On Abraham and Other Matters
When our Murshid was here he made two statements concerning Abraham, and one other statement:
1. That Abram end Abraham and Brahma were one.
2. That Abram or Abraham and Zardusht (Zarathustra) were one.
3. That the different Saviors or Avatars should not be considered as many but as one.
Fabre D’Olivet traces the source of all spiritual streams (exclusive of China) through Egypt and back; Gerald Massey traces the spiritual streams of India, Palestine, Persia, the Tigris-Euphrates countries, and the Mediterranean and Western European countries to Egypt. Do they differ? What do we find?
That Abram, Ptah and Brahma were all creators, all founders. They represent the father aspect, the active element, fire and breath. The B in Abram and Brahma, the P in Ptah represent breath, fatherhood, activity, the lingam. On the face the lingam is the nose, through which air and prana must pass.
That Nnu or Nun (Egyptian), Noah or Nun (Hebrew) and Vishnu are one. They are the preservers. Associate them with water, the ark, the yoni, passivity, repose. Thebah signifies not only the ark, but any place of refuge, including the human body. On the face the element or organ is the mouth through which water and earth go; this is the upper yoni. Ark mouth and yoni all have the same shape. We breathe to grow, but we eat and drink to live.
Shu who is also Horus, Joshua (Jesus) and Shiva are one. This is the Savior, the rescuer, the transformer. All these are the offspring of the mother only, the water. Joshua (Io-Shu, Ia-Shu, Ya-Shiva) was the son of Nun, or in the New Testament, the son of Mary (Mariam, Miriam). Nun means water, particularly the waters of the firmament. Moses (Egyp. Ma-Shu) means water born. Moses and Joshua are aspects of the same principal; Moses represents Karma or law and Joshua or Jesus represents freedom from the law. So long as we are subject to that law we shall be in the desert; enlightenment brings to us into the Promised Land.
Jesus was the son of Mary. In Egyptian Mer signified the sea, Latin Mare, French Mer. In French Mere is mother. The letter M represents Mother, Water, Source. In Hebrew Am is Mother and Im the sea of the firmament. In Egyptian Meshken was the womb, the source of creation—this becomes Mashken, Am-Schekinah, God as source. Jesus was born of water and the spirit (Mary and the Holy Spirit). The spirit signifies the breath and this signifies or symbolizes not the birth of the physical body, but spiritual birth or rebirth.
This is signified in the passing of the Israelites over the Red Sea, and then over the Jordan, and by the whole symbolism and doctrine of baptism wherever and whenever taught. This is the doctrine of rebirths taught in the New Testament. Flesh and Blood cannot inherit the kingdom of Heaven, but he that is born of water and the spirit does. Jesus, Joshua, Shu, Shiva, Moses, all were born of water.
Moses had a brother named Aaron and a sister named Miriam. Aaron means “a rod.” As stated before, Miriam stands for the sea. Moses raised his rod and parted the water. This is the same as the
Lard’s spirit passing over the face of the waters in Genesis. In the fight between the Israelites (children of light) and the Amalekites (the children of darkness), Moses held his rod aloft. But his arms grew tired and they had to be held up. Those holding up the arms represent the Ida and Pingala forces of the breath which raise the procreative power rod in a spiritual direction. When they do not function, the arms and rod drop, the procreative power takes a material direction and the Amalekites are victorious over Israel (compare Tarot cards 1, 6and 7). The rod is again used to part the waters of the Jordan; it is the vertical line in the cross and crux ansata, and the lingam, in copulation.
Above it is stated that the Nose was Masculine and the Mouth feminine. In Greek Ne (pronounce nay) is “Yes” and “Ma” no. In the Kabbalistic triangle we have “Diabalus est Dues Inversus” where the lower triangle represents the upper reversed and in black. Both are pictured as bearded faces. The upper is androgynous. The gods were supposed to be androgynous and are represented with the androgynous symbol, the crux ansata. But the lingam and yoni are not both to be found in the loins of a person—they are together only on the face. The spiritual part of the human is above the diaphragm; the crux ansata of the breath (spirit) is formed of the nose and mouth, and through the directing of the breath upward (raising the arms of Moses holding the rod), the spiritual man expressed himself.
Moses in the bulrushes to a certain extent represents Noah and his progeny in the Ark, particularly Shem (compare Shu). The Semites are both the progeny of Shem and the followers of Moses. Shem and Shu represent light and sun, and it was upon Moses that the glory of God shone. When he came before the Israelites with the Tablets of stone and his face shone, he represents the sun, even as Joshua, Jesus, Horus, Zardusht and all Avatars represent the sun, the manifestation of God in the physical world.
That Abram and Zardusht were one can be seen from the passage that states Abram came from Ur of the Chaldees. The word in Hebrew is Kasdim. Kasdim does not signify a people or race, but stood for the Magi or Chaldean initiates. In Aramaic Chasodim signified the Essenes and was later applied to the mystics and Kabbalists. If Abram came from Kasdim (Magi) and Zardusht also, may they not be one? Remember, Zardusht does not signify a man’s name but a stage of spiritual development just as Buddha was not a man’s name but a stage of spiritual development.
It has already been noticed that the Osiris of the Egyptians and the Ishwara of the Hindus may be the same. And why not also Ashur of the Chaldeans? In the book of Esther the King of Kings is called Asherverosh or Ahasueras. No such king ever ruled Persia. But Asherverosh resembles Ashur, Osiris, and Ishvara, all the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords. When we consider that Esther (Ishtar) and Mordecai (Marduk) were the names of the gods of the Babylonians, and that Haman means the black one or devil (Ahriman), may we not look for a new interpretation of this commonly considered irreligious, pseudo-historical book?