Biblical Haran, on a larger scale than earlier (Bal 5.9). He gives no details of what such reestablishment means though, it must be admitted, the ambience is of larger scale only. But Vimalsuri gives details that are closer to the Bible. He says that Dasaratha lived in the fear of Ravana—whom we will encounter as the Egyptian Pharaoh later. Then he married Kaikeyi in a swyamvara and returned to Saket—another name for Ayodhya—thereafter (23.16, 24.34). This entry to Ayodhya-Saket may be mentioned in the Bible as migration from Ur of the Chaldeans to Haran. Dasaratha dies at Ayodhya-Haran in both narratives as also in the Bible.

Another small point of difference is that the Biblical narrative mentions the migration of Abram and Sarai with Terah from Ur of the Chaldeans to Haran which means that Abram and Sarai were married at Ur. Vimalsuri, on the other hand, mention this marriage after migration to Ayodhya (28.129).

Haran to Bethel

The Biblical narrative continues with Abraham migrating from Haran to Canaan along with Sarah and Lot. Within Canaan he travels to Shechem, ‘Terebinth tree of Moreh’ and settles between Bethel and Ai. Bethel has mountains on the East. Here there was famine and Abraham went to the South to Egypt. In Egypt he asks Sarah to mention she was his sister so that the Egyptians will not kill him. Sarah was, as expected by Abraham, taken to the Pharaoh. But the Pharaoh was plagued with great plagues. He then returned Sarah to Abraham and sent him away with his possessions. Abraham returns to Bethel (Gen 12.5-13.3).

This story contained in 16 verses in the Bible occupies about 300 pages each in both Valmiki and Vimalsuri. We give here only the key similarities. Rama is asked to leave for the forests for 14 years by his father. He, Sita and Lakshmana travel for a long time in the forests and in the end settle at Panchvati with River Godavari and mountains nearby (Aranya 16.13-14). This is similar to Bethel and Ai of the Bible.

Sita is abducted by Ravana at Panchvati. Rama attacks Ravana’s Lanka and rescues Sita and returns with her to Ayodhya. They pass through Panchvati, i.e. Biblical Bethel, where Sita was abducted (Yuddha 123.45). Here there is a difference. Rama moves on from Panchvati to Ayodhya-Haran and further narrative takes place from Ayodhya while the Bible mentions rest of story with Bethel as the center. Another difference is that the Biblical narrative mentions Rama’s reluctant acquiescence to Sarah being taken to the Pharaoh while the Indian texts mention her being abducted. The common thread is that of Abraham-Rama’s wife being taken to the foreign King.

 

An important statement in the Bible is Abraham’s statement that Sarah is his sister. In later reference to Abimelech he explicitly states Sarah is daughter of his father but not daughter of his mother (Gen 20.12). The main Indian tradition has no such story. However, Jinsenacharya in Jaina Mahapuranam says that … [add Mahapuranam]. Further, Sita’s birth is shrouded in mystery in Valmiki Ramayana. It is possible this has something to do with birth of Sita.

Sequence of Lot’s separation to Sarah’s death

The Bible gives five key events after Abraham’s return from Egypt.

• Abraham and Lot separate due to strife between their herdsmen. Lot is captured by Chedorlaomer king of Elam and then rescued by Abraham. Lot dies (Gen 13-14).

• Abraham journeys to Gerar in Kadesh in the land of Philistines. Sarah is taken to king Abimelech and then released (Gen 20). Then a friendship is made between Abimelech and Abraham (Gen 21.32).

• Hagar is expelled. Her son becomes an archer in the wilderness (Gen 21-14-20).

• Abraham undertakes to sacrifice Issac (Gen 22).

• Sarah dies at Kirjath Arba. She is buried in land bought by Abraham (Gen 23).

These five modules are found with some variation in both Valmiki and Vimalsuri but the order is different as shown in Table below:

Order of four modules in Gen 13-23

Order in genesis

Valmiki (Numbers refer to sequence in the narrative)

Vimalsuri (Numbers refer to sequence in the narrative)

1 Separation of Abraham and Lot and latter’s death

5 Sage Durvasa visits Rama and Lakshmana is expelled.

5 Lakshmana is in coma upon being told of Rama’s death and dies.

2 Conflict and friendship with Abimelech of Philistines

2 Shatrughna attacks Madhurapuri and conquers it.

1 Shatrughna attacks Madhurapuri and conquers it.

3 Hagar expelled. Son becomes an archer.

1 Sita is expelled. Sons Lav and Kush become warrior.

2 Sita is expelled. Her sons launch war against Rama’s kingdom and are united with him.

4 Isaac’s sacrifice.

3 Rama undertakes Aswamegha Yajna.

3 (Lavan and Ankush attack Ayodhya and are united with Rama).

5 Sarah dies and is buried.

4 Sita is subjected to fire test and then sinks into the earth.

4 Sita undergoes fire test and becomes ascetic.

 

 

 

 

Valmiki’s Uttar Kanda, where these stories are found, is known to be a later addition. Hence, change in sequence of modules is pardonable. The sequence of Bible and Vimalsuri is similar except for interchange of modules 1 and 2. Having noted this difference in sequence, we now proceed to show their similarities.

Separation of Abraham and Lot and latter’s death

There was strife between herdsmen of Abraham and Lot after Abraham’s return from Egypt. Lot thereupon decides to settle in the plains of Jordan while Abraham remains at Canaan. Subsequently Lot is captured by King Chedorlaomer from Sodom. Abraham rescues Lot. Thereafter Lot lives in Sodom which is destroyed by God but Lot escapes to Zoar where his daughters get him drunk and cohabit with him to produce sons. Thereafter Lot is not mentioned in the Bible. One presumes he died (Gen 12.7, 14, 18.20 and 19.30).

The story in Valmiki Ramayana is very short. Rama was in serious discussion at one time. He appointed Lakshmana to guard the gates and ensure no one entered. At that very time Sage Durvasa visits and seeks audience with Rama. Lakshmana is caught in a dilemma. He decides to allow Durvasa to meet Rama, who expels him for this misdeed. Lakshmana controls his breath and dies (Uttara 105-106). The theme of Abraham-Lot conflict is found here.

Vimalsuri gives the story as follows: Two Angels decide to test the love of Rama and Lakshmana for each other. They come to Lakshmana and in jest inform him that Rama has died. Thereupon Lakshmana enters a coma and is not revived despite medical treatment and dies (110). Lakshmana’s going into coma resonates with Lot’s daughters getting him drunk. Conflict between Abraham and Lot is missing here but Lakshmana goes into coma and dies which is similar to Lot getting drunk and thereafter not being heard of in the Bible.

 

Conflict and friendship with Abimelech of Philistines

Abraham sojourns in Gerar in the land of Philistines after return from Egypt. Again he asks Sarah to say she is his sister and she is taken to the king and subsequently released upon knowing she is Abraham’s wife. Thereafter, Abimelech comes to Abraham and makes a treaty of friendship (Gen 20, 21.22-32).

The parallel in Valmiki possibly lays in Shatrughna’s attack on Madhurapuri. The common link is provided by the seafaring character of the Philistines. The King of Madhurapuri is son-in-law of Lanka which is also a seafaring country. However, Shatrughna, unlike Abraham, kills the king of Madhurapuri. This episode does not close with friendship (Uttara 69). Vimalsuri gives an identical story (87).

The similarity between the Biblical and Indian narrative is admittedly tenuous. The common point is another conflict with seafaring people after return from Egypt-Lanka.

Hagar expelled. Son becomes an archer

Sarah did not have a child till this time. Sita, likewise, also did not have a child till this time.

Sarah asks Abraham to go into her maid Hagar who bears Ishmael. Soon thereafter Sarah bears Issac. Thu Abraham has two sons. Likewise Rama has two sons Lav and Kush according to Valmiki or Lavan and Ankush according to Vimalsuri. The common point is that Abraham-Ram has two sons.

Abraham expels maid Hagar and her son Ishmael who becomes an archer (Gen 22.20). Similarly, Sita is expelled by Rama and bears Lav and Kush, who become great warriors. The difference is that in the Biblical account Hagar is expelled after the birth of the two sons while in the Indian account they are born after Sita is expelled.

Another difference is that Abraham has three wives—Sarah, Hagar and Keturah whom he marries later. Valmiki, however, says Rama had only one wife—Sita. This is extolled as a virtue. Rama wanted to undertake the Aswamegha sacrifice and that required presence of his wife. Then he makes a golden statue of Sita to complete the rites. This is contradictory to the Biblical narrative. However, this is partly nullified by Vimalsuri’s assertion that Rama had four wives—Sita, Prabhavati, Ratinibha and Sridama (91.18).

