786 is not ॐ and ॐ is not Vedic !!!!!


Written by Imran Khan

According to many Vedic dharma followers, The number “786” means “Om”


Fig 1

 


 

Fig 2

 

            All Arabic copies of the Koran have the mysterious figure 786 imprinted on them . No Arabic scholar has been able to determine the choice of this particular number as divine. It is an established fact that Muhammad was illiterate therefore it is obvious that he would not be able to differentiate numbers from letters. This “magical” number is none other than the Vedic holy letter “OM” written in Sanskrit (Refer to figure 2). Anyone who knows Sanskrit can try reading the symbol for “OM” backwards in the Arabic way and magically the numbers 786 will appear! Muslims in their ignorance simply do not realise that this special number is nothing more than the holiest of Vedic symbols misread.

 

 Response:

 

Point No 1.
No Arabic copy of Quran has the English/ Urdu Number 786/ LAY imprinted on them. If you don’t believe me look for yourself . I have never come up across any copy of Qur’an having the Number 786/ LAY on it!

 

Point No 2:  Islamic Scholars say that, 786 is numerological value to “Bismillah Ar Rahman Nir/ir Rahim” which has surfaced recent era and it is an innovation ( Bidah ) in Islam and it is forbidden or more specifically “Haram” since Quran opposes Astrology,fortune telling, Numerology and such business and queries. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Every innovation is misguidance and going astray, and all what drives man astray leads to Hell-Fire.”

 

Point No 3:  The Prophet Muhammed who was a successful Merchant in his early life , has to know the Arabic Alphabets to work in trade, since all the numbers that he had to use were Alphabets.

 

“786” is the total value of the letters of “Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim”. In Arabic there are two methods of arranging letters. One method is the most common method known as the alphabetical method. Here we begin with Alif, ba, ta, tha etc. The other method is known as the Abjad method or ordinal method. In this method each letter has an arithmetic value assigned to it from one to one thousand. The letters are arranged in the following order: Abjad, Hawwaz, Hutti, Kalaman, Sa’fas, Qarshat, Sakhaz, Zazagh. This arrangement was done, most probably in the 3rd century of Hijrah during the ‘Abbasid period, following other Semitic languages such as Phoenician, Aramaic, Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldean etc.

 

If you take the numeric values of all the letters of the Basmalah, according to the Abjad order, the total will be 786. In the Indian subcontinent the Abjad numerals became quite popular. Some people, mostly in India and Pakistan, use 786 as a substitute for Bismillah. They write this number to avoid writing the name of Allah or the Qur’anic ayah on ordinary papers. This tradition is not from the time of the Prophet -peace be upon him- or his Sahabah. It developed much later, perhaps during the later ‘Abbasid period. We do not know of any reputable Imams or Jurists who used this number instead of the Bismillah.

Here is a table explaining the above answer

 

Table 5. The 19 Arabic letters of the Basmalah and their corresponding gematrical values. They all add to 786.
Letter No.

Arabic

English

Gematrical Value

1 Baa’ B 2
2 Siin S 60
3 Miim M 40
4 ‘Alif A 1
5 Laam L 30
6 Laam L 30
7 Haa’ H 6
8 ‘Alif A 1
9 Laam L 30
10 Raa’ R 200
11 H!aa’ H 8
12 Miim M 40
13 Nuun N 50
14 ‘Alif A 1
15 Laam L 30
16 Raa’ R 200
17 H!aa’ H 8
18 Yaa’ Y 10
19 Miim M 40
Total 786

 

 

 

Alef
ا 1
Ya’
10 ي
TTa’
9 ط
Ha’
8 ح
Zay
7 ز
Waw
6 و
Ha’
5 ه
Dal
4 د
Jim
3 ج
Ba’
2 ب
Qaf
100 ق
Saad
90 ص
Fa’
80 ف
‘Ayn
70 ع
Seen
60 س
Noon
50 ن
Mim
40 م
Laam
30 ل
Kaf
20 ك
Ghayn
1000 غ
Za
900 ظ
Dad
800 ض
Dhal
700 ذ
Kha’
600 خ
Tha’
500 ث
Ta’
400 ت
Shin
300 ش
Ra’
200 ر

 

 

 But 786 has no bases in Islam. Due to our ignorance we have used these numbers believing them to be sacred . Muslims have used “786” on anything that they believed to be spiritual. Similarly, some Muslims replace Allah’s name by the number ’66’ and the Prophet’s name by ’92’.

