The #Biblical narrative of #Abraham and #Ramayana narrative of Rama are parallel. The differences arise mainly because the Bible is silent on events narrated in the #Bible. The small numbers of differences are superficial and do not destabilize either narrative if interchanged. Read More - http://www.commonprophets.com/the-differences-in-narratives-of-rama-and-abraham-are-mutually-consistent/ Watch Video - https://youtu.be/qftSj1OJrek

1. The differences in narratives of Rama and Abraham are
mutually consistent.
We have been suggesting that Biblical Abraham, Quranic Ibrahim and Hindu Rama
were the same person. This hypothesis is challenged by scholars who correctly
argue that mere delineating the similarities of parallels is not sufficient. We
should also look at the differences between the narratives. We shall do this now.
Abraham, Sarah and Lot went to the
south
Rama, Sita and Lakshmana went to the
south
In tracing the differences between the Biblical and Hindu narratives we take the
lead from the presidential address at the Society of Biblical Literature given by
Professor Samuel Sandmel in 1961.

2. Professor Samuel Sandmel warned
against Parallelomania in a lecture at
SBL.
Parallelomania take place when the
parallels are highlighted and
distinctions are hidden.
Prof Sandmel said that there is a dangerous trend of “Parallelomania” where
scholars take disjointed parallels between difference narratives and try to show
the identity. Sometimes they artificially also deduce causality as to which
narrative came first and which followed. He said that the alleged similarities may
not actually exist because scholars do not pay adequate attention to the
differences between the narratives.

3. There are no contradictory narratives
in the Biblical and Hindu narratives of
Abraham-Rama.
The silences in the Biblical and Hindu
narratives give an impression that they
are different.
There are two types of differences. First is where the Biblical narrative says a X
and the Hindu narrative says Y—which are two different or contradictory
statements about the same event. Second is where the Biblical narrative may be
silent and the Hindu narrative tells of some event; or the Hindu narrative is silent
and the Biblical narrative tells of some event. Now these silences are not
necessarily contradictory.

4. The Bible and Ramayana are like
historians talking about Normandy and
the Pearl Harbour
The Bible and Ramayana are like
historians talking about Normandy and
the Pearl Harbour
For example, let us say two person were writing the narrative of Second World
War. One historian talks about the landing at Normandy while another talks about
the Japanese attack on the Pearl Harbour. This does not mean that the two
narratives are distinct. It only means that the two narratives are different aspects
of the same larger frame. We have to; therefore, distinguish between the
differences which are due to silences and differences which are contradictory.
Certain distinctions between the narratives still do not mean that the narratives
are not the same. The distinctions can be “irreconcilable” or “superficial.”

5. Abraham and Lot were same persons as Rama and Lakshmana.
The Bible says that Abraham had two brothers. One of them, Nahor, had a son
name Lot. The Biblical narrative of revolves around these four persons--Abraham
his two brothers and one nephew. The Hindu narrative also revolves around four
persons but all are brothers. Here we have a superficial distinction between the
narratives. Whether Lot was nephew or brother does not destabilize the plot.

6. Terah migrated from Ur Chaldea to Haran to Ai. Rama’s ancestors migrated
from Ikshumati to Ayodhya
A distinction is that the Bible tells of Abraham’s father Terah having migrated
from a place named Ur Chaldea to Haran where he died. Abraham went onwards
to a placed name Ai in Canaan from here. In comparison, the Hindu narrative does
not tell of Rama’s father Dasaratha migrating. However, it does say that Rama’s
ancestors lived at a place called Ikshumati. It follows that there would have taken
a migration from Ikshumati to Ayodhya at some time although the time of this
migration is not specified. The parallel, therefore, is that both narratives tell of a
migration from Ur Chaldea or Ikshumati to Ai or Ayodhya although the timing of
the migration is different. Once again, the distinction is superficial since it does
not destabilize the plot.

7. Abraham was a powerful herdsman
while Rama was a king
Abraham was a powerful herdsman
while Rama was a king
A distinction is that the Bible speaks of Abraham as a herdsman, very often, a
powerful herdsman. On the other hand, the Hindu narrative tells of him being a
king. Once again this is a superficial difference is not critical to the narrative.

