PDA

View Full Version : L859 and Beit ha-Meqdash family



rzak
12-05-2020, 04:45 PM
This about Shallum Ben Hushiel, known to Arabs as Salman al-Farsi. There is a story that After the success of Salman al-Farsi’s strategy in the battle of the trench, a lively argument began between the two groups of the believers, the Muhajireen and the Ansar, with each of them claiming Salman belonged to their group and not to the other one. Muhammad arrived on the scene and heard the argument. He put an end to the argument by saying: "Salman is neither Muhajir nor Ansar. He is one of the Ahl al-Beit”
Ahl al Bait was understood as to mean “that he is member of prophet’s Household”, that he considered Shallum as a member of his family. But seemingly the true meaning of this was that there was a knowledge about his background that Shallum was “member of the [ruling] family of Beit [ha-Miqdash]” - Jerusalem.
His brother, Nehemiah ben Hushiel, was aided by Sassanians against Heraclius and after they took Jerusalem, he was appointed ruler of Jerusalem. However, short time after this Christians revolted against Jewish rule and Nehemiah and almost all his family was killed (note the similarity with death of Ali and Hussein). Only Shallum managed to escape. Sassanians would stop their support for the Jews (note the similarity with the betrayal of Kufans to Hussein). The period of Nehemiah was as short as that of Ali, and his death was as tragic as that of Hussein. Shallum’s son Yakov ben ٍShallum, known as Ka’ab al-ahbar, was appointed Exlirach of Jerusalem after the Arab conquest (hence his title Cheif Rabbi) , but was later deposed by Omar after the pig incident. He would later be known by his enemies supporters of the Christian faction as Ibn Saba’ or Ibn al-Sawda when he started his propaganda against the Christian faction (Othman, Mwayah) in favor of Ahl beit ha-meqdash as the rightful pretenders for the throne.

This introduction is to start discussion of L859. This all explain why Ahl ha-beit TMRCA is 1350 ago (all were killed in massacre of Jerusalem) and why their most close relatives from. 3000ypp are Askenazi Jews, with a huge gap in between.
Ironically, Abdel Malik ben Marwan (Ben Marwan = from mount Moriah in Jerusalem جبل المروة) who considered him self the second David and rebuilt the third temple, is from the Christian adversary faction. (Edited to avoid politics)

jkotl0327
12-05-2020, 04:56 PM
This about Shallum Ben Hushiel, known to Arabs as Salman al-Farsi. There is a history that After the success of Salman al-Farsi’s strategy in the battle of the trench, a lively argument began between the two groups of the believers, the Muhajireen and the Ansar, with each of them claiming Salman belonged to their group and not to the other one. Muhammad arrived on the scene and heard the argument. He put an end to the argument by saying: "Salman is neither Muhajir nor Ansar. He is one of the Ahl al-Beit”
Ahl al Bait was understood as to mean “that he is member Of prophet’s Household”, that he considered Shallum as a member of his family. But seemingly the true meaning of this was that there was a knowledge about his background that Shallum was “member of the [ruling] family of Beit [ha-Miqdash]” - Jerusalem.
His brother Nehemiah sided with Sassanians against Heraclius and after they took Jerusalem, he was appointed ruler of Jerusalem. However, short time after this Christians revolted against Jewish rule and Nehemiah and almost all his family was killed (note the similarity with death of Ali and Hussein). Only Shallum managed to escape. Sassanian would stop their support for the Jews (not the similarity with the betrayal of Kufans to Hussein). The period of Nehemiah was as short as that of Ali, and his death was as tragic as that of Hussein. Shallum’s son Yakov Ben Hushiel, known as Ka’ab al-ahbar, was appointed Exlirach of Jerusalem after the Arab conquest (hence his title Chefe Rabi) , but was later deposed by Omar after the pig incident. He would later be known by his enemies supporters of the Christian faction as Ibn Saba’ or Ibn al-Sawda when he started his propaganda against the Christian faction (Othman, Mwayah) in favor of Ahl beit ha-meqdash as the rightful pretenders for the throne.