Isaac’s sacrifice

Abraham then received a call from God asking him to sacrifice his son Issac. Abraham proceeds to do the same (Gen 22). The parallel story in Valmiki Ramayana is of Rama undertaking Aswamegha Yajna (Uttara 91-92). There is no story of sacrificing son Issac though. Rama is united with sons Lav and Kush during this sacrifice. Vimalsuri mentions the same uniting with sons during attack by the sons and mentions no sacrifice (99-100). The common strand is that of a sacrifice (Bible and Valmiki). This sacrifice is associated with sons—in Isaac’s sacrifice or in the union of sons with father.

Sarah dies and is buried

Sarah dies at Kirjath Arba (Hebron) and Abraham “came to mourn for Sarah and to weep for her” (Gen 23.2). The tone is as if Sarah died away from Abraham and he ‘came’ to mourn for her. The death of Sita is more dramatic in the Indian tradition. Rama asks her to take oath of chastity in public. She does this and enters Rasatala—the depths—which is similar to being buried in the earth (Uttara 97.19-20). Vimalsuri, however, says Sita became an ascetic (102.46).

Abraham dies soon thereafter and is buried with Sarah (25.8-9). Rama dies soon thereafter in the Indian tradition as well.”

It is pretty clear that the likelihood of Ram and Abraham being the same figure is very high. In Bible, God predicts that all the nations of the world will bless Abraham. But Abraham as is currently understood represents only Christians, Jews and Muslims. If the followers of Ram are included, then Ram-Abraham becomes a revered figure for almost all the nations of the world.

There are differences of course in some descriptions in Quran and Bible too. In Bible, it is Isaac who is put to the test of sacrifice while in Islamic literature it is Ismail. There is no mention of Abraham and Ismail building Ka’ba in Bible. The story of Abraham smashing idols is there in Islamic and Biblical sources but is missing in Valmiki Ramayana.

Islam’s Position

It will be worthwhile here to make Islamic position clear regarding certain issues because most of Hindus do not understand this.

1.     Most Hindus tend to understand that Islam is a religion founded by Muhammad in Arabia. In Islam, Muhammad is not the founder but the ultimate figure in the long process of the establishment of God-directed system in the world. It began with Adam (or anyone else in Hinduism who is considered father of the current human race.) Many Islamic scholars believe (based on some ahadith and a quote of Ali) that, after descent from Garden, Adam started his worldly life in India. Incidentally, Adam may well be a derivative of Sanskrit word Aadi or Aadimanav. From Adam through tens of thousands of Guides and Ambassadors, it reached the ultimate destination, Muhammad who was declared the Last Ambassador of God and the Quran the Last Book of God. All the guides and Ambassadors were true devotees of God who preached that God alone is to be worshipped and everyone must work righteously and his deeds will be judged in the Afterlife.

2.     Rama/Abraham is considered to be the patriarch in all Semitic religions and occupies a very high position among the guides and Ambassadors of God. In Islam, the Darud Shareif which is recited in every single prayer (Namaz) mentions the name of Abraham/Ibrahim along with Muhammad imploring God to bless Muhammad the way He blessed Ibrahim. (Jai Muhammad and Jai Sriram may be the short Hindi versions of Darood).

3.     Abraham/Ram dynasties produced some of the most remarkable figures in Arabia including Moses, David, Solomon, Jesus and Muhammad. (Peace be upon all of them!)

4.      In Islam, no prophet or Ambassador can ever ask for his own worship or worshipping of idols. But the followers of many of them distorted the original concept and started worshipping idols. Further, Abraham/Ibrahim is particularly known for smashing idols.

5.     In Islam, which is the Arabic word for “Peace in submission to God”, the whole universe has been created by One God and is following the Laws of Nature created by God. Every other entity, howsoever big, powerful or pious, is his creation and any creation cannot be worshipped in place of or along with the Creator.

In short, Abraham/Ram may well be the connecting figure between all the great religions including Islam and Hinduism. If his true message is understood, it will not be difficult to conclude that Islam represents his religion sent by God and finalized and perfected by Muhammad (PBUH) for all times to come.

All the religions need to unite together to fight the immoral system established by the anti-God ideologies. Unfortunately, the religious organizations and movements have become centred more around religious identity and hatred for others rather than on religious morality and love for others. The religious and the protagonists of religions have to recognize the fact that the challenge in the present world to them is not from other religions but from the ideologies that seek to commercialize human susceptibilities through misguided concepts aimed at political and economic hegemony rather than a cleaner, healthier and more peaceful world. Hindus and Muslims of India should ideally take a lead in this campaign.

Comment by MG: There are at least three places in Palestine with the word "Ram": Ramallah [Ram+Allah] and Ramlah [or Ramleh], and Al-Ram.

Dr Javed Jamil is India based thinker and writer and Head of Chair in Islamic Studies & research, Yenepoya University, Mangalore,  with over a dozen books including his latest, “Muslim Vision of Secular India: Destination & Road-map” and  “Qur’anic Paradigms of Sciences & Society” (First Vol: Health), “Muslims Most Civilised, Yet Not Enough” and Other works include “The Devil of Economic Fundamentalism”, “The Essence of the Divine Verses”, “The Killer Sex”, “Islam means Peace” and “Rediscovering the Universe”. Read more about him at  He can be contacted at doctorforu123$yahoo.com. 

◆◆◆◆◆◆

Of Ram & Abraham

 By Post News Network  10 months Ago

Bharat Jhunjhunwala

Prime Minister Narendra Modi had promised to make Varanasi the Global Spiritual Capital, during his 2014 electoral campaign. The same can be done better for Ayodhya which is now at the centre of global attention with the construction of the Ram Temple.

The case for Ayodhya stands on the fact that there are remarkable similarities between the lives of Lord Ram and Ibrahim of the Abrahamic religions, namely, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Syed Tariq Abdulla of Rampur has established that Abrahamic Prophets Adam and Nuh lived in India. Might it be that Abraham too lived in India and is known as Ram to the Hindus? If so, Ram is not merely the Lord of the Hindus but the Father of the Abrahamic religions as well.

Ayodhya can be developed as not only the Global Spiritual Capital but also as a centre of pilgrimage for Hindus, Jews, Christians and Muslims at par with Jerusalem and Mecca. The government has developed the Pilgrimage Circuit covering Bodh Gaya, Lumbini and Varanasi. Ayodhya can similarly be developed as a global pilgrim destination.

Saudi Arabia is today earning an income of around $10 billion or Rs 75,000 crore every year from pilgrimage to Mecca. We could earn four times this money if we can establish Ayodhya as the pilgrim centre for the Hindu and Abrahamic religions.

A large number of parallels are seen in the life trajectory of Lord Ram and Prophet Abraham or Ibrahim. The original name of Ibrahim, written as Abraham in the Bible was Abram, or Ab-Ram, which means “father Ram.” Thus, the name “Ram” is embedded in the name Ibrahim. Similarly, the names Dasaratha and Terah, Sita and Sarah; and Lakshmana and Lot are similar. Ram went to the south with his wife Sita and brother Lakshmana. Abraham went south with his wife Sarah and nephew Lot. Ram’s wife Sita was abducted and taken to Ravana’s palace, Ram killed Ravana and retrieved Sita and returned to Ayodhya. Similarly, Abraham’s wife Sarah was forcibly taken to Pharaoh’s palace, the Lord stuck the Pharaoh with troubles and Abraham retrieved Sarah and returned to Ai where he was living.

The names Ravana and Pharaoh; and Ayodhya and Ai are also similar. Ram broke his relations with Lakshmana sometime after their return to Ayodhya because the latter violated his order of not allowing anyone to intrude upon his secret consultations. Abraham also broke his relations with Lot after their return to Ai because herdsmen of the two fought with each other. These and many other parallels in their lives open the possibility that Ram and Abraham could be the same person.

Indeed, the Holy Bible says that Abraham’s father Terah lived at a place called “Ur Chaldea.” Abrahamic religions believe this was a place named “Ur” in Iraq. But we have not one but many places with the name “Ur”—Kanpur, Nagpur, Rampur and so on across India. It is possible that Abraham may have lived in a place by name Ur in India. The Holy Quran says that Ibrahim and his son Ishmael made a House of Worship which is believed to be the one at Mecca. Ibrahim may have travelled from Ur in India rather than from Ur in Iraq to make the House of Worship at Mecca as believed by our Muslim brothers.

The major difference between Hindu and Abrahamic religions is that the Hindus undertake idol worship while the Abrahamic religions reject the same. They worship the unseen God or Allah. The situation of Hindu religion at the time of Lord Ram may have been similar. Yoga Vasishtha says that young Ram once returned from a pilgrimage to Ayodhya and developed disinterest in matters of the world. He asked what would be the benefit of engaging in worldly works when the entire universe was a mirage and did not actually exist at all.

