1. Who is Allah according to Hinduism?
    What do Hindu scriptures say about Allah?
    Are there any references to him in Hindu scriptures?
  2. BTW, I saw some blogs stating Shukracharya as Allah and all Muslims as demons in Hinduism.
    Who is this Shukracharya?
  • 14
    Don't believe them. Those theories don't have solid scriptural evidence. Bhavishya Purana, a Hindu Scripture which says about future events, was fabricated by Britishers and Muslim Invaders and doesn't exist in it's original form. Those bloggers refer to this corrupted version of Bhavishya Purana and put their own theories.
    – The Destroyer
    Nov 10, 2015 at 12:10
  • 1
    According us Allah is creator of this universe and us. He is god or bhagwan
    – Bhavin
    Nov 10, 2015 at 12:39
  • 3
    Well if you take it literally Allah means Mother in Sanskrit, which means Allah is the Goddess.
    – Surya
    Nov 10, 2015 at 13:30
  • 1
    @Surya Actually Allah is derived from moon worship. "I swear by the moon, And the night when it departs, And the daybreak when it shines; Surely it (hell) is one of the gravest (misfortunes)" (Koran 74:32)
    – Pinakin
    Nov 10, 2015 at 14:16
  • 6
    Here is another interpretation sir - Allah (God) is none other than Ishvara, or the Saguna Brahman. He is having all auspicousness and all the qualities. He is the Lord of All (Allah Malik). He creates, preserves and destroys the Universe. He is one with Brahman. All the best!
    – Sai
    Nov 10, 2015 at 15:35

7 Answers 7


Hindu scriptures doesn't mention at all about anything who closely resembles an Islamic Allah.

Theologically, Allah could be equated to Brahman, the Hindu supreme God. But the comparison fails after this point. Brahman is called'Shunya' (emptiness), 'Purna' (infinity) or even simply the pronoun'It'. Hindu Brahman is the all pervasive, genderless, infinite, eternal truth and bliss which does not change, yet is the cause of all changes. It doesn't favour it's followers nor punish those who doesn't believe in it. It doesn't have emotions not any characteristics (Nirguna Brahman) or can be conceptualized as having definite characteristics (Suguna Brahman).

Allah is word which simply means 'the one true God'. He (a male entity) is described in Quran as having a spiritual body, a distinct personality replete with emotions and desire. Allah has a form which is Absolute, Spiritual, infallible, most beautiful and transcendental to all kind of material objects, free from even a tinge of material contamination.

Clearly, the basic assumptions about Allah and Brahman are quite different and stark.If a Hindu assumes Allah to be a form of Brahman's infinite forms, it would be offensive to an Islamic purist, because then the absolute-ness of Allah is lost.

  • 4
    you hit it so well. The point is when we compare religions we should not make any assumptions. It says so in the Bhagavad Gita. Great rivers merge in the oceans. Religious knowledge is the same way.
    – user4592
    Jan 27, 2016 at 10:32
  • @gansub. Thank you. A few months ago, I answered a similar question on Quora (quora.com/How-many-Hindus-believe-in-Allah/answer/…). I just reproduced it here. :) Jan 27, 2016 at 10:47

According to Hinduism, Allah is Lord Shiva.

Allah is the one who never takes birth. In Hinduism Lord Shiva never takes birth. Allah is amorphous and Shiva Lingam in Hinduism is the symbol that Lord Shiva is lacking in shape or shapeless. Allah is the creator and destroyer and Lord Shiva is the eternal seed of all the things. He is creator, operator and destroyer.

In Macca there is a shiva lingam which is called "Noor-e-ilahi" i.e. Lord of light in islam. The same entity is called "Jyotirlingam" in Hinduism.

There are many references in Shiva Purana which describes the properties of Shiva which is found suitable/similar to Allah in Islam. e.g. Truth,light,amorphous,.. etc.

In Bhagvad Geeta Lord Krishna has nerrated that if thousands of suns appear in sky then maybe it forms equal light of Parmatman. Parmatman is "Ajanma", "Akarta" and "Abhokta" means unborn, undoer. Shiva purana provides more details about Shiva Parmatman who never takes birth and never takes anything but is only a light.

Brahmakumaris also describes Shiva as Allah/GOD.

Shukracharya is demon teacher or guru. He is not allah. Shukracharya is great devotee of Allah/Shiva. Shukracharya always guides demons. And muslims are not demons. Muslims are humans only like us.