This introduction is to start discussion of L859. This all explain why Ahl ha-beit TMRCA is 1350 ago (all were killed at massacre of Jerusalem) and why their most close relatives from. 3000ypp are Askenazi Jews, with a huge gap in between.
It could have significant consequences because this means that the Royal family of Jordan are the rightful guardians of the third temple built on Mount Moriah by Abdel Malik ben Marwan (Abdel Malik of Mount Moriah -جبل المروة- in Jerusalem)

I don't know too much about this but certainly plausible. You should know though that Nehemiah was an appointed exilarch, the rightful title went to Bustenai in 640 and his line. This has nothing to do with guardianship of Mount Moriah because that does not have to do with family line. Who has rightful guardianship there threatens to veer into politics so we shouldn't go there.

rzak
12-05-2020, 05:07 PM
Just ignore politics and let us comment only on genealogy/history.

rzak
12-05-2020, 05:16 PM
Bostanai was appointed by Omar as Ras al-Galut رأس الغالوت Rosh ha-Galut after he deposed Yakov. Omar had given order that any Muslim who would not bow to Ras al-Galut and say “peace upon you son of David” when his entourage passes in the street, will be severely punished. Followers of the Previous Galut would be known as Gulat غلات الشيعة (objective of Galut). No, ghulat does not mean extremists!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghulat

jkotl0327
12-05-2020, 09:29 PM
Bostanai was appointed by Omar as Ras al-Galut رأس الغالوت Rosh ha-Galut after he deposed Yakov. Omar had given order that any Muslim who would not bow to Ras al-Galut and say “peace upon you son of David” when his entourage passes in the street, will be severely punished. Followers of the Previous Galut would be known as Gulat غلات الشيعة (objective of Galut)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghulat

Don't know much about these specific policies of Omar, he was relatively good to the Jews in Israel I believe. My tradition sees it a bit differently from the Islamic if I understood this correctly. I read about it a bit. The 33rd exilarch was Hananya, this seems to be agreed upon. After his execution, for 50 years there was no exilarch until Bustenai, his son was appointed, in the Jewish tradition I think. You believe that the title rightfully went to Hananya's younger brother Hushiel, and then to his son Shallum and then to his son Yakov before Bustenai was appointed. I don't think the Jewish tradition recognizes these three as exilarchs if I'm not mistaken, whereas the Islamic tradition has respect for them and does view them this way.

rzak
12-05-2020, 09:50 PM
I am not discussing the rightful exilarch. I am aware of execution of Hananyah and appointment of Nehemiah by Khosrau. Histories of Yakov and Shallum exist in Jewish sources.
Nehemiah is from house of Ephraim son of Joseph, not of David, hence he was the would be Messiah ben Joseph (as Ali was the would be prophet according to Gulats).
I do not speak from Islamic point of view, but of historical and facts point of view.
I am here to discuss the true meaning of Ahl Beit [ha-Meqdash] and how it applies to L859.
Later I will write about the striking similarities between Nehemiah, Yakov, Shallum, Bostanai, the Karaites moviment and their schism and stories about Ahl al-Beit [ha-Meqdash]
Yes, Nehemiah was appointed, but he was considered the would be expected messiah by the Jewish world at that time. He was recognized by Jews and he did not seize his position. He was valiant fighter, leader and mystic, exactly as it is said about Ali ben Abi Taleb (who also was claimed to be the would be prophet by Ghulats).

An example of these similarities : Bostanai was given for wife the daughter of the last Persian king Yezdegerd (given to him by Omar in Jewish sources). In a problematic Islamic narrative, Hussein ben Ali ben abi Taleb was also given the daughter of Yesdegerd by Omar.

jkotl0327
12-06-2020, 04:33 AM
I don't think you can say the Jewish world viewed him as the expected messiah. One book, Sefer Zerubavel, considered by many Rabbis even at that time to be unreliable suggested that he was Moshiach ben Yosef but this was not universal opinion. Ultimately, looking at L859 I think your theory is plausible, in the sense that the Arab lineage descends from converted Jews. My question is, is there any specific evidence that L859 came from the specific Jews you are referring to, or just any Jews that may have converted to Islam at that time, whether in Israel or in the Arabian Peninsula?