8. The Bible is silent on Abraham-Rama
being taken by the Sage Vishwamitra
to the south.
The Bible is silent on Sarah-Sita being
married to Abraham-Rama while
returning from the south
Now we come to an important silence in the Ramayana which records the doings
of Lord Rama. The text tells of Rama being taken by the Sage Vishwamitra to the
south for killing certain demons who were obstructing his sacrifices. Rama got
married to Sita while returning from the journey. The Bible is silent on this but
this slips into the Biblical narrative without a hiccup.

9. Abraham, Sarah and Lot went to the
south just as Rama, Sita and
Lakshmana went
Abraham, Sarah and Lot went to the
south just as Rama, Sita and
Lakshmana went
The next point is that Abraham-Rama travels to the south in both the narratives.
Abraham is accompanied by his wife Sarah and his nephew Lot whereas Rama is
accompanied by his wife Sita and his brother Lakshmana. The travel to the south
is attested in the both the narratives.
A distinction is that the Bible says that there was a famine in the land of Canaan
which led Abraham to migrate to the south. The Hindu narrative dose not talks
about such a famine. Instead, it tells in great details about a palace intrigue. It
says that the Dasaratha, father of Rama, had three wives. He had given a boon to
one of his wives--Kekeyi. She invoked this boon when Dasaratha wanted to install
Rama on the throne of Ayodhya and insisted that Rama should be exiled for
fourteen years and her son Bharata should be installed on the throne. This
intrigue led to Rama traveling to the south.

10. Now, the famine and the intrigue could happen at the same time. These can go
together. The Bible talks about the famine while the Hindu texts talk about the
intrigue. The two narratives are not contradictory.
Rama-Abraham crossed the Ganga River while traveling to the south. The
Bible is silent on this.
While Rama travelling to the south, the Ramayana gives a large number of events.
These include visiting Sage Bharadwaj, crossing the Yamuna and Ganga rivers,
killing of a number of demons like Viradh, visiting the hermitage of sage Agastya
and so on.

11. Rama-Abraham settled in the south at Panchvati-Mitsrayim.
Rama settled at a place called Panchvati after these events. The Bible is silent on
these events. These things could happened in the life of Abraham and the Biblical
may not have recorded them.
Sarah-Sita was taken to the palace
of Pharaoh-Ravana
Sarah-Sita was abducted by Pharaoh-
Ravana

12. The Biblical narrative tells of Abraham reaching Mitsrayim in the South. The
people of Mitsrayim found that Sarah was beautiful. They reported this to the
Pharoah and they her to the Pharaoh’s palace. The Hindu narrative is much
longer. It tells of Surpanakha, sister of the king of south name Ravana, coming to
Panchvati and requesting Rama or Lakshmana to marry her. She went to Ravana
upon being rebuffed. Then Ravana pledged to take revenge with Rama. This led
toRavana coming to Panchvati, abducting Sita and taking her to his palace in
Lanka.
We can see that the taking of Sarah-Sita to the palace of the king of the south is
the same in the two narratives. The difference is that the Biblical narrative does
not give many details. It only says that Sarah was taken to the palace whereas the
Hindu narrative gives details about the conflict with Supanakha, Ravana coming to
abduct her, and taking her to Lanka. The two narratives are parallel.
An interesting event happened in the south. Abraham told Sarah to speak to the
people of south that she was his sister and not his wife. He thought that people of
the south would kill him and in order to take Sarah if she said that she was his
wife. Then, in the south, Sarah said that she was Abraham’s sister and the people
of the south took her to the Pharaoh. Later, in the Biblical narrative, Abraham said
that Sarah was the daughter of his father but not of his mother. She was his half-
sister and became his wife.

13. Stutterheims’ legend of Rama tells of
Sita being daughter of Dasaratha.
The Malayan legend of Rama tells of
Sita being daughter of Dasaratha.
The Ramayana does not talk about this event. But the Malayan legend of Rama
tells of an incident. It says that Dasarata had once visited Lanka. While Ravana
had gone to be with his first wife, Dasarata cohabitated with his wife Mandu Daki,
likely referred to as Mandodari in the Ramayana. The daughter born of that union
was Sita.