At that time, Sage Vasishtha explained to Ram that this entire universe was pervaded by the same Supreme Power called Brahman and this universe was as real as Brahman. Thus, he advised Ram to engage in his worldly duties, seeing Brahman in everything—the earth, the trees and the relatives. Thereafter, Ram abandoned his idea of giving up the material world and engaged in actions such as killing Ravana. The core message of the Sage was that there is only one Brahman and no other. The Hindu Brahman, it would be surmised, is the same as the God of the Bible and Allah of in the Quran.

Hinduism was the global spiritual leader till about a thousand years ago. Till then, it appears, Hindu society adhered to the path of action told by Sage Vasishtha and followed by Lord Ram. The situation changed dramatically after Adi Shankaracharya came with his teachings. Sage Vasishtha had taught people that “Brahman is truth and the world is His manifestation.” In distinction, Shankaracharya taught that “Brahman is truth and the world is unreal.” The material world became “unreal.” Shankaracharya, it appears, made this teaching only to create a detached mode of action. He lived actively in the 32 short years of his life. Like Vasishtha, he wanted people to engage actively in the world but with a sense of detachment. However, it appears, his teachings got perverted and later Hindu teachers taught that the world was actually unreal and there was no benefit to be derived from engaging in action within it. The result was that the best minds of India became inert and we lost to the Lodhi, Mughals and the British, and Hinduism has been declining since then.

The making of the Ram Temple presents an opportunity to reinstate the teaching of Sage Vasishtha, which is in essence parallel to the teachings of the Abrahamic religions, at the centre of the global religious movement; and to raise Lord Ram from a Hindu Avatar to the Global Lord. Ram and Ibrahim could be the same person. Teachings of Sage Vasishtha are parallel to the teachings of the Bible and Quran. Therefore, we can promote the Ram Temple as a Temple of Ibrahim as well and promote the teachings of Sage Vasishtha. In this way we can make Ayodhya the Global Spiritual Capital that the Prime Minister had promised to do for Varanasi in 2014; and also, as the global pilgrim destination along the lines of Jerusalem and Mecca.

The writer is a former Professor of Economics at IIM Bangalore.

◆◆◆◆◆◆

http://www.commonprophets.com/were-abraham-and-rama-the-same-person/

http://www.nataliasuri.com/is-ram-of-valmiki-ramayana-the-same-as-abraham-of-the-bible/

https://www.livemint.com/Sundayapp/EOi0ienO9G7lm8G1dM6SpN/The-possible-links-between-Jews-and-Hindus.html

https://www.boloji.com/articles/15119/abraham-and-brahma-part-i

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/abraham-and-brahma-part-i-divine-covenants-of-common-origin.516517/

बुद्धवाणी में वेद का उल्लेख - आर्य समाज।

महात्मा बुद्ध और वेद

(बुद्ध पूर्णिमा के अवसर पर प्रकाशित)

विद्वा च वेदेहि समेच्च धम्मम । न उच्चावच्चं गच्छति भूरिपज्जो ।। ( सुत्तनिपात श्लोक २९२ )

अर्थात महात्मा बुद्ध कहते हैं – जो विद्वान वेदों से धर्म का ज्ञान प्राप्त करता है, वह कभी विचलित नहीं होता ।

विद्वा च सो वेदगु नरो इध भवाभावे संगम इमं विसज्जा । सो वीततन्हो अनिघो निरासो अतारि सो जाति जरान्ति ब्रूमिति ।। ( सुत्तनिपात श्लोक १०६० )

अर्थात वेद को जानने वाला विद्वान इस संसार में जन्म या मृत्यु में आसक्ति का परित्याग करके और तृष्णा तथा पापरहित होकर जन्म और वृद्धावस्थादि से पार हो जाता है ऐसा मैं कहता हूँ ।

ने वेदगु दिठिया न मुतिया स मानं एति नहि तन्मयो सो । न कम्मुना नोपि सुतेन नेयो अनुपनीतो सो निवेसनूसू ।। ( सुत्तनिपात श्लोक ८४६ )

अर्थात वेद को जानने वाला सांसारिक दृष्टि और असत्य विचारादि से कभी अहंकार को प्राप्त नही होता । केवल कर्म और श्रवण आदि किसी से भी वह प्रेरित नहीं होता । वह किसी प्रकार के भ्रम में नहीं पड़ता ।

यो वेदगु ज्ञानरतो सतीमा सम्बोधि पत्तो सरनम बहूनां । कालेन तं हि हव्यं पवेच्छे यो ब्राह्मणो पुण्यपेक्षो यजेथ ।। ( सुत्तनिपात श्लोक ५०३ )

अर्थात जो वेद को जानने वाला,ध्यानपरायण, उत्तम स्मृति वाला, ज्ञानी, बहुतों को शरण देने वाला हो जो पुण्य की कामना वाला यग्य करे वह उसी को भोजनादि खिलाये।

उपरोक्त विवरण से यह स्पष्ट है कि महात्मा बुद्ध वैदिक आर्य जनों को आदर्श मानते थे। अब बुद्धजीवी यह विचार करें कि महात्मा बुद्ध के उपदेशों का विरोध करने वाले व्यक्ति बौद्ध कैसे हो सकते हैं ???

गैर मुस्लिम जन्नती, काफ़िर, जिहाद - गामीदी।

क्या गैर मुस्लिम जन्नत में जा सकता है?

बहेसियते कुरआन हकीम के तालिब ए इल्म जिस बात के हम कायल हैं वो ये है कि कम अज़ कम तीन चुनिंदा और बुनियादी हकाएक ऐसे हैं जिनका शऊर हमारी फितरत में जुड़ा हुआ यानी चस्पा कर दिया गया है। इन हकाएक के अंदर हर साहबे अक्ल शख़्स उसके अपने हालात व मवाके के मुताबिक जवाब देही ज़रूर होगी। इन तीन बुनियादी हकाएक का शऊर हमें भीतर से ही मिल जाता है।

इसके अलावा जो बाकी हकाएक व आमाल हैं जैसे फरिश्तों पर ईमान, रिसालत पर ईमान, शरई अहकाम व इबादात की अदायगी वगैरह। इन की जवाबदेही पैग़ाम पहुंचने और वाज़ेह होने के साथ शर्त है। वजह वही कि इन सब का शऊर हमें अपने अंदर से नहीं बाहर की मालूमात से हासिल होता है। 

ये तीन हकाएक कौन से हैं? इन का बयान कम अज़ कम दो जगहों पर कमो बेश एक से अल्फ़ाज़ में किया गया है। सूरेह अल बकरा की आयत 62 (और सूरह मायदा की आयत 69) मुलाहज़ा कीजिए:

"जो लोग मुसलमान हैं या यहूदी या ईसाई या साबीइन (यानी कोई शख़्स किसी कौम व मज़हब का हो) जो अल्लाह (यानी एक ख़ुदा) और रोज़े कयामत (यानी आमाल की जज़ा व सज़ा) पर ईमान लाएगा, और नेक अमल करेगा, तो ऐसे लोगों को उन (के आमाल) का सिलाह ख़ुदा के यहां मिलेगा और (कयामत के दिन) उनको ना किसी तरह का खौफ़ होगा और ना वो गम नाक होंगे"

गोया अहले ईमान के साथ तमाम दीगर मौजूदा मज़ाहिब के जिम्मेदारों को एक कतार में खड़ा करके कहा जा रहा है कि जो नीचे दर्ज तीन बातों पर ईमान लाएगा और उसके मुताबिक अमल करेगा, उसे रोज़ कयामत ना कोई खौफ़ होगा ना ही कोई गम। ये वो तीन अकाएद हैं जो इस्लाम का पैगाम ना पहुंचने के बावजूद हर इंसान को मानने होंगे। चाहे उसका ताल्लुक किसी भी मज़हब या तबकह फिक्र से हो;

1- एक ख़ुदा पर ईमान

2- सज़ा व जज़ा पर ईमान

3- नेक अमल

अब सवाल ये पैदा होता है कि बिना इस्लाम का पैगाम पहुंचे उन तीन बातों पर ईमान व अमल का तकाज़ा क्या ज़्यादती नहीं? तो हरगिज़ ज़्यादती नहीं है। वजह वही जो हमने इब्तिदा में ही बयान किए कि इन तीनों बातों का अहसास व शऊर हमारी फितरत में जुड़े हुए हैं। गोया इन तीनों बातों को मानने और अमल करने के लिए आप तक किसी मज़हब, शरीयत, किताब या रसूल का पहुंचना ना पहुंचना ज़रूरी नहीं। किताब अल्लाह इस लिहाज़ से सिर्फ आपको याद दिहानी (ज़िक्र) करवाती है और याद दिहानी उसी बात की करवाई जाती है जो अपनी हकीक़त के ऐतबार से आप पहले से जानते हों। इन तीनों बातों का एक मुख्तसर सा जायेज़ा ले लेते हैं की किस तरह ये हमारी फितरत में पहले से मौजूद है? अगर नहीं, फिर तो ये ऐसा है कि एक शख़्स को प्यास ना लगी हो और आप ज़बरदस्ती उसे पानी पिलाने लगें। ऐसे में उसका जिस्म पानी उगल देगा क्यूंकि उसमें तलब (ज़रूरत) ही नहीं है।