rzak
12-07-2020, 01:59 PM
I don't think you can say the Jewish world viewed him as the expected messiah. One book, Sefer Zerubavel, considered by many Rabbis even at that time to be unreliable suggested that he was Moshiach ben Yosef but this was not universal opinion. Ultimately, looking at L859 I think your theory is plausible, in the sense that the Arab lineage descends from converted Jews. My question is, is there any specific evidence that L859 came from the specific Jews you are referring to, or just any Jews that may have converted to Islam at that time, whether in Israel or in the Arabian Peninsula?
By studying the historical events written about Ali/Salman (Shallum)/Ka'b al-Ahbar (Yakov) and those about House of Nehemia, I can see the parallels and similarities between the two, that surely are not accidental. The story about how Salman was described as member of family of Beit ha-Meqdash makes this more plausible. I find L859 the only plausible SNP for House of Nehemia/Shallum/Ali, given the TMRCA 1350ybp, descending from Jews with TMRCA 3000ybp.
Initially the followers of this movement were not called Muslims, but believers, and they could be Jewish or Christian. The Civil war probably was between those two factions, as well as between jewish factions later. For example, Uthman ben Affan was Christian. Here what Ibn Ishaq wrote about him 180 years later: .. Waraqa decided Christianity and followed the books of its teachers until he had obtained knowledge of the scripture. Ubaydullah remained in doubt until, after the revelation, he made profession of Islam and went to Abyssinia but when he arrived there he became a Christian and died thus, after having renounced Islam. third, Uthman, went to Byzantium, where he became a Christian and attained high office.."
Christian faction emerged victorious from the second civil war, with the ascension of Muawiyah and the Christian Umayyads (until conversion of Marwan).
But I think things were even more complicated. There was probably also conflict between Babylonian rabbinic Judaism and Sadducees, then the Schism of Karaite Judaism. Note this same story of Karaite Judaism is also told about Ali and his bloody conflict with Kara'at al-Quran (read Karaites - later known as Kharijites), who were his followers, but a schism occurred for not very clear reasons. But I need to see when first reference to the Kara'at was done to see if this is correct.
Another similarity is the battle of Siffin. There is a narration that Ka'b al-Ahbar (Yakov ben Shallum) said that in the same place a battle had occurred between Followers of Nehemia and thousands of Jewish souls were lost.

rzak
12-08-2020, 12:06 PM
My question is, is there any specific evidence that L859 came from the specific Jews you are referring to, or just any Jews that may have converted to Islam at that time, whether in Israel or in the Arabian Peninsula?

Similarity of history of House of Nehemiah and Ahl al-Beit indicates that it is about the same lineage.

During Abbasid era, historians Arabized the Jewish history and their internal conflicts and their conflicts with the Christians during Byzantine-Sassanid wars (Muawiyah I) and incorporated it into the Arabic history. Due to big time lapse and forgotten tradition and history, they sometimes used several names to refer to the same person, shifted some historic events in time, extended lives of some persons, sometimes invented fictitious personalities.

jkotl0327
12-08-2020, 01:58 PM
Similarity of history of House of Nehemiah and Ahl al-Beit indicates that it is about the same lineage.

During Abbasid era, historians Arabized the Jewish history and their internal conflicts and their conflicts with the Christians during Byzantine-Sassanid wars (Muawiyah I) and incorporated it into the Arabic history. Due to big time lapse and forgotten tradition and history, they sometimes used several names to refer to the same person, shifted some historic events in time, extended lives of some persons, sometimes invented fictitious personalities.