 

Regarding the Question is This “magical” number 786 is none other than the Vedic holy letter “OM” written in Sanskrit? 




This is a false comparison because Numerology is neither a language nor does it help in preserving or spreading the teachings of the Qur’aan. The sole purpose of Numerology is to make charms and amulets, which are used as a part of the religion to avert misfortune and evil eye.

 

AUM or OM according to Hinduism ????

 

OM !! What does it mean?  Where does it come from?

 

 Om in various scripts

 


 

The symbol AUM in the Devanagari as per the Vedic scripts . 


 

 

The symbol om in the Devanagari (Hindi, Nepali), Gujarati and Marathi scripts.

 

 The syllable Om is composed of the three sounds a-u-m (in Sanskrit, the vowels a and u combine to become o) and the symbol’s threefold nature is central to its meaning.

 

The sacred syllable Om which form a central core of modern Hinduism turns out to be more enigmatic as one studies its origin.  In spite of all the claims of its prehistoric origin and vedic origin, om cannot be found in any document or archeological object which antedate the Christian Era.

 

 Om is not mentioned in the ancient Rig-Veda.   The only possible indirect reference is  in hymns 1.164.39  which speaks of the syllable (akshara) that exists in the divine and is in no way definitive or even indicative.

“What,” asks the composer of this hymn, “can one who does not know this do with the chant?” He adds, “Only those who know it sit together here.” That is, only initiates gather to delight in the mystery of the sacred syllable and the company of the deities.

 

Since the syllable and the mantra are so important, the fact that Vedic religion did not mention about it anywhere is significant.   The earliest direct reference to Om is found in  the opening hymn of the Shukla-Yajur-Veda (1.1), the “white” recension of the Vedic hymnody dealing strictly with the performance of the sacrifices (yajus). But historians consider this as a later addition.. 

 

For the Taittirîya-Samhitâ (5.2.8), which is appended to the Yajur-Veda, still cryptically speaks of the “divine sign” (deva-lakshana) that is written threefold (try-alikhita).  . The threefold constituents of om – A U M –  are referred to, in the Prashna-Upanishad (V.5). and the symbolic elaboration of this is found in the Mândûkya-Upanishad.

 

Even the early Upanishads written in Sanskrit, refer to it only indirectly as the udgîtha (“up sound”)
and the pranava (“pronouncing”).  In the Yoga-Sûtra (1.27),it is called the Word (vâcaka) of the Lord (îshvara). Patanjali further states (in 1.28) that in order to realize the mystery of the Lord, the om sound should be recited and contemplated. In the earliest Upanishads,  (Brihad-Âranyaka,
Chândogya, and Taittirîya)aum is mentioned many times  both as aum and om-kâra

 

The Meaning of Om. 

 

 A century ago, the German scholar Max Müller, ( M. Müller, Three Lectures on the Vedânta Philosophy, London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1894) who introduced the Indian Scriptures to the west, had the idea that om might be a contraction of the word avam, “a prehistoric pronominal stem, pointing to distant objects, while ayam pointed to nearer objects.,,,, Avam may have become the affirmative particle om, just as the French oui arose from hoc illud.” This follows the common everyday use of a syllable produced by the “up sound” or exhalation producing  om to mean
 “Yes, I agree” with the same meaning as “Amen” .  