1- एक ख़ुदा पर ईमान

सबसे पहली शर्त अल्लाह पर ईमान यानी एक ख़ुदा पर ईमान। जायज़ा लीजिए कि क्या वाकई इंसान में एक ख़ालिक की प्यास है? क्या उसकी फितरत अपना परवरदिगार तलब करती है? तारीख़ इंसानी इस बात पर गवाह है की इंसान ने हर दौर में और हर इलाके में एक बर्तर (सुपीरियर) हस्ती के तसव्वुर को तस्लीम किया है।

एक साबित शुदा चीज़ को साबित नहीं किया जाता बल्कि उसके रद करने वालों से इस्तदलाल (दलील/सबूत) तलब किया जाता है। इंसानियत की अदालत ने तारीख़ी ऐतबार से ख़ुदा के वजूद में पेश किए जाने वाले मुकदमे को कबूल किया है, अब आप लाख उन सबूत व दलाएल का इंकार करें, इस तारीख़ी सच को बदलने की आपकी हैसियत नहीं है। ये दावा इंसानियत ने हर दौर में इजतेमाई (कलेक्टिवली) हैसियत से कबूल किया है, अब अगर कुछ सर फिर उठते हैं और इंसानियत के इस मुत्तफिक फैसले को रद करते हैं तो उन से पूछा जाएगा कि दलील पेश करें। ये बिल्कुल ऐसा ही है जैसे कि इंसान ये खूब जानता है कि ममता का जज़्बा मां में इलहामी तौर पर ख़ुद बा ख़ुद जुड़े हुए हैं, इसका इज़हार मुख्तलिफ माहोल में मुख्तलिफ तरीके से हो सकता है मगर इस जज़्बे का फितरी होना सबको कबूल है। इस तरह एक ख़ालिक का तसव्वुर हमेशा हर माहोल में इंसानियत का एक आम सरमाया रहा है, उसे कभी अल्लाह, कभी ख़ुदा, कभी गॉड, कभी परमात्मा और कभी आसमानी बाप कह कर पुकारा गया। हद तो ये है कि आज का जदीद ज़हन जिसे ख़ुदा के तसव्वुर से भी एलर्जी है, वो भी आज "सुप्रीम इंटेलिजेंस" या "कलेक्टिव काॅशिंयसनस" जैसे दिलफरेब इस्तिलाहात ईजाद करके उसकी तौजीह (वजह ज़ाहिर करना) पेश करता नज़र आता है। नाम जो भी दें मगर एक बरतर हस्ती के तसव्वुर को इंसानियत ने हमेशा आगे बढ़ कर कबूल किया। "कह दो कि उसे अल्लाह कहकर पुकारो या रहमान कहकर, जिस नाम से भी पुकारो, सारे अच्छे नाम उसी के हैं" (बनी इसराईल, 110)। तसव्वुर ख़ुदा की कोंपल फितरत की गोद में परवान चढ़ते ही ये अंदर से बाहर का सफर करती है। यही वजह है कि एक बच्चा चाहे वो अमेरिका में पैदा हुआ हो या भारत में, चीन से ताल्लुक रखता हो या अफ्रीका के ज़ूलु कबीले से... वो अपने वालीदैन से ये सवाल कर ही देता है कि मुझे किसने पैदा बनाया? या मैं कहां से आया? 

आप उसे कहते हैं कि मैंने तुम्हें दरख़्त से तोड़ लिया या एक  फरिश्ता हमें दे गया या मार्केट से खरीद लिया। आप उस बच्चे को मुत्मईन करने के लिए जो भी जवाब दें, मगर उसका ये मासूम सवाल इस हकीकत का ऐलान कर रहा है कि ख़ुदा के वजूद की तलब इंसान के अंदर फितरी तौर पर मौजूद है। इंसानी रवय्यों पर की जाने वाली बहुत सी तहकीकात, वो सब यही बताती हैं कि इंसान में फितरी व कुदरती तौर पर ऐसे दावे मौजूद हैं जो उसे एक ख़ुदा पर ईमान रखने पर आमादा करते हैं। तहकीक में ये भी बताया गया कि सख़्त तरीन मुल्हिद (नास्तिक) भी इंतेहाई मुश्किल हालात में बगैर अपनी मर्ज़ी के एक बर्तर हस्ती को पुकार उठता है। गोया इंसान इलहामी (आसमानी) पैग़ाम ना पहुचनें पर या इलहामी पैगाम ना वाज़ेह होने पर मज़हब का इंकार तो कर सकता है मगर ख़ुदा के वजूद का नहीं। कुरआन हकीम के बयान के मुताबिक उस ज़िंदा बर्तर हस्ती के वजूद की गवाही हम सब इंसानों की फितरत व ज़िन्दगी हमें हर पल याद दिहानी करवाती है। उस मुकालमे का अहसास हमारी जिस्मानी याददाश्त से ज़रूर मिटा दिया गया है मगर हमारी रूह और फितरत आज भी पुकार पुकार कर हमें हमारा जवाब याद दिला रहे हैं। सूरेह अल-अराफ की 172 आयत मुलाहजा हो:

"और ऐ नबी (स०), लोगों को याद दिलाओ वो वक़्त जबकि तुम्हारे रब ने बनी आदम की पुष्त से उनकी नस्ल को निकाला था और उन्हें ख़ुद उनके ऊपर गवाह बनाते हुए पूछा था "क्या मैं तुम्हारा रब नहीं हूं?" उन्होंने कहा, "ज़रूर आप ही हमारे रब हैं, हम इस पर गवाही देते हैं" ये हमने इसलिए किया कि कहीं तुम कयामत के रोज़ ये ना कह दो कि "हम तो इस बात से बेख़बर थे।"

2- सज़ा व जज़ा पर ईमान

दूसरी शर्त मौत के बाद ख़ुदा के सामने अपने आमाल की जवाबदेही का अहसास है। ये तकाज़ा भी इंसान के अंदर मौजूद है कि अच्छाई का बदला अच्छा और बुराई का बदला बुरा निकलता है। इंसान बचपन से ही ये चाहता है कि उसकी अच्छाई या कामयाबी को सराहा जाए और कोई  ज़्यादती करे तो उसे सज़ा दी जाए। इसी को मद्देनज़र रख कर वालिदैन से लेकर उस्ताज़ह तक इनाम की लालच और सज़ा का खौफ बतौर आज़माए हुए तरीके की तरह इस्तेमाल करते हैं। यही तकाज़ा है जिसकी बुनियाद पर इंसान अदालत से लेकर पुलिस तक निज़ाम कायम करता है। जेल समेत बाकी साज़ाओं का निफाज़ करता है।

इस दुनियां में मुकम्मल इंसाफ का तसव्वुर भी नामुमकिन है। यहां तो तजुर्बा व नज़ारा ये है कि ज़ालिम ताकत व इक्तिदार के नशे में चूर रहता है और मज़लूम, ज़ुल्म सितम की चक्की में पिसता ही जाता है। यहां अक्सर हराम खाने वाला अय्याशियों का मज़ा लूटता है और महनत कश पर ज़िन्दगी की बुनियादी ज़रूरियात भी तंग हो जाती है। कितने ही मुजरिम, फसादी और कातिल किसी अदालत की पकड़ में नहीं आते। एक मिसाल लिए, अगर एक बूढ़ा शख़्स किसी नौजवान को कत्ल कर देता है और मान लिए कि वो पकड़ा भी जाता है। अदालत उसे उसके जुर्म की बुनियाद पर सज़ाए मौत भी नाफिज़ कर देती है। अब सवाल ये है कि क्या ये वाकई इंसाफ है? कहने को तो कातिल को कत्ल के बदले कत्ल कर दिया गया। मगर क्या यही इंसाफ की मुकम्मल सूरत है? कातिल तो एक बूढ़ा शख़्स था, जो अपनी ज़िन्दगी गुज़ार चुका था, जबकि कत्ल होने वाला एक नौजवान था, उसकी पूरी ज़िन्दगी उसके सामने थी। मुमकिन है कि उसकी अचानक मौत से उसकी बीवी बेघर हो जाए, उसके यतीम बच्चे बाप का साया ना होने से गुमराही, आवारगी इख्तियार कर लें। क्या यही हकीक़ी इंसाफ है? ज़ाहिर है कि नहीं। यही वो सुरतेहाल है जो इंसान में फितरी व अक्ली तकाज़ा पैदा करती है कि कोई ऐसी दुनियां व अदालत बरपा हो जहां इंसाफ अपने मुकम्मलतरीन दर्ज में हासिल हो। जहां बुरे को उसकी बुराई का और नेक को उसकी नेकी का पूरा पूरा बदला मिल सके। दीन इसी अदालत की खबर 'रोज़ हश्र' के नाम से देता है। अब कोई इसे जन्नत जहन्नम, नर्क सवर्ग पुकारे, हैवेन हेल का नाम दे, मोक्ष, निर्वाण या फिर पुनर्जन्म से उसको ज़ाहिर करे। सब दर हकीक़त उसी 'जवाब देही के अहसास' यानी 'सेंस ऑफ़ अकाउंटेबिलिटी' के रूप हैं।