I see, certainly interesting reply I never paid much attention to this lineage in the past.

drobbah
12-08-2020, 03:03 PM
Christian Ummayads....you should write a Middle Eastern historical fiction novel series cause this is great material.Uthman ibn Affan was never a Christian either, him and his Banu Ummaya who were the most influential clan of Quraish were proud pagans prior to Islam.There's no where in traditional sources that claim Uthman was a Christian in fact he was one of the earliest staunchest Muslims who even married two daughters of Muhammad hence nicknamed Dhun-Nurayn

rzak
12-08-2020, 03:25 PM
Christian Ummayads....you should write a Middle Eastern historical fiction novel series cause this is great material.Uthman ibn Affan was never a Christian either, him and his Banu Ummaya who were the most influential clan of Quraish were proud pagans prior to Islam.There's no where in traditional sources that claim Uthman was a Christian in fact he was one of the earliest staunchest Muslims who even married two daughters of Muhammad hence nicknamed Dhun-Nurayn

Strange that you only contested the Christian Umayyads. The narration I quoted about the Christianity of Uthman is from Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah. Regarding Muawiyah I, the only archeological inscription left by him is in Greek and with a Cross, without any mention to any new religion. 41604

rzak
12-08-2020, 03:39 PM
Some Christian styled frescoes from Qusayr 'Amra built by Walid II, where he used to seclude himself. 4160541606

drobbah
12-08-2020, 03:42 PM
Strange that you only contested the Christian Umayyads. The narration I quoted about the Christianity of Uthman is from Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah. Regarding Muawiyah I, the only archeological inscription left by him is in Greek and with a Cross, without any mention to any new religion. 41604
Lol you are one of those guys, I see.So who created the Qur'an and when was it created? Clearly in your theory it wasn't compiled during Uthman's reign and Islam never existed

rzak
12-08-2020, 04:30 PM
Lol you are one of those guys, I see.So who created the Qur'an and when was it created? Clearly in your theory it wasn't compiled during Uthman's reign and Islam never existed

Who said Islam never existed? Ibn Ishaq clearly said that the prophet's companions could be Christians. Umayyads converted to Islam later.

Here are some photos from Palace of Hisham in Jericho, with some Christian paintings on the walls of the palace. These paintings would be a grave violation of Islamic rules. The first photo is a statue of Walid II from Kirbat el-Mafjar bathhouse
416084160941610

rzak
12-12-2020, 06:06 PM
The concepts of Occultation (Ghaiba) and Return (Raj'a) thought to be unique to Shiite Islam (moderate and Ghulat) about Ali and his descendants also are in fact taken from the story of prophet Menachem ben Ami'el, who supposedly had followed Nehemiah ben Hushiel, including the concept of being hidden under ground in a crypt until the Return (Raj'a)

Lupriac
02-10-2021, 04:28 PM
Bostanai was appointed by Omar as Ras al-Galut رأس الغالوت Rosh ha-Galut after he deposed Yakov. Omar had given order that any Muslim who would not bow to Ras al-Galut and say “peace upon you son of David” when his entourage passes in the street, will be severely punished. Followers of the Previous Galut would be known as Gulat غلات الشيعة (objective of Galut). No, ghulat does not mean extremists!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghulat

Where are you getting this from? Ghulat strictly comes from the Arabic "Ghali" (lit. excess(ive)). If you're going to revise history, at least do it in the more controversial matters.

rzak
02-11-2021, 12:18 AM
First of all “ghali” (غالي) does not mean excess-ive, but expensive or dear. To be Excessive is ghala (غَالَى ). It is obvious that Arabic is not your native language. And the subject of emergence of Shiism is the most controversial in Islamic history.

Lupriac
02-11-2021, 03:35 PM
The root goes -> هو] غالى]
("[He] Excessed/committed excess")
Caught me on an unintentional mistake there, but thank you for proving my point.

P.S: Still waiting for the sources!

rzak
02-11-2021, 07:33 PM
I do not approve you point. Gullat is derived from rosh ha galut not from the verb “to be excessive”. It is a completely different word. To think it is derived from the verb “to be excessive” is as bizarre as to think the word ka’aba is derived from cube (muka’ab), because it is cubic.

drobbah
02-11-2021, 07:56 PM
is as bizarre as to think the word ka’aba is derived from cube (muka’ab), because it is cubic.