  • 3
    I have mentioned Shiva purana already. This is scripture based answer not opinion based answer. Thank you.
    – prem30488
    Jan 25, 2016 at 11:08
  • 3
    I completely agree with you though for others it might sound like a one sided answer. Instead of saying Lord Shiva it would be better to say Paramatma as a whole is Allah. Otherwise other ignorants will say, "Why only Lord Shiva? Why not Lord Vishnu or Lord Brahma?" But you are completely correct. Jan 3, 2017 at 14:08
  • 2
    I hope you know that the 'stone' in mecca is pre-Islamic pagan artifact. Mar 10, 2017 at 4:27
  • There is mention of Allah and Islam in bhavishya purana. I heard about this in videos from old Hindu saints. Dont want to post full details here but definitely, Allah is not Shiva. Dec 31, 2019 at 17:36

No, there is no mention of Allah in any Hindu scriptures. Hindu scriptures are believed to be thousands year old and Islam as a religion came much later. So, don't believe whoever tells such things.

Whether it is Iswar, Allah, God; all refers to the same Supreme lord who creates this world to live in harmony and be His true reflection.


Mohammad: prophet or pisach?


Since a long time a question has been bothering Hindus and Muslims alike about the identity of Mohammed who is called the prophet of islam, while some Islamic clergy especially the infamous Zakir Naik tried to answer this all they did is give misinformation on this matter such as the blasphemous act of calling Mohammad as Kalki aavtar and the confusion still exists. The point of this article today is to provide the Hindu perspective to Mohammed and see whether Mohammed is a prophet or a pisach by comparing the Hindu scriptures with the Islamic ones on the topic of Mohammed which shall give us a proper answer to this question.


While most of the references given about Mohammed by Islamic clergy from the Hindu scriptures is out of context and many times even the verses or scriptures mentioned by those corrupt people are outright lies especially the ones stated by Zakir Naik, there indeed is a reference to Mohammed in Hindu scriptures however any Muslim reading this article will not like it and from this point begins hell for any muslim readers of this article in general and those who lie that Mohammed is Kalki in particular. The Bhavishya Puran which is considered as an authentic Puran as per all the lists made on this matter and its original version available with the ancient Guru parampara like that of the Shankaracharya parampara mentions Mohammed though in a very bad light. The Bhavishya Puran Pratisarga Parv Khand 3 Chapter 3 states that in the lineage of king Salivahana were born a total of 10 descendants Raja Bhoj was the last of those 10 successive kings; this chapter mentions Raja Bhoj crossed Sindhu and went to conquer land of the mlecchas going as far as the middle east; after his conquest there came his own council along with which came the mlevvha Mohammed. Later he visited the desert where in the middle of desert was a Shiv Mandir where the king prayed to lord Shiva (this mandir is the kaba in mecca) after which lord Shiva appears and asks the king to leave the land for it has been polluted by mlecchas or barbarians also stating that the land is now ruled by the demon king Tripurasur who attained rebirth through the powers of demon Bali after Shiva had destroyed Tripurasur and is increasing the demon race, we find that the Mohammed mentioned is actually Tripurasur (which makes sense when we observe various evidences regarding Mohammed and his life). It has also been stated in this chapter by Shiva that this Mohammed is now a pisach and loves doing activities of pisach and asks once Raja Bhoj once again to leave the mleccha land. Later Mohammed comes to visit the king at night and declare that he is propagator of pisacha cult which shall destroy and corrupt all pure Dharma also stating mark of the pisach cult will be circumcision, absence of shika and janeu, it's followers will shout loudly, be omnivore and shall devour animals without performing the required rites or kulatantra (all of which is done by Muslims). This chapter also talks about Medina stating Mohammed was carried to Medina by his students after his death (which occurred due to a curse) and was buried there and that place is sacred for Muslims. It must also be noted that Mohammed is actually written as Mahamada in this chapter which is the only place in the entire range of Hindu scriptures where the Islamic prophet has been mentioned however Mahamada also means great illusion and in this chapter Mohammed has been described as an illusionist pisach.


In the earlier point the real story behind Mohammed and his mention in Hindu scriptures have been stated clearly and it can be stated already that the Islamic claims that Mohammed is Kalki or Mohammed is mentioned in Hindu scriptures as some great person is fake and he actually is mentioned in Hindu scriptures as a illusionist pisach and reincarnation of the vile Tripuratapini who is archenemy of lord Shiva. In this point we shall make a comparative analysis by citing references from the Islamic scriptures and comparing them with Hindu scriptures to see if Islam is pisach cult and Mohammed a pisach or not.