इंसान की फितरत ऐसी है कि वो मजमुई (सम्पूर्ण) ऐतबार से कभी भी नामुमकिन का तकाज़ा नहीं करता। यानी वो ये दुआ हरगिज़ नहीं करता उसके दो की जगह चार हाथ निकल आए, वो ये तमन्ना नहीं रखता की कश! दो और दो चार ना होते बल्कि पांच होते। मगर क्या ये अजीब नहीं है?  कि यही इंसान फितरी तौर पर तमन्ना रखता है कि उसे मौत ना पकड़े, वो हमेशा की ज़िन्दगी जिए। उसे बीमारी ना सताए, वो हमेशा सेहत से भरपूर रहे। उस पर बुढ़ापा ना सवार हो, वो हमेशा जवानी के उमर में रहे। ये तकाज़ा इसलिए हमारी फितरत में मौजूद है कि भले इस दुनियां में इनकी ताबीर ना मुमकिन महसूस हो लेकिन एक और दुनियां ऐसी ज़रूर सजाई जाएगी जहां इन फितरी तकाज़ों को पूरा किया जाएगा। दीन उस दुनियां की बशारत (खुशखबरी) देता है।

3- नेक अमल

अच्छाई और बुराई की समझ भी हमारी फितरत में पहले से मौजूद है। सूरेह अल-शम्श में इरशाद बारीताला है: "हमने इंसान को उसकी अच्छाई व बुराई को इलहाम कर दिया है।" गोया अच्छाई व बुराई की समझ हम सब इंसानों में मौजूद है। यही वजह है कि पूरे इंसानियत की तारीख़ देख लीजिए बगैर तकसीम रंग, नस्ल, मज़हब आपको नज़र आयेगा कि इंसान हमेशा ये जानता है कि सच बोलना अच्छा और झूठ बोलना बुरा है। किसी मज़लूम की मदद करना, किसी रोते को हंसाना, किसी भूखे को खिलाना आला खूबियां और किसी का हक़ मारना, ना हक़ कत्ल करना, किसी को दुख देना बुरे आमाल हैं। दुनियां भर का जस्टिस सिस्टम कुछ मुआशरती इकदार (सामाजिक मूल्यों) के अलावा अपनी असल में उन ही मूल्यों, सिद्धांतो से निकलने वाले जज़्बात का बयान है। ये अलबत्ता सच है कि इलहामी किताब हो या बाकी फलसफे इनसे इज़ाफ़ी आमाल व फैसले भी इसी फेहरिस्त में शामिल होते जाते हैं।

■■■■

काफ़िर ऐसे शख़्स को कहते हैं, जिसे दीन की दावत पेश की जाए, वो हक़ जान ले, मगर अपनी अना, तकब्बुर और तास्सुब की वजह से उस दावत का इंकार करदे, उसे झुठला दे। ऐसे लोगों को काफ़िर कहा जाता है। जैसे कुफ्फारे मक्का ने हक़ को जानते बूझते झुठला दिया। और ये शान सिर्फ नबी व रसूल को अता होती है, क्यूंकि उनकी दावत सबसे मुकम्मल और बेहतर होती है। और अंबिया व रसूलों का राबता अल्लाह से होता है, और अल्लाह बता देता है, कि सामने वाला शख़्स जो दीन की दावत को झुठला रहा है, वो जानते बूझते झुठला रहा है या अभी उसे समझ नहीं आयी इसलिए अभी कबूल नहीं कर रहा। खालिद बिन वलीद की मिसाल ले लिए, वो ना समझी में झुटला रहे थे, उन्होंने रसूल स० के दांत मुबारक भी शहीद किए, लेकिन अल्लाह ने उन्हें हिदायत दी। क्यूंकि वो अभी समझ नहीं पाए थे। दूसरी तरफ अबू जहल और अबू लहब ने जानते बुझते झुटलाया था इसीलिए उन्हें अज़ाब मिला। आज हम जब किसी को दावत देंगे, तो हमें ये मालूम नहीं हो सकता कि सामने वाला शख़्स जानते भूझते झुठला रहा है, या उसे अभी बात समझ नहीं आयी। हमारे पास ख़ुदा की वही नहीं आयेगी, हम उसके दिल का हाल नहीं जान सकते। हमें नहीं पता कि वो अबू जहल की तरह झुठला रहा है या अभी उसका हाल खालिद बिन वलीद जैसा है। लिहाज़ा हम उसे काफ़िर नहीं कह देंगे। बस ये कह देंगे की ये हमारे गिरोह(मुस्लिम) में शामिल नहीं है, गैर मुस्लिम है।

क़ुफ्र का इस्तेमाल

-सीरतुन्नबी के मुताल्ले से मुतल्लिक-

रिसालत के साथ ही ये फरमान ख़ास है कि लोग अगर रसूल स० की दावत का इंकार अपने तास्सुब व तकब्बुर की बिना पर करदें, तो उन पर क़ुफ्र का इस्तेमाल कर दिया जाता है, यानी काफ़िर करार दे दिया जाता है।

ये एजाज़ रिसालत का है, जो ख़त्मे नबुवत के साथ ख़त्म हो गया।आज जो लोग मुसलमान नहीं हैं उन्हें गैर मुस्लिम कहा जाएगा, काफ़िर नहीं। लिहाज़ा कोई आलिम अगर गैर मुस्लिमों को दीन की दावत दे, और वो लोग उस दावत को कबूल ना करे, तब भी वो लोग गैर मुस्लिम ही रहेंगे, काफ़िर नहीं कहलायेंगे।

लोगों पर कुफ्र का इस्तेमाल करना सीरतुन्नबी के नबुवत व रिसालत का पहलू है जिसे गैर नबी (यानी हम लोग) अपने हाथ में नहीं ले सकतें।

■■■■

-सीरतुन्नबी के मुताल्ले से मुतल्लिक-

रसूल सल्लल्लाहु अलैहि व सल्लम अपनी हयाते मुबारका में सिर्फ नबुवत व रिसालत के मंसब(ओहदे) पर ही फायज़(पहुंचने वाले) नहीं थे। बल्कि एक अरसा आप स० मक्का के शहरी रहे, फिर रियासते मदीना के हाकिम भी बने। दीन के पहले आलिम भी थे। और ज़ाती शख्सियत में मुहम्मद बिन अब्दुल्लाह भी।

बतौर नबी और रसूल, आप सल्लल्लाहु अलैहि व सल्लम ने जो इकदामात(रास्ते अपनाए) किए, उन्हें पढ़ कर अगर वही इकदामात ग़ैर नबी यानी, हुक्मरान, उल्मा या आवाम करने लगे तो ये दीन की दुरुस्त समझ नहीं है। ऐसे इकदामात ख़ालिस नबुवत की खु़सूसियत है। जो ख़त्मे नबुवत के साथ ख़त्म हो गए। आवाम के लिए रसूल सल्लल्लाहु अलैहि व सल्लम के मक्के की शहरी ज़िन्दगी उस्वा हस्ना है। बतौर हाकिम किए गए इकदामात, आज आवाम और आलिम करने लगें तो ये भी दीन का निहायत ग़लत फहम है।

इसी तरह ज़ाती शख्सियत (मुहम्मद बिन अब्दुल्लाह) के लिहाज़ से किए गए मामलात को दीन और सुन्नत करार देना भी फहम की ग़लती होगी।