They both share the same root verb, the vast majority of Arabic words come from a three letter simple past tense verb. مكعب comes from the word كعبة which means set heel.So basically الكعبة is the heel of the community (centre point of where they gather).There is nothing bizarre about what Lupriac said.

rzak
02-11-2021, 08:15 PM
They both share the same root verb, the vast majority of Arabic words come from a three letter simple past tense verb. مكعب comes from the word كعبة which means set heel.So basically الكعبة is the heel of the community (centre point of where they gather).There is nothing bizarre about what Lupriac said.
The vast majority of people think ka’aba is so called because it is cubic. Just google it.
I mentioned ka’aba because it is said to be related to Ahl Beit ha-Meqdash.
The word for rabbi in Arabic is Ka’ab (heel). This is because they entered barefooted to the holy of holiness (with heel touching the holy ground as in exodus 3:5). Ka’aba is derived form ka’ab which is derived from barefooted rabbi.

Aben Aboo
02-11-2021, 09:00 PM
The vast majority of people think ka’aba is so called because it is cubic. Just google it.
I mentioned ka’aba because it is said to be related to Ahl Beit ha-Meqdash.
The word for rabbi in Arabic is Ka’ab (heel). This is because they entered barefooted to the holy of holiness (with heel touching the holy ground as in exodus 3:5). Ka’aba is derived form ka’ab which is derived from barefooted rabbi.

"Ahl Beit Ha-Meqdash" has no sense in arabic: ال , "Al", is "the", but "أهل" , Ahl, is "Family".
Or maybe do you want to talk about inhabitants from Jérusalem?.
In arabic the other name for the Holy place, Harām Al Sharīf in Jerusalem,Al Qūds, is Al Bayt Al Maqdis in Arabic.
Rabb "الرب" is The Lord, The Master, but not "Ka'ab", كعب.

rzak
02-11-2021, 09:14 PM
"Ahl Beit Ha-Meqdash" has no sense in arabic: ال , "Al", is "the", but "أهل" , Ahl, is "Family".
So it's Al Bayt Al Maqdis in Arabic.
Rabb "الرب" is The Lord, The Master, not "Ka'ab", كعب.
Rabi and rabb are different words. Rabbi is a religious Jewish title that in Arabic was ka’ab at that time. Hence Ka’ab Al-ahbar means The Chief Rabbi

Aben Aboo
02-11-2021, 09:18 PM
Rabi and rabb are different words. Rabi is a religious Jewish title that means ka’ab in Arabic.

"Al Rabb", الرب just means The Master.
And ربي "Rabbī" just means "My" Master...
No, Al Ahbar is his surname, a tittle, not Ka3b....

rzak
02-11-2021, 09:20 PM
"Al Rabb", الرب just means The Master.
And ربي "Rabbī" just means "My" Master...
It seems you do not understand the subject. I am not saying ربي
I am saying رابي
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbi

rzak
02-11-2021, 09:29 PM
"Ahl Beit Ha-Meqdash" has no sense in arabic: ال , "Al", is "the", but "أهل" , Ahl, is "Family".
Or maybe do you want to talk about inhabitants from Jérusalem?.
In arabic the other name for the Holy place, Harām Al Sharīf in Jerusalem,Al Qūds, is Al Bayt Al Maqdis in Arabic.
Rabb "الرب" is The Lord, The Master, but not "Ka'ab", كعب.

In my opinion, the meaning of “Ahl al-beit” is not member of household of Mohammed, but “the family of Exilarch of Jerusalem” Nehemiah, the brother of Shallum, arabized as Salman (al-Farsi). People did not understand the words of the prophet

Aben Aboo
02-11-2021, 09:32 PM
It seems you do not understand the subject. I am not saying ربي
I am saying رابي
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbi

Ok, i see، رابي is the tittle of Jewish Teachers.
And Al Ahbar is the same, just another word in arabic.

rzak
02-11-2021, 09:35 PM
[QUOTE=rzak;747201]In my opinion, the meaning of “Ahl al-beit” is not member of household of Mohammed, but “the family of Exilarch of Jerusalem” Nehemiah, the brother of Shallum, arabized as Salman (al-Farsi). People did not understand the words of the prophet[/QUOTE
That time it was not knows to Arabs as al-qds, but was known as Aelia. Al-quds is later name derived from the Hebrew “beit ha Miqdash” which means the city of the Holy of Holiness.