A) Hindu scriptures: The Vishnu Puran Book 1 Chapter 5 while defining various creations of Bramha states the Bhut, Pisach, Rakshas, Yaksh and a few other creatures are of tamsic nature; these creatures have been stated to be of evil nature, ignorant, of uncontrolled senses and who always causes harm to others creatures. Also, a better idea of mindset of rakshasa and pisach can be found from the Manusmriti Chapter 3 verse 33-34 which describes the Raksasha and pisacha form of marriage stating Raksasha rite to be forcefully marrying a girl after killing her entire family and raping her while pisach rite means to rape a sleeping or intoxicated girl or one who is suffering from mental disorder and then marrying them; the core essence can be stated that Raksasha and pisach are vile by nature if their marriage customs are such evil. Also, even if we are to keep the scriptures aside the very term pisach in Sanskrit means a demon or evil entity in itself and rest is quite evident.

Also, the various Hindu scriptures states certain sins are unforgivable; the Manusmriti Chapter 11 verse 55, the Usana Smriti Chapter 8 verse 1 and the Chandogya Upanishad Chapter 5 Section 10 verse 9 states stealing gold, drinking alcohol, having sexual intercourse with wife of Guru, killers of bramhans and associating with people who have done any of these four acts are considered unforgivable sins; it is further stated in the Manusmriti Chapter 11 verses 56-59 gives a list of additional sins equivalent to the above mentioned sins. Apart from this the Hindu scriptures have been clear restriction on meat eating and even when it permits it gives a complete list of creatures that are forbidden; the Bramha Puran Chapter 113 verses 111-112 and the Manusmriti Chapter 5 gives a list of food forbidden under any circumstances and even where the scriptures allows animal slaughter there is a distinct process in which the animal is killed in one blow because it ensures minimal pain caused to the animals (the Manusmriti Chapter 4 verse 2 has clearly stated this). Also it must be noted that the Manusmriti Chapter 5 verse clearly 50 states that one who eats meat by inflicting cruelty on animals is same as a pisach. It must also be noted that beef is outright banned in Hindu scriptures and consuming it is punishable even by death as per the Atharva Veda Book 1 Hymn 16 verse 4 (I already made a detailed article on beef being forbidden as well).

Sexual slavery is also forbidden be it done on anyone as per the Apstambha Dharma Sutra Prasna 1 Patala 7 Khanda 20 verses 10-12 and the Manusmriti Chapter 10 verse 86 forbids slave trade outright and even though the Manusmriti Chapter 8 verse 415 has described 7 kinds of slaves nowhere in the entire Manusmriti or any Hindu scriptures is sex slavery even allowed and the Manusmriti Chapter 8 verse 364 forbids rape of any form outright and states it to be punishable by death. Also there are detailed instructions of treating servants and slaves in Hindu scriptures which stated they must be treated with respect and never quarreled with or forced (unless the slavery is inflicted as a form of punishment), since the topic of slavery alone is long I shall make a seperate writing on that topic as extending this any more shall be out of scope of the article.

B) Islamic scriptures: In the previous point we saw what the Hindu scriptures states about pisach, in this point we shall observe what the Islamic scriptures say about general behavior of Muslims and how it proves them to be pisach from the Hindu perspective. The Islamic process of animal slaughter is to bleed the animal slowly to death, also only a few things are forbidden in Islam which are animals with fangs, blood of creatures and swine as the Quran Surah 2 Ayat 173, Surah 5 Ayat 3, Surah 6 Ayat 145 states clearly and from these verses the halal procedure is drawn which involves slowly slicing throat and arteries of animals to bleed them to death while their alive (anyone can check halal guidelines); also cow is not forbidden from Muslims.

Apart from this, sex slavery is justified in Islam as per the Quran Surah 4 Ayat 24, Surah 16 Ayat 75, Surah 23 Ayat 5-6, Surah 33 Ayat 50, Surah Ayat, and Surah 70 Ayat 29-30 to cite a few references. Also, marrying slaves if they are believer is also allowed as per Surah 2 Ayat 221, Surah 24 Ayat 32 and all Islamic scholars unanimously agree that sexual slavery and marriage of slave women if they are believers is allowed (which again is Raksasha rite).