रसूल सल्लल्लाहु अलैहि व सल्लम ने जंग (जिहाद) का फैसला बतौर हुक्मरान किया था। आज अगर कोई आलिम, या कोई जमात लोगों को हथियार पकड़वा दे, और किसी जगह "जिहाद" करने का ऐलान कर दे, और साथ ये कहे कि मैं नबी स० के उसवा हस्ना पर अमल कर रहा हूं, तो ये दीन की ग़लत ताबीर है। क्यूंकि इस जमात या आलिम के पास इक्त़िदार नहीं है।

लिहाज़ा जब तक किसी जमात या आलिम को इक्त़िदार(हुक्मरानी) हासिल नहीं होती, उसे रसूल सल्लल्लाहु अलैहि व सल्लम की हयाते मुबारका के शहरी पहलुओं को रोल मॉडल बना कर अपनी कोशिश करनी चाहिए। तालिबान, दाईश और हर कुछ अरसे बाद कानून तोड़ने वाली तहरीकों का चलना दीन की ऐसी ही गलत ताबीर की वजह से होता है।

शिव, सदाशिव और बुद्ध - अक्षय भाई।

 

शिव कौन है।

उनका किसी ना किसी रूप मे जन्म हुआ या फिर वो प्रकट हुऐ तभी तो उन्होने विवाह भी किया और उनके बच्चे भी हुऐ अब अगर  शिव को समझा जाऐ तो वो एक संसारिक है। दरअसल, जब हम 'शिव' कहते हैं तो वह निराकर ईश्वर की बात होती है और जब हम 'सदाशिव' कहते हैं तो एक महान आत्मा की बात होती है और जब हम शंकर या महेश कहते हैं तो वह सती या पार्वती के पति महादेव की बात होती है। बस, हिन्दूजन यहीं भेद नहीं कर पाते हैं। अक्सर लोग शंकर को शिव कहने कि भुल कर बैठते है। शिवपुराण के अनुसार शिव ने सदाशिव शंकर को बनाया है। पवित्र कुरआन के अनुसार अल्लाह ने आदम आलैहिस्सलाम को बनाया और बाईबल भी यही बतलाता है। अगर आप मानो तो सदाशिव शंकर को आदम आलैहिस्सलाम मान सकते है। मगर चूकि शिव पुराण के अनुसार शिव ने सदाशिव शंकर को बनाया तो सदाशिव शंकर को ईश्वर का दर्जा तो नही दिया जा सकता है।

शिव और शंकर दोनो अलग है। अगर श्री शंकर अविनाशी होते तो क्या वो एक तुक्ष्य इंसान से भागते अगर वो भविष्य जानते तो क्या वो अपना भष्मकङा उस पापी को देते?? जबकी वेद के अनुसार ईश्वर अविनाशी है तत्वदर्शी भी है वो तो सभी के दिलो का हाल भी जान लेता है। ""भस्मासुर कि कथा:- भस्मासुर बारह वर्षो तक श्री शंकर जी के द्वार के सामने सीर नीचे पैर ऊपर कर (शीर्षासन)करके भक्ति तपस्या करता रहा।एक दिन माँ पार्वती जी ने कहा "हे महादेव"(श्री शंकर) आप तो समर्थ है।आपका भक्त क्या माँगता है?इसे प्रदान करो प्रभु।श्री शंकर ने भष्मासुर से पुछा बोलो क्या चाहते हो।मै तुझपर अति प्रसन्न हूँ।भष्मासुर ने कहा पहले वचन दो मै जो माँगु दोगे श्री शंकर वचनबद्ध हो गऐ।फिर भष्मासुर ने बोला आपके पास जो भष्मकण्डा(भष्मकङा) है वो मुझे दिजिऐ।श्री शंकर ने भष्मकङा दे दिया।भष्मकङा हाथ मे आते ही भष्माशुर ने कहा हो जा शंकर होशियार मै पहले तुझी को भष्म करूँगा तथा पार्वती को पत्नी बनाऊँगा।यह कहकर अभद्र ढंग से हँसा तथा शिवजी को मारने के लिऐ उनकी ओर दौङा। श्री शंकर  उस दुष्ट का उद्दैश्य जानकर वहा से भाग निकले पीछे पीछे पुजारी आगे आगे इष्टदेव शंकर भगे जा रहे थे।आगे का वाकया तो आप सभी जानते ही होगे।

बुद्ध आस्तिक थे।

उन्होने अपना पुरा जीवन राज-पाठ बीबी बच्चा अल्लाह(ईश्वर)कि खोज मे झोक दिया।अब ईश्वर (अल्लाह)कि खोज कौन कर सकता है?? ईश्वर कि खोज सिर्फ एक आस्तिक ही कर सकता है कोई नास्तिक नही।क्योकि नास्तिक को तो कोई फर्क ही नही पङता कि ईश्वर है या नही उसे तो बस अपने जीवन मे मस्त रहना है।फिर क्यू कोई नास्तिक अपना घर बीबी बच्चा छोङ कर जंगलो मे कष्ट भोगने जाऐगा?? इससे ये सिद्ध होता है कि गौतम बुद्ध एक आस्तिक थे हाँ वो ईश्वर के नाम पर झूठे अंधविश्वास के सख्त खिलाफ थे इसी लिऐ वो सच्चे ईश्वर कि खोज मे निकल पङे और काफी दुख भोगने के बाद उन्हे सच्चा ज्ञान भी प्राप्त हुआ फिर उन्होने ने एक संघ का स्थापना किया और लोगो को अंधविश्वास के माया-जाल से बहार निकालने मे लग गऐ।अगर ऐसा नही है तो मुझे बताओ सिद्धार्थ (बुद्ध)किसकी तलास मे घर त्याग दिऐ??और जब सिद्धार्थ वापस आऐ तो वो बुद्ध बनकर क्यू वापस आऐ??सिद्धार्थ बनकर क्यू नही रहे?? सिद्धार्थ जिस सच कि तलास मे घर त्यागे उसे ही हम ईश्वर अल्लाह मानते है और उसी ईश्वर-अल्लाह को समझ लेने के बाद सिद्धार्थ बुद्ध बन गऐ।

~ अक्षय भाई।

■■■■

जानें कैसे हुआ भगवान शिव का जन्म? 

शिवपुराण में है ये कहानी

भगवान शिव (Lord Shiva) सदा अपने भक्तों पर कृपा बरसाते हैं. मान्यता है कि भगवान शिव को खुश करने के लिए सोमवार को सुबह उठकर स्नान करके भगवान शिव की आराधना करनी चाहिए. जानें कैसे हुआ भगवान शिव का जन्म? शिवपुराण में है ये कहानी शिवपुराण के अनुसार भगवान सदाशिव और पराशक्ति अम्बिका से ही भगवान शंकर की उत्पत्ति मानी गई है.

सोमवार (Monday) का दिन भगवान शिव (Lord Shiva) को समर्पित है. ऐसे में कहा जाता है कि अगर सोमवार को भगवान शिव की सच्चे मन से पूजा की जाए तो सारे कष्टों (Pains) से मुक्ति मिलती है और सभी मनोकामना पूरी होती है. शिव सदा अपने भक्तों पर कृपा बरसाते हैं. मान्यता है कि भगवान शिव को खुश करने के लिए सोमवार को सुबह उठकर स्नान करके भगवान शिव की आराधना करनी चाहिए. वेद कहते हैं कि जो जन्मा है, वह मरेगा अर्थात जो बना है, वह फना है. वेदों के अनुसार ईश्वर या परमात्मा अजन्मा, अप्रकट, निराकार, निर्गुण और निर्विकार हैं. अजन्मा का अर्थ जिसने कभी जन्म नहीं लिया और जो आगे भी जन्म नहीं लेगा. प्रकट अर्थात जो किसी भी गर्भ से उत्पन्न न होकर स्वयंभू प्रकट हो गया है और अप्रकट अर्थात जो स्वयंभू प्रकट भी नहीं है. निराकार अर्थात जिसका कोई आकार नहीं है, निर्गुण अर्थात जिसमें किसी भी प्रकार का कोई गुण नहीं है, निर्विकार अर्थात जिसमें किसी भी प्रकार का कोई विकार या दोष भी नहीं है.

अब सवाल यह उठता है कि फिर शिव क्या है? वे किसी न किसी रूप में जन्मे या प्रकट हुए तभी तो उन्होंने विवाह किया. तभी तो उन्होंने कई असुरों को वरदान दिया और कई असुरों का वध भी किया. दरअसल, जब हम 'शिव' कहते हैं तो वह निराकर ईश्वर की बात होती है और जब हम 'सदाशिव' कहते हैं तो ईश्वर महान आत्मा की बात होती है और जब हम शंकर या महेश कहते हैं तो वह सती या पार्वती के पति महादेव की बात होती है.

भगवान शिव का जन्म कैसे हुआ?