Aben Aboo
02-11-2021, 09:36 PM
In my opinion, the meaning of “Ahl al-beit” is not member of household of Mohammed, but “the family of Exilarch of Jerusalem” Nehemiah, the brother of Shallum, arabized as Salman (al-Farsi). People did not understand the words of the prophet

Yeah all people did not understand words of the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم، but you yes, you understand...

rzak
02-11-2021, 09:37 PM
Ok, i see، رابي is the tittle of Jewish Teachers.
And Al Ahbar is the same, just another word in arabic.

Ka’ab al-ahbar was not a name, but a very high religious Jewish title. No wonder Omar (Omer) consulted him in everything before he fell out of favor with Omar.

rzak
02-11-2021, 09:40 PM
Yeah all people did not understand words of the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم، but you yes, you understand...
Yeah, this is very strange for me people did not get it. The prophet would not say he is a relative and member of his family, while he is not.

drobbah
02-11-2021, 09:42 PM
Islam is basically Judaism according to this guy lol

Aben Aboo
02-11-2021, 09:43 PM
Ka’ab al-ahbar was not a name, but a very high religious Jewish title. No wonder Omar consulted him in everything

I said the same, high tittle for Al Ahbar...
And do you know that Ka3b Al Ahbar this great Tabi'i was finally Muslim?

rzak
02-11-2021, 09:44 PM
No I am not saying this. But they played important rule. When historians wrote the Islamic history during Abbasid era, they incorporated them in the Islamic history as if they were muslims.

Aben Aboo
02-11-2021, 09:45 PM
I was not serious....Islam knows very well meaning of Ahl Al Bayt....it's not a new thing...

Aben Aboo
02-11-2021, 09:49 PM
No I am not saying this. But they played important rule. When historians wrote the Islamic history during Abbasid era, they incorporated them in the Islamic history as if they were muslims.

Ok i see...yeah this Big conspiracy of these Ummayads and Abbassids...
And you, you are alone to know the Truth right, isn't strange?

rzak
02-11-2021, 09:53 PM
Exactly. This is why I think L859 is the most logical clade for them. And for general Uqba ibn Nafi al-Fihrī al-Qurasyī (Akiva אקיבה)

rzak
02-11-2021, 10:00 PM
Ok i see...yeah this Big conspiracy of these Ummayads and Abbassids...
And you, you are alone to know the Truth right, isn't strange?
It is a genealogical hypothesis about important origin of L859 I wanted to share. It has nothing to do with religion or faith.

Aben Aboo
02-11-2021, 10:17 PM
It is a genealogical hypothesis about important origin of L859 I wanted to share. It has nothing to do with religion or faith.

You love conspiracies and say the same things like the Shi'a from Books with no sanad, mawdu3, no isnad sahih.
So you are not alone and not the first to say these tales.

rzak
02-12-2021, 01:10 AM
You love conspiracies and say the same things like the Shi'a from Books with no sanad, mawdu3, no isnad sahih.
So you are not alone and not the first to say these tales.

Sanad of Hadith is a strategy invented to defend lies invented 180-300 years after events these lies were intended to. A fact that everybody knows does not need “isnad ”
For example: if you say tower of Eiffel is in Paris, you do not need to prove it, because everybody knows it is correct. If an ignorant says tower of Eiffel is in Rome and nobody believes him, he is going to say that he heard his neighbour narrating from his cousin that he heard a third person narrating a thing he heard from the wife of a friend that while he was travelling he heard somebody saying the Eiffel Tower is in Rome or may be in Venice and Allah knows better. Sanad is a proof of weakness, not strength. And I do not know what you mean about what Shia say in their books.
If you do not agree with my suggestion about L859 and the family of an unfortunate excluded exilarch of Beit ha Meqdash, then it is up to you.

rzak
02-14-2021, 08:19 PM
Actually the conclusion that Shallum ben Hushiel and Salman Al-Farsi are the same personality is known to scholars for long time. Salman is Arabized Shallum and the title Farsi was due to his essential contribution to conquest of Persia. His military experience came from Byzantine–Sasanian War of 602–628 before he fled Jerusalem after execution of his family.
My suggestion is that looking onto the L859, it is obvious that not only Salman, but all house of Ali are related to Nehemiah. The striking similarities between history of house of Nehemiah and House of Ali prove this even further.

