PDA

View Full Version : Can Indians and Pakistanis be Syed?



Ali16
05-13-2016, 02:38 PM
An interesting question.

parasar
05-13-2016, 02:54 PM
Member: JATT2016 believes "... Indians/Pakistanis cannot be syed. ..." What are his qualifications and on what basis do you make that statement? Does anyone else have anything to add to help further genealogical knowledge in the Indian subcontinent? I would appreciate your thoughts.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6455-Haplogroup-J-CTS2906-Punjabi-Jatt/page11&highlight=j-cts2906

9278

Yes I have no doubt many Syeds in India are of Arab (mainly Iraqi, and some Syrian) descent. Families of Arabian peninsular descent are also noticed.
There are even supposedly Brahman families of Arab descent (cf. Dutta Mohyals).

Coldmountains
05-13-2016, 04:20 PM
I remember reading a study about Afghan Y-DNA and all tested Arab Afghans in this study had local Central Asian/South Asian Y-DNA. I think the great majority but of course not all Syeds in South Asia are either local people or have just indirect arab ancestry. It had many advantages to claim this kind of origin in the past.

Coldmountains
05-13-2016, 04:22 PM
Yes I have no doubt many Syeds in India are of Arab (mainly Iraqi, and some Syrian) descent. Families of Arabian peninsular descent are also noticed.
There are even supposedly Brahman families of Arab descent (cf. Dutta Mohyals).

Can you please tell more about the Arab origin of some Brahmin communities? I not heard yet that Brahmins were positive for any Arab Y-DNA. Even in Afghanistan there is zero or less than 0.01% of it.

parasar
05-13-2016, 05:35 PM
Can you please tell more about the Arab origin of some Brahmin communities? I not heard yet that Brahmins were positive for any Arab Y-DNA. Even in Afghanistan there is zero or less than 0.01% of it.

The Dutta Mohyals I had mentioned in my post claim an Arab connection. The story they tell is that after the (maha)Bharata war, descendants of Aswathama left India for Arabia and returned to India after their defeat in the battle of Karbala. http://watandost.blogspot.com/2008/01/brahmans-in-karbala.html

There is a Chibba Mohyal on Dr_McNinja's list who is R1a1, but Chibbas were from Sindh so does not tell us much.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xm5xp5Qxk8N8kSortwFU5Qr-KWCGNKsYgdT5Mnv8kDc/edit#gid=0

Another from Sialkot is E1b1b1a (not sure which Mohyal clan, except that he is not a Bali Mohyal).

khanabadoshi
05-13-2016, 06:18 PM
This study is from 2010: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/mace-lab/publications/articles/2010/Belle_AAS10_Syed.pdf
As well as this study, looking for Arab lineage in general: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2859343/

There was another in-depth study, but I can't find it.

bol_nat
05-14-2016, 07:32 PM
Yes I have no doubt many Syeds in India are of Arab (mainly Iraqi, and some Syrian) descent. Families of Arabian peninsular descent are also noticed.
There are even supposedly Brahman families of Arab descent (cf. Dutta Mohyals).

Syed is someone who is direct decendent of Muhammad (PBUH) through his grandsons and not just arab decendents.

jatt2016
05-15-2016, 02:41 PM
Syed is someone who is direct decendent of Muhammad (PBUH) through his grandsons and not just arab decendents.

I am in agreement with what you said. It is impossible to verify on scientific grounds , if anybody claims to be syed today. Nobody knows what Y haplogroups the Prophet belong too.
Even, to establish an arab ancestry for a person from South Asia is ambiguous as different ethnic groups can have the same haplogroups.

Ali16
05-15-2016, 03:03 PM
Even though the studies cannot prove someone is a Syed, every study so far has overwhemingly proven that most self-identied Syeds are imposters.

saltranger
05-18-2016, 11:31 AM
Most Arabian Sharifs (Syeds) belong to J1c Y Haplo.

Ali16
05-18-2016, 12:55 PM
I don't think that contradicts my statement. Thank you for your unscientific observation.

Cyaxares
05-18-2016, 01:47 PM
I don't see why not. Since being a Syed depends on your paternal lineage. I've seen plenty of Seyyeds amongst Pakistani Shias and Indians. Your paternal Y-DNA would have to be J1c3* for you to make that claim.

Ali16
05-18-2016, 01:52 PM
You have no basis to make that statement. The key holder of the Kaaba is R1a. Quraish is not and was not homogeneous. The groups you are looking out clearly have biased results as they push everyone else out of their project.

Cyaxares
05-18-2016, 01:59 PM
Yes but the Prophet wasn't:

"Arab DNA forums and DNA Project admins reported that two test results of members of the Jordanian royal family (private kits) are positive for L859. The possible Y-DNA ancestor is Abdul Muttalib (497-578), the grandfather of Islamic prophet Muhammad (570-632). The haplogroup J1-P58-L147.1-L858-L859 can be observed in other members of Hashemites clan, founded by the great-grandfather of Muhammad and also within the larger paternal Quraish tribe. No descendant by classical genealogy (Hashemite, Sharif, Abbasid) of Abdul Muttalib has published positive testing for L859."

http://isogg.org/wiki/Y-DNA_famous_people#Mohammed.2C_Prophet.2C_Hashemite s.2C_probably_related_Y-DNA

Ali16
05-18-2016, 02:04 PM
Maybe the real descendants are more intelligent and don't have a cause, but to be oppressed by the "Quraish" again. Nobody knows the DNA of the Prophet (pbuh).