शिवपुराण के अनुसार भगवान सदाशिव और पराशक्ति अम्बिका से ही भगवान शंकर की उत्पत्ति मानी गई है. उस अम्बिका को प्रकृति, सर्वेश्वरी, त्रिदेवजननी (ब्रह्मा, विष्णु और महेश की माता), नित्या और मूल कारण भी कहते हैं. सदाशिव द्वारा प्रकट की गई उस शक्ति की 8 भुजाएं हैं. पराशक्ति जगतजननी वह देवी नाना प्रकार की गतियों से संपन्न है और अनेक प्रकार के अस्त्र शक्ति धारण करती हैं. वह शक्ति की देवी कालरूप सदाशिव की अर्धांगिनी दुर्गा हैं.

उस सदाशिव से दुर्गा प्रकट हुई. काशी के आनंदरूप वन में रमण करते हुए एक समय दोनों को यह इच्‍छा उत्पन्न हुई कि किसी दूसरे पुरुष की सृष्टि करनी चाहिए, जिस पर सृष्टि निर्माण (वंशवृद्धि) का कार्यभार रखकर हम निर्वाण धारण करें. इस हेतु उन्होंने वामांग से विष्णु को प्रकट किया. इस प्रकार विष्णु के माता और पिता कालरूपी सदाशिव और पराशक्ति दुर्गा हैं. विष्णु को उत्पन्न करने के बाद सदाशिव और शक्ति ने पूर्ववत प्रयत्न करके ब्रह्माजी को अपने दाहिने अंग से उत्पन्न किया और तुरंत ही उन्हें विष्णु के नाभि कमल में डाल दिया. इस प्रकार उस कमल से पुत्र के रूप में हिरण्यगर्भ (ब्रह्मा) का जन्म हुआ. एक बार ब्रह्मा और विष्‍णु दोनों में सर्वोच्चता को लेकर लड़ाई हो गई, तो बीच में कालरूपी एक स्तंभ आकर खड़ा हो गया.

तब ज्योतिर्लिंग रूप काल ने कहा- 'पुत्रो, तुम दोनों ने तपस्या करके मुझसे सृष्टि (जन्म) और स्थिति (पालन) नामक दो कृत्य प्राप्त किए हैं. इसी प्रकार मेरे विभूतिस्वरूप रुद्र और महेश्वर ने दो अन्य उत्तम कृत्य संहार (विनाश) और तिरोभाव (अकृत्य) मुझसे प्राप्त किए हैं, परंतु अनुग्रह (कृपा करना) नामक दूसरा कोई कृत्य पा नहीं सकता. रुद्र और महेश्वर दोनों ही अपने कृत्य को भूले नहीं हैं इसलिए मैंने उनके लिए अपनी समानता प्रदान की है.'

इसे भी पढ़ेंः महादेव के इन अनुपम रूपों के बारे में नहीं जानते होंगे आप, जानें इनकी अद्भुत कथा

सदाशिव कहते हैं- 'ये (रुद्र और महेश) मेरे जैसे ही वाहन रखते हैं, मेरे जैसा ही वेश धरते हैं और मेरे जैसे ही इनके पास हथियार हैं. वे रूप, वेश, वाहन, आसन और कृत्य में मेरे ही समान हैं.' अब यहां 7 आत्मा हो गईं- ब्रह्म (परमेश्वर) से सदाशिव, सदाशिव से दुर्गा. सदाशिव-दुर्गा से विष्णु, ब्रह्मा, रुद्र, महेश्वर. इससे यह सिद्ध हुआ कि ब्रह्मा, विष्णु, रुद्र और महेश के जन्मदाता कालरूपी सदाशिव और दुर्गा हैं।

(Disclaimer: इस लेख में दी गई जानकारियां और सूचनाएं मान्यताओं पर आधारित हैं. Hindi news18 इनकी पुष्टि नहीं करता है. इन पर अमल करने से पहले संबंधित विशेषज्ञ से संपर्क करें.)

https://hindi-news18-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/hindi.news18.com/amp/news/dharm/know-how-lord-shiva-was-born-this-story-in-shivpuran-pur-3257759.html?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA%3D%3D#aoh=16218527250898&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fhindi.news18.com%2Fnews%2Fdharm%2Fknow-how-lord-shiva-was-born-this-story-in-shivpuran-pur-3257759.html

No rebirth in the Rigveda - Koenraad Elst

No rebirth in the Rg-Veda

Koenraad Elst

Friday, March 22, 2013

  

            In my article about Sati, I had written that Sati dates back to the time when the Hindu people did not yet believe in reincarnation, and that it was also known among other people who didn’t have the doctrine of reincarnation, such as the ancient Egyptians and Chinese. Predictably, some Hindus reacted furiously, stating that Hindus had always believed in reincarnation and quoting chapter and verse from the Vedas to prove it. Here is my answer: the Rg-Veda, at least, does not contain the doctrine of reincarnation at all, and it is a post-Rg-Vedic text that explicitly introduces it. So, this is not a foreigner’s answer, it is the answer of one of India’s own great seers.

The concept of reincarnation is first explained in the Chandogya Upanishad. The Brahmin young man Shvetaketu returns home from his studies, where he supposedly has learned all Vedic knowledge including the core doctrine of the Upanishads (the Self, Atmavada), and meets his childhood friend from the Kshatriya caste, who quizzes him about the knowledge he has gained. Has he learned what happens to us after death? No, admits Shvetaketu, that wasn’t part of my curriculum. So we can already conclude that the core doctrine of the Upanishads is not dependent on a theory of the afterlife, such as the theory of reincarnation.

In Buddhism and Jainism, reincarnation is absolutely central, and it is fair to laugh at Western converts who insist on declaring themselves Buddhists but refuse to accept reincarnation. In Hinduism, by contrast, it is merely the factual situation that most people believe in reincarnation, but the core doctrine in its original form is not dependent on it. The goal of Buddhist meditation may be conceived as stopping the wheel of reincarnations, but the goal of Hindu meditation is not so defined. Check Patanjali, who mentions knowledge of past lives in passing, but doesn’t define the goal of yoga in terms of the reincarnation cycle. It is simply, technically, the isolation (Kaivalya) of consciousness from its field of objects in which it is mostly entangled, egardless of what happens to the conscuious subject before birth or after death. Buddhism in its Zen form has rediscovered this view, where the here and now is all-important and beliefs about past lives or the afterlife don’t matter. Hindus, by contrast, have become crypto-Buddhists and have come to believe that liberation means stopping the wheel of reincarnation. Not so Shvetaketu.

Now, when even Shvetaketu’s father Uddalaka doesn’t know the answer to this question, they go and ask the king. He turns out to know, and to have known all along. So he teaches them the doctrine of reincarnation for the very first time in Vedic literature and in all the writings of mankind. He also says that this doctrine is commonly believed in among Kshatriyas. No wonder the doctrine is so central in the traditions of Mahavira Jina and the Buddha, both Kshatriyas. He finally reveals that this belief is the secret of the Kshatriyas’ power. Indeed, those who consider their bodies as merely clothes they can take off and replace with new ones, are not afraid to kill or to die, they are fearless and win the battles, and hence they enjoy the power.

The Upanishadic account is confirmed by the reincarnation doctrine’s absence in the Rg-Veda. Yet, my reader claims: “Contrary to mischievous propaganda taking prominence in last few months, Vedas have their foundations in theory of rebirth.” Note first of all the immature debater’s assumption that a statement with which he disagrees must necessarily be born from “mischievous” motives. In reality, a statement may be right or may be wrong regardless of the speaker’s motives; but let that pass.

The reader claims: “Almost all mantras of Vedas implicitly assume that rebirth happens across various species and situations as per Karma or actions of the soul.” This is definitely untrue. He may project his own beliefs onto the  Vedic mantras, but most of these can be read without evoking in the reader’s mind the notion of reincarnation or any other doctrine of a life after death. For instance, the two most famous mantras, Vishvamitra’s Gayatri Mantra and Vasishtha’s Mrtyunjaya Mantra, are unrelated to reincarnation or to the afterlife. The first one is a hymn to the rising sun and asks it to enlighten the worshipper’s mind. The second one is a hymn to Shiva and asks him to deliver the worshipper from mortality. Come to think of it, this presupposes exactly that death is considered the problem, unlike in the doctrine of reincarnation, where rebirth (i.e. non-death) is an automatic given, and completely unlike the Buddhist and generalized Hindu belief that continuous rebirth is the problem and that liberation consists in getting rid of these repeated rebirths.