 

Chândogya Upanishad clearly spells out the equation between the words udgîtha and pranava.   The first record of this usage is in the Brihad-Âranyaka-Upanishad (3.9.1) itself, where om is employed seven times in this manner. Indeed, the Chândogya-Upanishad (1.1.8) clearly states: “That syllable is a syllable of assent, for whenever we assent to anything we say aum [= om].”  “If, then, om meant originally that and yes, we can understand that, like Amen, it may have assumed a more general meaning, something like tat sat, and that it may have been used as representing all that human language can express.” (Max Muller)

 

 Swami Sankarananda, (Swami Sankarananda, The Rigvedic Culture of the Pre-Historic Indus, Calcutta: Ramakrishna Vedanta Math, 1942),  proposes that om is derived from the Vedic word soma. Through the influence of the Persians, who did not pronounce the letter s, the word soma was changed to homa and subsequently was shortened to om.  This is only a conjecture to find a meaning in connection with Vedic religion. Earlier Sankara also hung on to this relation.. Swami considers sacred syllable om as a symbol of  Sun since  Aitareya-Brâhmana (5.32)says:
“That which glows is om.”  Evidently it is a weak argument.

 

 However the historic development of the meaning goes far beyond the Vedic gods and common Amen to identify Om with  the shabda-brahman.   In this the unknowable indescribable God expresses himself in creation through the Word.  The cosmos was created by the Word. “And God said,….. and it was so” Chândogya-Upanishad (2.23.3), calls this creation as extension of God, since there is nothing except God, even the creation is his expression and the immanence of God.  The Chândogya-Upanishad (1.9.4) also quotes Atidhanvan Shaunaka,  as saying, “So long as your descendants will know this udgîtha, their life in this world will be the highest and best.”  .

 

 Mândûkya-Upanishad   explained the three constituent parts (mâtrâ) of the syllable—namely A U M—as  past, present, and future; as the states of  waking, dreaming, and deep sleep. The  fourth part the silence that follows as the inexpressible Brahman.   

 

 Atharva-Shikhâ-Upanishad expounds the syllables and associate them for easy memorization and interpretation.  These are only to be considered as mnemographic techniques for teaching to those who sit beside. (Upanishad)

 

AUM or OM Borrowed from Christianity ????

Thus apparently the symbol and mantra Om emerged in Indian scene soon after the mission of St.Thomas the Apostle and seen only after that time.  Surprisingly all early churches in the Malankara had used this as the Christian symbol and appear at the entrance of the seven original churches. Even when these churches were remodeled and reconstructed the aum was retained.   It was clearly part of the Malankara Christian tradition from the first century.  They however associate it with the Christian Trinity and to Christ – the word who became flesh  which we will discuss later.  An objective conclusion would be that Aum was indeed the original Christian concept as introduced by Thomas.

 

 The Word became Flesh

 

 The Christian interpretation of Aum had always been based on John 1:1
“In the beginning was the Aum.  This Aum was with God.  This Aum was indeed God.”

 

 It also introduces the fullness or the substance of God as represented by the silence that follows or the totality of the syllable.  Word was the first expression of God through which the whole cosmos – living and the nonliving – visible and the invisible – were created.  If one looks even deeper, the whole of Kabballa and the threefold tree reaching into the unknown darkness encased in the ineffable name of YHVH can be seen.  It goes far deeper than the simple logos of the Greek.  While the Hindu trinity with its intricate mythologies is based on the dialectics of good and evil and their interaction, ( A feature borrowed from the Gnosticism after the coming of Mani) Christian trinity is based on Love. This was the basic conflict on which Manichaens were declared heretics by the early churches everywhere in the world.  Surprisingly  this is reflected in the Saivism  in its pure form and is maintained by the pure saivites of the south which is finding a resurgence.  With it the demise of the myths where the gods fight with each other will have to be discarded along with all the heresies that came into the church later through the influence of Manichaenism.  

 

Conclusion: 

 

1. 786 is not  

 

2.  is not Vedic

 

3. was borrowed from christianity is an equavalent for Holy Word or God!


Imran Khan,

Peace!

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s