Squad
02-15-2021, 02:40 AM
I'm pretty sure L859 is the haplogroup to which Muhammad belonged. I have many reasons to think so, I just don't feel like explaining this to people who have no understanding of population dynamics.

What I can tell you is that FGC8712 is a hijazi/tihami line, this is very clear looking at the early expansion of FGC11 clades from southwestern Arabia.

Moderator
02-15-2021, 04:52 AM
A general reminder to keep things civil and refrain from ad hominem attacks. Also, please stay on topic and avoid making politicized comments and/or sweeping generalizations about any nationalities or cultural groups. Further violations of the Terms of Service will lead to infractions.

rzak
02-17-2021, 06:29 PM
I'm pretty sure L859 is the haplogroup to which Muhammad belonged. I have many reasons to think so, I just don't feel like explaining this to people who have no understanding of population dynamics.

What I can tell you is that FGC8712 is a hijazi/tihami line, this is very clear looking at the early expansion of FGC11 clades from southwestern Arabia.
First, Mohammad did not have known male descendants. When we are speaking about L859, we refer to descendants of man we know as Ali ben abi Taleb. Second, we see FGC8712 is under the ~3100ybp split we see in other lines between Arabs and Jews, with FGC8712 being the Jewish line. There is a big Ashkenazi line parallel to L859. Then in L859 you see a big interruption from 3100ybp until 1400ybp. Had this line been lived in Arabian peninsula all these years, we would have seen thousands of people in between (the only thing people did that time in Arabian peninsula was replicating themselves -no wars no pandemics). This interruption from 3100ybp to 1400ybp is because all the line was killed during Byzantine Sassanid wars in Palestine in Jerusalem when Sassanids, under pressure of their Iraqi/Persian subjects (equivalent to Kufans) abandoned Nehemiah, and Jerusalem Jewish inhabitants were killed by Christians (equivalent to Ummayads), with only one person managing to escape death (founder of Ahl al-Beit line - Beit [ha Meqdash] line)

Squad
02-21-2021, 05:07 AM
First, Mohammad did not have known male descendants. When we are speaking about L859, we refer to descendants of man we know as Ali ben abi Taleb. Second, we see FGC8712 is under the ~3100ybp split we see in other lines between Arabs and Jews, with FGC8712 being the Jewish line. There is a big Ashkenazi line parallel to L859. Then in L859 you see a big interruption from 3100ybp until 1400ybp. Had this line been lived in Arabian peninsula all these years, we would have seen thousands of people in between (the only thing people did that time in Arabian peninsula was replicating themselves -no wars no pandemics). This interruption from 3100ybp to 1400ybp is because all the line was killed during Byzantine Sassanid wars in Palestine in Jerusalem when Sassanids, under pressure of their Iraqi/Persian subjects (equivalent to Kufans) abandoned Nehemiah, and Jerusalem Jewish inhabitants were killed by Christians (equivalent to Ummayads), with only one person managing to escape death (founder of Ahl al-Beit line - Beit [ha Meqdash] line)

I know he did not have male heirs, doesn't change the claim that he is L859+. And there's also two other parallel lines to L859, bothbof which are arabian. One is located in the Tihama coast, the other in the UAE tribe of banu salih who claim descent from the Tihama as well. FGC8712 is thus very most likely a hijazi line

What are you talking about, many lines don't manage to become super common, there even rarer arabian lines than L859. P56 is arabian but barely exist anymore in Arabia, whereas it is very common in Ethiopia