As stated in point 3 pisach in Hindu scriptures refers to a distinct group of creatures however it also refers to humans as well who posess such natures. The Hindu scriptures also states what activities makes one a pisach and ironically those are the same behavior that are rejected in Hindu scriptures which are endorsed or rather promoted in Islam. The Muslims are prescribed to eat like pisach behave like pisach and even live and die like pisach, they come from mleccha bhoomi and bear all the marks of pisach which is yet another prove of what the Bhavishya Puran states about Mohammed. Also in the given reference of Bhavishya Puran in this context also states that Mohamed shall try to corrupt every other religion and even other cults which is indirectly affirmed by the Quran in Surah 2 Ayat 75, Surah 2 Ayat 79, Surah 2 Ayat 159, Surah 2 Ayat 174, Surah 3 Ayat 78, Surah 4 Ayat 46, Surah Ayat, Surah 5 Ayat 13-15, Surah 6 Ayat 91, and Surah 7 Ayat 162 which claims that all scriptures that came before the Quran are corrupted and tries to assert this notion that all other non Muslim faith are polluted. Hence it can be concluded from every point that Islam indeed is a pisach cult and Mohammed is a pisach as whatever has been stated about Mohammed in the Bhavishya Puran has been proven true. Also, the Muslims are so insecure about their prophet's well being that they have to say "peace be upon him" whenever they mention his name clearly they know deep down their prophet was a pisach and went to hell and is being tortured by Yamraj personally hence they pray that may their demonic prophet may get peace one day.

Ps: All the references of the Quran are from the translation made by Imam Mustafa Al Khattab who is an authorized imam in hafz Quran (which is the Quan recognized by Arabia which is the very heartland of islam as authentic) so no one can reject what has been written here.


Credits of the writing and compilation belongs to Jalandhar.

  • Pisacha in the Bhavishya Purana is talking about Gabriel, not Muhammed. Nov 16, 2021 at 12:56
  • @Aupakarana Abhibhaa both the Gita press transition (which is the abridged version) and the translation by Babul Upadhay (which is the verse by verse translation) states its Mohammed and both these editions are quoted by the Dharmacharyas. Kindly show me some prove of it being reference to Gabriel your statements are in direct contradiction with acharyas and authorized people (not talking about myself). Nov 16, 2021 at 23:17
  • 1. How are even the best acharyas and authorized people about Hinduism expected to know the other religions well enough to recognise Gabriel without them also being well versed in them? This is not their area of expertise. 2. Muhammed is described as being fond of doing the work of Pishacha (with Pishacha being singular) which makes no sense to say if Muhammed or his followers are Pishacha. Nov 16, 2021 at 23:21
  • Because being a Dharmacharya means you must have knowledge of all the religions and sects without that knowledge how do u expect them to have a discussion or debate with authorities of other religions? Also most importantly the reference of Bhavishya Puran here is essentially a Hindu scripture and not Islamic one so your argument doesn't hold valid in the first place. Nov 22, 2021 at 13:27
  • It's a Hindu scripture about Islam and Christianity. Also Gabriel hardly ever gets brought up in debates, except for Jews and Christians (rightfully) pointing out that Gabriel in Islam behaves exactly like you would expect an evil angel to behave so no God would send him in such a manner to convince the believers of the other faiths. Nov 22, 2021 at 18:30

Shukracharya is a maharshi. There were two kinds of people at that time. Devas and Asuras. According to devas, asura means demon/evil. According to asura, they call 'devas' as 'daevas' which means demon/evil. These devas used to live in today's Northern Pakistan. Pariha is the place from where lord Rudra came. According to them, these Asuras are evil. Asuras used to live in Today's India. Devas thought these Asuras are evil and started destroying them and finally when they have reached Kasi(Varanasi), Lord Rudra realized that they are not evil but different. So, he decided to make Kasi as the holiest place and built many temples and declared that No war should ever happen in this place. All those remaining Asuras were taken to pariha and he gave a new life for them in pariha. Then, the devas came into Today's India and settled here itself.

These devas treated shukracharya as demon god because he used to stand on their side. Before shukracharya guided them, the asuras didn't know much about anything. No rules, No civilization etc. He came and made them follow rules set by him in the name of god. All the asuras started following him and so a strong religion has been built by using faith. As days passed the asuras started destroying temples and idols of other religions' gods stating there is only one god and you should follow only him.

Since Hindus treated shukracharya as evil, they destroyed almost all the details about him.Lord Ram likes Shukracharya and does the same but this time he sets only laws to be followed and doesn't do that in the name of god as laws can be updated, unlike faith. In Ramayana, you can find a little part about Shukracharya. In Shiva purana and Shiva Trilogy by Amish tripathi, you can get all the points I have mentioned here.