14. Sarah was half-sister of Abraham just as Sita was half-sister of Rama.
The Ramayana confirms that Sita was Born in Lanka. Here the Malayan legend and
Ramayana are parallel that Sita was born in Lanka. The Ramayana is silent about
her father while the Malayan legend says she was daughter of Dasaratha, father
of Rama. Later, the Valmiki Ramayana says that Sita was thrown into the sea and
was picked up by King Janaka and married with Rama. Both the narratives,
therefore, indicate that Sita could be the daughter of Terah-Dasaratha. Thus, the
Bible says Sarah was Abraham’s father’s daughter while the Ramayana is silent.

15. The Pharaoh did not touch Sarah just as Ravana did not touch Rama.
The King James Version of the Bible says that while returning Sarah to Abraham
the Pharaoh said to Abraham that you should told me that she was your wife
because “I might have touched her.” This indicates that he had not touched her.
The Ramayana confirms that although Ravana had not touched her. Both the
narrative are parallel that Sarah-Sita had not been touched by Pharaoh-Ravana.
Towards the end of Abraham’s stay in the south, the Bible says that the Pharaoh’s
house was struck with troubles. It does not tell what those troubles were. Yet,
because of these troubles the Pharaoh decided to return Sarah to Abraham.

16. Rama-Abraham crossed the sea to
attack Lanka-Mitsrayim.
Rama-Abraham brought troubles to
Pharaoh-Ravana.
The Hindu narrative is much longer. Over two entire books it tells about Rama’s
search for Sita, his sending Hanuman to search for Sita, crossing the sea, attacking
Lanka, killing Ravana and then retrieving his wife Sita. The mention that the
Pharaoh was struck with troubles in the Bible could be parallel to this long
narrative given in the Ramayana. The distinction is that Abraham did not kill the
Pharaoh while Rama killed Ravana.

17. Biblical Ai was Ramayana’s Ayodhya
Abraham-Rama returned to his place of origin which is Ai in the Bible and
Ayodhya in the Ramayana. The Bible tells of this travel in the single verse whereas
the Hindu text gives a long description on the Pushpak vehicle.
We find that there are major problems with silences between the two narratives.
The first silence in the Bible is about Rama’s travels to the south with
Vishwamitra. The second silence is about Rama’s confrontation with demons like
Viradh during his travel to the south. The third silence is regarding the long effort
made by Rama to attack Lanka retrieve Sita. The fourth silence is about the
Return in the Pushpak vehicle. However, these silences smoothly slip into the
Biblical narrative and are not in any way contradictory.
The first point of distinction between the two narratives is that the Bible talks
about two brother and one nephew whereas the Hindu narrative talks about

18. three brothers of Abraham-Rama. The second distinction is that the Bible talks
about Abraham being a herdsman whereas the Hindu narrative talks about him
being a king. The third distinction is the Bible talks about Abraham travelling to
the south because of a famine whereas the Hindu narrative talks about his
travelling to the south because of a palace intrigue. The fourth distinction is that
the Pharaoh is not killed by Abraham but the Ravana is killed by Rama. These
distinctions do not destabilize the overall narrative, however. Therefore, we
should seriously think that whether these parallels could arise because of the
memories of the same events recorded in the two traditions.
Freud said that collective memories
remain in social unconscious.
Freud said that societies keep
unconscious memories like the
individual.
Psychologist Sigmund Freud has said that just as events of the past are recorded
in an individual’s unconscious, similarly the social events of the past are recorded
in the collective unconscious of the society. It is possible that there was one series
of events part of which was remembered by the Biblical stream and another part
was remembered by the Hindu stream. The same memory is now available to us
in two versions but the two version merge into each other beautifully.

19. There take place more happenings after Abraham-Rama returning to Ai-Ayodhya.
We will discuss those in another post. For the present, these similarities and the
lack of irreconcilable distinctions between the two narratives give us reason to
believe that Biblical Abraham and Hindu Rama could be the same person.