rzak
02-21-2021, 01:25 PM
Islamic history of events was written hundreds of years later. The book of ibn Hisham (d. 218 A.H. 833AD) the earliest reserved work about Sirah was written almost 180 years after the events. He wrote it on order of Al-Amin the 6th Abbasid caliph. He wrote it according to Abbasid political agenda. He wrote he took his information from another earlier work by Ibn Hisham (that has not survived). Even though, he deleted and edited many events he thought were “unbelievable for a man in his normal mind”. He also stated he deleted all Isra’iliyyat! (Why? Did he just arabize Jewish events)
The earliest historian was Al-Waquidi (d 207 A.H. – 823 AD). Here what later historians said about him:
1) Al-Shafi’i (d. 204 A.H.): "All the books of al-Waqidi are lies. In Medina there were seven men who used to fabricate authorities, one of which was al-Waqidi."
2) Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241 A.H.): "He is a liar, makes alternations in the traditions"
3) Al-Nasa’i (d. 303 A.H.): "The liars known for fabricating the hadith of the Messenger of Allah are four. They are: Arba’ah b. Abi Yahya in Medina, al-Waqidi in Baghdad, Muqatil b. Sulayman in Khurasan and Muhammad bin Sa’id in Syria."
4) Al-Bukhari (d. 256 A.H.) said "al-Waqidi has been abandoned in hadith. He fabricates hadith"
5) Al-Dhahabi (d. 748 A.H.): "Consensus has taken place on the weakness of al-Waqidi"
6) Abu Hatim Muhammad ibn Idris al-Razi (d. 277 A.H.): "He fabricates hadith. We have abandoned his hadith"
7) Ali ibn al-Madini (d. 241 A.H.): "He fabricates Hadith"
Ibn ‘Adi (d. 365 A.H.): "His traditions are not safe and there is danger from him (in accepting his traditions)"

In fact every later historian claimed he knew the history better than those who lived before him, and accused those who preceeded him that they did not know what they were saying or that they were liars

This is to explain why these historians intentionally or intentionally changed names, gave several names to same people as if they were different personalities, deleted events and invented others.

Here I will only write about house of Ali ben Abi Taleb. Even here some sources say this is not his original name and his name was changed.
Actually I do not care if these are fairy tales or legends, but why they are similar?

Here I will start:

1) Ali ben abi Taleb also means “Elevated he - who - has disciples”. A title suggestive of an academic. He was based in Iraq the site of 2 academies.

2) Hussein ben Ali married the daughter of the last Persian king, the same one that Bostanai married. Both Islamic and Jewish sources say she was offered to Hussein and Bostanai, respectively, by Omar (or by Ali)

3)..

rzak
02-21-2021, 07:18 PM
3) Ali's mother was Fatimah Bint Assad. Adoa Bet Assad was the other recognized wife of Bostanai

4) Children of Bostanai with the Persian prince were not recognized as meritorious of the hereditary title of Exilarch, as their mother was considered to be a slave, while children of bint Assad were considered legitimate for title exilarch. Descendants of Ali-Hussein were not succeeded in attract recognition and support for their cause

Aben Aboo
02-21-2021, 09:54 PM
Lol no comment...don't make your propaganda, just stay on the DNA science...

rzak
02-21-2021, 10:28 PM
Lol no comment...don't make your propaganda, just stay on the DNA science...

To interpret genealogy we need to know history

I am trying to reconcile between:
1) The Hebrew titles of the line: Ha-Shem and people of Beit (Meqdash)
2) similarities between what we know about them and what we know about Bostanai
3) what we know about the fate of house of Nehemiah ben Hushiel during Byzantine Sassanid war 1400ybp
4) what we know about the fate of sons of Bostanai with his Persian wife
5) How these personalities were mixed or mistaken 200 years later by historians
6) Identification of Slaman Al-Farsi with Shallum ben Hushiel, the brother of Nehemiah
7) what we know about Karaites and what we know about Quran Readers (al-karra’un) who revolted against authority of Ali
8) identification of ka'ab al-Ahbar with Yaakov ben Shallum and with Ibn Saba' / Ibn al-Sawdaa'

AND

1) the interruption from 3100ybp to 1400ybp seen in L859 and how it applies to the previous items.

Would it be explained by the events in Jerusalem 1400ybp during the Byzantine Sassanid war (Jewish revolt against Heraclius and capture of Jerusalem by Nehemiah, Christians revolt, mascare against Jews, retake of Jerusalem by Shahrbaraz's forces)?

Has anybody other explanation to the interval 3100 -1400ybp?