Let me make it simple for you. Completely forget that Allah is an Islamic origin name. Think of your Ishta or your favourite deity and imagine you are calling him Allah out of love. I would suggest to everyone who have submitted their own answers here to not think of Islam when explaining yourself and not to take this question very literal. Very big saints and Sufis like Bhagat Kabir, Sacho Sain Satram Das, Bhagat Kanwar Ram, Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai (A Muslim who is dearly loved by everyone including Hindus) have called Brahman by countless names. For example, Meharbaan which means the merciful, Sajrahn which is used to call Him in love, Saiban and so on. And all of the Hindu saints that I mentioned above have used the name Allah when mentioning Paramatma in bhajans.

What I'm trying to say is Allah is not limited to Islam. Allah is a beautiful name for Almighty Brahman. Allah is a name for Paramatma. To understand this, you do not need to look at a specific scripture because a scripture would never prevent someone from expressing his love to God in the form of different names. You can call Him "father" if you like or even "Ahura Mazda" Which is the name used for God in the Zoroastrianism religion that means "The Wise One". Always remember what matters more while praying to Him and calling Him with different names is your intentions. You can think of Lord Krishna or Lord Rama while saying Allah and He will lovingly listen to you. They both are One with Paramatma which is the reason I used "He" and not "They" in the previous sentence.

Bottom line is do not think of Allah as a God only limited to Islam. This is completely wrong as Paramatma is not limited to any religion. Think of Allah as a nickname for Paramatma which you call out of love. Just like you would call a loved one "Bablu".

  • 1) the question asks for scriptural references not personal opinions. 2) the post asks about position of Allah in Hinduism which means a comparative analysis is bound to be made otherwise there is no way to figure out position of a pisach. 3) the sufi cult was extremely genocidal by nature u may live in ur fairytale world of secularism but that's not the case for all. 4) alla ordains none except him must b worshipped so ur statement is even disrespecting Islam. Nov 17, 2021 at 4:33
  • 5) ishvar is called by many names doesn't justify calling him by the name used for a pisach deity how would u feel if I nickname your parents after Osama bin laden or a serial rapist? It's the same a devotee shall feel if their isth is nicknamed after a pisach deity. 6) the description of Allah in Quran states him to have one shin and 2 right hands kindly show me some Hindu God even remotely similar to this. 7) there is no Allah except Islam the concept of Allah his teachings everything has its root in Islam so trying to analyze alla out of Islam is impossible Nov 17, 2021 at 4:35
  • 8) if alla is not restricted to Islam then why does he say in the Quran to break idols extort non Hindus rape women enslave children and such nonsense against non Muslims? 9) what I said is documented evidence I can give exact references and Quran is the only way to know mindset of Allah not personal opinion that too of a non Muslim. 10) kindly read history first before u die in praising sufis in case u wish I shall provide references of this as well. Nov 17, 2021 at 4:38
  • Lastly Shri Ram destroyed adharmis and only scriptures are the source to know what the gods think about various issues the scriptures are the only documented evidences and far more important than ur personal opinions and scriptures say even Shri Ram says anti veidic people are evil and scriptures ordain Allah is pisach as per Hindu terms and comparative religious analysis. Reported ur answer for spreading misinformation and trying to divert topic Nov 17, 2021 at 4:41

Allah is arebic word meaning "Parabramha".

Allah = Means "The Only One to be Worshipped".

In Bhagvad Gita 9.23 Lord Shrikrishna says :

येऽप्यन्यदेवता भक्ता यजन्ते श्रद्धयान्विता: |
तेऽपि मामेव कौन्तेय यजन्त्यविधिपूर्वकम् || 23||

ye ’pyanya-devatā-bhaktā yajante śhraddhayānvitāḥ te ’pi mām eva kaunteya yajantyavidhi-pūrvakam

Meaning - O son of Kunti, even those devotees who faithfully worship other gods also worship me. But they do so by the wrong method.

Receiver of all prayers is Lord Shri Krishna.

So you can say , Allah i.e. Parabrahma is Lord Shri Krishna

  • I agree, this is mentioned in gita. Apr 9, 2021 at 22:56
  • "But they do so by the wrong method." doesn't seem to be a good translation. The adverb 'Avidhipūrvakam' means 'in the absence of fixed rules'.
    – Ritesh
    Nov 21, 2021 at 22:14

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .