Who Created Brahma?

Table of Contents

Introduction

Brahma is traditionally described in Hinduism as the creator of the universe, one of the Trimurti along with Vishnu (the preserver) and Shiva (the destroyer). Temples, texts, and myths depict Brahma as the origin of all life, the cosmic architect, and the being responsible for the very creation of existence itself.

But here’s a question that makes these stories immediately suspicious: If Brahma created everything, who created Brahma?

This question leads to a paradox that highlights the human origin of these myths. The stories of Brahma are inconsistent, illogical, and often contradictory. They reveal more about cultural imagination, social control, and storytelling than divine truth.

The Mythical Stories of Brahma’s Creation

According to Hindu Puranas:

Brahma emerged from a lotus that grew from the navel of Vishnu.
In some versions, he is self-born, appearing from a cosmic egg (Hiranyagarbha).
Other myths describe him as being created by Shiva or another supreme cosmic force.

Notice the problem? Every story tries to establish Brahma as the origin or a product of another god, creating a logical loop. If he is the creator of all, he cannot simultaneously be created. If he is created by someone else, then that someone else is effectively the “real creator.”

The Infinite Regress Problem

This is where logic fails in Hindu mythology:

Brahma creates the world.
But Brahma is created by Vishnu or a cosmic force.
Then who created Vishnu or the cosmic force?

This creates an infinite regress: every creator must have a creator, and the stories never reach a true origin. Asking “Who created Brahma?” inevitably leads to “Who created the creator?” and “Who created that creator?” This cycle never ends.

In philosophy, a first cause or unmoved mover is necessary to stop the infinite regress. Hindu mythology, in the case of Brahma, fails to identify this first cause, exposing its human-made nature.

Human-Made Stories

The stories about Brahma were likely:

Passed down orally for centuries, changing with each storyteller.
Inserted into Puranas by priests to give a framework for cosmology.
Used to justify Brahminical authority, because understanding creation elevated religious leaders as interpreters of divine law.

There is no historical or scientific evidence that Brahma ever existed. Unlike the physical universe, Brahma’s stories exist only in texts, myths, and cultural memory.

The Logical Inconsistency

Brahma myths are riddled with contradictions:

Self-born vs. Created: Some texts claim he is self-born, others that he is created by Vishnu or Shiva.
Supreme Creator or Subordinate: If he is the supreme creator, why would he need a source or parent god?
Moral Paradoxes: Brahma’s stories include immoral actions, such as creating humans and then interfering in their lives for favoritism, punishment, or lustful reasons.

If Brahma is supposed to be divine and perfect, why do his stories depict him with human flaws? This further demonstrates the human origin of these myths.

Why the Stories Are Fraudulent

No Evidence: There is no archaeological, historical, or astronomical proof of Brahma. Temples dedicated to Brahma are extremely rare, unlike Vishnu or Shiva.
Contradictory Tales: Texts contradict each other on who created Brahma, when he appeared, and how he functions.
Logical Paradox: Infinite regress makes Brahma’s existence impossible as a literal creator.
Cultural Manipulation: These myths were used to enforce social hierarchy, justify ritual authority, and control belief systems.

In other words, the myths of Brahma are a clever storytelling system, designed to appear divine but ultimately functioning as fraudulent cultural construction.

The Problem of Belief

Humans are naturally drawn to stories explaining existence. Myths about Brahma serve psychological and social purposes:

Answering the “Why are we here?” question.
Providing a narrative for rituals, festivals, and worship.
Reinforcing priestly or caste authority.

But these stories are not evidence. They are faith-based narratives with no grounding in reality. Believing in them as literal truth is like believing in an unverified legend passed down over millennia.

Comparisons with Observed Reality

Creation vs Observation: Modern science shows the universe follows physical laws. Brahma’s story of creating life, the cosmos, and humans contradicts these observations.
Temporal Contradictions: Myths describe timelines of millions of years, avatars, and cycles that are inconsistent with historical or geological evidence.
Anthropomorphism: Brahma and other gods act like humans, they have desires, make mistakes, and quarrel. A true creator would not need human traits.

Humor in the Myth

The stories of Brahma are almost comically human:

He forgets details, needs help from Vishnu, or emerges from a lotus.
He is rarely worshipped despite being the “creator,” while Vishnu and Shiva dominate devotion.
Festivals and temples celebrate beings with questionable moral behavior.

Imagine a “creator of the universe” struggling with jealousy, desire, and incompetence. The absurdity highlights the fictional and cultural origin of these stories.

Infinite Regress and the “Real Creator”

At some point, logical thinking forces the question: if Brahma was created, then who created his creator? And who created that creator?

The stories never answer this.
This is why belief in Brahma requires faith without evidence.
Rational examination shows that these myths cannot point to a true, singular, ultimate creator.

Thus, Brahma myths are human-made explanations for the unknown, not divine revelation.

Brahma in Society

Despite being the “creator,” Brahma has few temples or rituals dedicated to him. Why?

His stories were largely used by priests to teach morality, cosmology, and obedience rather than encourage worship.
Brahma’s lack of prominence shows that even within Hinduism, his divinity is less practical and more symbolic.

This further supports the argument that Brahma is fictional and constructed.

Conclusion

The question “Who created Brahma?” exposes the illogical and fabricated nature of Hindu creation myths:

Brahma cannot be both creator and created.
Infinite regress makes literal belief impossible.
Stories are morally inconsistent and illogical.
There is no historical or physical evidence.
Myths serve cultural, social, and psychological purposes, not divine truth.

In short, Brahma’s stories are human inventions, not divine fact. They are fascinating cultural narratives, full of creativity, imagination, and sometimes humor, but believing them as literal truth is illogical.

The myth stops nowhere. For every “creator,” there is a “creator’s creator,” and eventually, the cycle does not reach the real source. Humans have told these stories for centuries, and the fraud lies in presenting imagination as absolute truth. Brahma may be a god in stories, but he cannot be real as described, and the paradox of his creation proves it.