            The reader them claims to “provide some mantras from [the] Vedas that specifically talk of rebirth”, and starts with RV 10.59.6-7: “O Blissful Ishwar, Please provide us again healthy eyes and other sense organs in next birth. Please provide us powerful vitality, mind, intellect, valor again and again in next births. We achieve bliss in this life and future lives. May we keep looking up to your glory always. Keep us in peace with your blessings. O Ishwar, you provide us space, earth and other elements again and again so that our sense organs function. You provide us the ability to have good health and enjoy life in every birth. You make us strong again and again in various births.” But in fact, the Sankrit original doesn’t mention rebirth (punarjanma), it merely asks the god to give this vitality etc. “again”, i.e. after having lost it. The hymn is about “quickened vigour” and “health-giving medicine”, i.e. about health and longevity, about non-death. It requires very special pleading to read multiple lives into this.

The source quoted is 19th-century reformer Dayananda Saraswati’s notoriously fanciful translation, in which e.g. the names of the different gods are rendered as “God”, making the Vedic seers into quasi-Christians. Like many modern Hindus, he projected his own Christian-influenced beliefs onto the Vedic text. Most Hindus read the Vedas, to the extent that they read them at all, through Puranic lenses, applying the post-Vedic Hinduism which Dayanand Saraswati claimed to despise but which still determined his interpretation to a large extent. What he added and what set him apart from mainstream Hinduism in his day, was that he also tried to bring in quasi-Protestant monotheism and anti-idolatry which he had interiorized from his colonial masters. But in this case, it is not a Christian but a post-Vedic Hindu notion of reincarnation that he projects onto the Rg-Vedic verses.

The reader then quotes Rg-Veda 1.24.1-2: “Question: Whom do we consider the most pure? Who is the most enlightened one in entire world. Who provides us mother and father again in the world after gifting us ultimate bliss or Mukti? Answer: The self-enlightening, eternal, ever-free Ishwar alone is most pure. He alone provides us mother and father again in the world after gifting us ultimate bliss or Mukti.”

The word Mukti (freedom, liberation) and the concept of ultimate bliss are completely imaginary here, the special pleading that pervades later Hindu reading of the Vedic compositions. The original speaks of “seeing” father and mother, whom we shall indeed see in the hereafter. That is what the Rg-Vedic seers  believed in: the same story which we tell our children, viz. that our dead relatives are waiting for us in the hereafter. Sometimes we tell our children also that that particular star over there is where grandfather has gone to; and a Brahmanic funeral ritual (which, a Tamil Brahmin told me, is still performed) does indeed specify which part of the starry sky welcomes the deceased souls. This hereafter is incompatible with the notion of reincarnation. The verse contains the word “punah” (again), and this seems to be reason enough for our reader to believe that reincarnation is meant.  

That’s it for the Rg-Veda. The other quotes which the reader gives, are taken from the younger Yajur- and Atharva-Veda. They were partly contemporaneous with the older Upanishads, and it is not unreasonable if we come across reincarnation beliefs there. Yet, even here we find similar mistranslations. According to him, i.e. to Dayanada Saraswati of the Arya Samaj, this is what Yajurveda 4.15 says: “Whenever we take birth, may our deeds be such that we get a pure mind, long life, good health, vitality, intellect, strong sense organs and a powerful body. In next life also, keep us away from bad deeds and indulge us in noble actions.” But other translations, and indeed the Sanskrit original, don’t speak of reincarnation. They say that breath and life and consciousness have come “again”, but doesn’t imply that we first must have died. At least one translator even specifies that the hymn was said upon awakening.

            As for Atharvaveda 7.67.1, the reader or his source again indulges in misdirection. If that book contained the doctrine of reincarnation, it would still prove nothing about the Rg-Veda; but the verse quoted doesn’t even contain this doctrine: “May we get healthy sense and work organs in next life as well. May I [be] full of vitality. May I have spiritual wealth and knowledge of Ishwar and Vedic concepts again and again. May we be selfless for welfare of world in next lives again and again. May our deeds be noble so that we get human life and always get purity of mind and actions so that we can worship you and achieve salvation.” This translation is really very far from the original, which is another prayer for health and longevity, this time obtained from a specific medicinal herb. Many hymns of the Atharva-Veda are about health-restoration and medicine, i.e. about saving and prolonging life rather than counting on a next life.

            About Atharvaveda 5.1.2, he translates very freely: “One who conducts noble actions obtains noble lives in next births with strong body and sharp intellect. Those who conduct bad deeds get birth in lower species. To experience the fruits of past actions is natural trait of soul. After death, the soul resides in Vayu, Jala, Aushadhi etc. and again enters the womb to take next birth.” We don’t see these “next births” there, but maybe we should sit together and perform a word-by-word translation. This hymn is significantly called the Immortality Hymn, a name which we have already shown to be at odds with the reincarnation doctrine and certainly with the later quasi-Buddhist doctrine that we are tired of these endless rebirths in this Vale of Tears.

            In Yajurveda 19.47, however, the reincarnation doctrine may indeed be implied:

“There are two paths for the soul. One path Pitryana provides birth again and again through union of father and mother, good and bad deeds, happiness and sorrow. The other path of Devayana frees the soul from cycle of birth and death and provides bliss of salvation. The whole world reverberates with both these paths. And after both, the soul again takes birth as progeny of father and mother.” This is the same concept enunciated repeatedly in the older Upanishads: that either we can go to heaven (way of the gods) or we can come back here (way of the ancestors). This doctrine has the same origin as the doctrine of the old Upanishads, where indeed it is introduced as an innovation.

Our reader ends his letter with some lengthy quotations from “Maharishi Swami Dayanand Saraswati`s masterpiece `Light of Truth’”, which only prove that he, like most 19th-century Hindus, believed in reincarnation and could not imagine life without it. The Swami’s organization, the Arya Samaj, claims to this day that he abhorred the decadence into which Puranic literature had thrown the Hindus and that he merely wanted to restore the Vedas to the pristine purity they once enjoyed. In fact, he too was a “Puranic Hindu” who read the Veda through Puranic eyes. He believed that the Veda was of supernatural origin, hence his attempt to translate all reference to mundane people and places out of it.

But in fact, we know the family relations of the Vedic seers, the places where they lived or travelled, the reasons why they waged war and the tribes against whom they did battle, even their fondness for the psychedelic Soma brew. Short, they and their books were human, all too human. Of course they changed their mind once in a while, and they learned from their surroundings or from their own discoveries. This way, they first believed in a hereafter where we would meet again, but later came to the notion that we returned from the hereafter to be born again. Since this belief is attested among many different tribes the world over, and since India knew many tribes of whom the Vedic (Paurava and esp. Bharata) tribe was only one, we opine that it existed among some Indian tribes too at the time when the Rg-Veda was composed. But it was new to the Vedic seers, who had cherished a different belief for long. Only when a successful class advertised the new and hitherto secret doctrine of reincarnation as its key to success, did the doctrine catch on. This way, Hindu history is also the history of progress.  

◆◆◆

Koenraad Elst (°Leuven 1959) distinguished himself early on as eager to learn and to dissent. After a few hippie years he studied at the KU Leuven, obtaining MA degrees in Sinology, Indology and Philosophy. After a research stay at Benares Hindu University he did original fieldwork for a doctorate on Hindu nationalism, which he obtained magna cum laude in 1998. As an independent researcher he earned laurels and ostracism with his findings on hot items like Islam, multiculturalism and the secular state, the roots of Indo-European, the Ayodhya temple/mosque dispute and Mahatma Gandhi's legacy. He also published on the interface of religion and politics, correlative cosmologies, the dark side of Buddhism, the reinvention of Hinduism, technical points of Indian and Chinese philosophies, various language policy issues, Maoism, the renewed relevance of Confucius in conservatism, the increasing Asian stamp on integrating world civilization, direct democracy, the defence of threatened freedoms, and the Belgian question. Regarding religion, he combines human sympathy with substantive skepticism.

◆◆◆

You dont even provide the context. I don't know if it was oversight on your part or deliberate as the complete quote would contradict your pro reincarnation leaning.

Anyway here is the complete quote from Satyavidya.com

I am Manu and I became the Sun. I am the Poet-Seer, Rishi Kakshivan!- RV.IV.26.1.

Manu was the first mortal of the human race. He is son of Surya, the inner-Sun or the Self. Kakshivan is not only a great Seer, but also the great Divine Medic, Dhanvantri. This brahmastra, which basically means and is cognate to 'Aham brahmasmi' (as per Brihadaranyaka), connects us to the Divine powers of the Self.


Leaving aside the gobbldygook of the inner Sun or Self-whatever the heck that means, I think it is on the mark. The sage is associated with Ayurveda and his diety of Dhanvantri and for his being the Sun , he seemed to have acquired boons from the solar dieties of Ashwins which compelled him to create Ayurveda.