Cyaxares
05-18-2016, 02:07 PM
Yeh you are describing Quraish. Whilst Hashemites were a tribe within Quraish. The Ummayids aren't descendants of the Prophet.

Ali16
05-18-2016, 02:11 PM
The Abbasids and Umayyads should have the same Y-DNA.

Cyaxares
05-18-2016, 02:14 PM
We don't know the DNA of the Prophet but according to the scientists we know the Y-DNA of his paternal grandfather:

"J1e is the genetic signature of the Hashemites, a clan to which the Prophet Mohammed belonged. The current King of Jordan, Abdullah II, is a Hashemite descendant, and one of the better-known living descendants of the Prophet Mohammed. Just how many will test their own DNA to find a link remains to be seen, officials say. "When it comes to the Prophet, I'd rather live in doubt than receive certainty that I'm not related to him," said Sheikh Furber."

"Because Ali and the Prophet Mohammed share the same grandfather, their paternal DNA is identical. Descendants can confirm their lineage when they reflect similar patterns. Most Islamic scholars agree there is nothing objectionable about testing individual DNA - and countries such as the UAE encourage DNA use in criminal forensics - but there are complex rulings when it comes to using DNA in court for establishing lineage."

http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/dna-could-illuminate-islams-lineage#page1

Plus I think it makes more logical sense since J1 is Pred in the Arab Peninsula. The Sayyed line descends directly from Imam Ali(AS), if I remember correctly.

Ali16
05-18-2016, 02:15 PM
These cites are not authoritative in this matter. DNA could illuminate, yes, but it may not.

Cyaxares
05-18-2016, 02:17 PM
Why not?

Ali16
05-18-2016, 02:17 PM
Has your DNA proven you are Persian?

Ali16
05-18-2016, 02:20 PM
Why not?

Because no qualified genetic researcher who has studied this subject has published results because they know that by rushing to make a claim, they will create chaos in the Islamic community. That's why I don't say J1 or any other haplogroup is the haplogroup. We just don't know. Now, you may feel that you know something, but it doesn't mean that you do know something.

Cyaxares
05-18-2016, 02:21 PM
You didn't answer my question.

Cyaxares
05-18-2016, 02:24 PM
This is quite interesting:

"Quraysh & Banu-Hashem (FGC8712+, L859+, FGC10500+, DYS485=14)- Background

Administrators
Adnan Khamjan [email protected] , Group Administrator
[email protected] , Group Co-Administrator
[email protected] , Group Co-Administrator
[email protected] , Group Co-Administrator
Mohsin Sh. [email protected] , Group Co-Administrator
Surnames
Alawi, Hashemi, Qurayshi
Background
This project intends to track down individuals, and their Y-DNA kits, who tested positive for FGC8712, L859, FGC8703, FGC10500, ZS2094, FGC40136, FGC10502, CTS8308, FGC8702, FGC9578, ZS5448, ZS2102, and/or L615 markers.

This projects concluded that:
* L859+ individuals are descendants of Quraysh tribe
* FGC8703+ individuals are descendants of Hashem clan
* FGC10500+ individuals are descendants of Imam Ali (A.S.)

Below is the most updated phylogenetic tree of the Quraysh (& FGC8712) Project:
http://www.qur.co/filedata/fetch?id=1715

Hashem tribe emerged in west Arabia (Hijaz) and migrated to the south (Yemen) or to the north east (Levant, Mesopotamia, & Persia). Sayeds & Sahrifs with well known lines of succession tested positive for L859 and FGC10500 markers. Here is the statistical and geographical distribution of current Quarshi, Hashemi, and Alawite kits:
http://www.qur.co/filedata/fetch?id=1734

A Y-STR model of Imam Ali bin abi-Taleb (A.S.) was generated based on the 100+ available Alawite kits:
http://www.qur.co/filedata/fetch?id=851

FGC8712 and its downstream SNPs are defined as a branch of the greater J1 phylogenetic tree (characterized by the M267 SNP-marker):
http://genogenea.com/J-M267/tree

Prophets Ibrahim (Abraham), Ismael (Ishmael), Ishac (Isaac), Haroon (Aaron), and Mohamad (PBUH&P) are considered major forefathers in the J1 phylogenetic tree. Today, many groups and families claim to be direct male-descendants of these respected forefathers but they find themselves positioned in distant genetic periods. Thus far, FGC8712 is the only SNP that maintain two parallel descending lines with: one line is 100% Ishamelite-Adnanite (~100 kits) and the other one is 100% Jacobite (~30 kits). The age of FGC8712 subclade is believed to be between 3400 and 4200 yBP (years before present).

Therefore, individuals who tested positive for this respected Y genetic marker (FGC8712) are encouraged to join the Quraysh & Bani Hashem project.

To browse all Y-SNPs and understand their positions on the Y-DNA chromosome, please use the ISOGG YBrowse Tool:
http://ybrowse.org/gb2/gbrowse/chrY/?"


I'm not sure what you mean by choas in the islamic community.

Ali16
05-18-2016, 02:27 PM
It is quite interesting for me, but for different reasons. Well, if they say that the Jordanian royal family is not Syed (which is likely true), that may create one type of chaos... There is a joke that Kazuo Morimoto recited that once the Moroccan King went to visit the Shah, the Shah was in a convertible. The Moroccan King asked, isn't this dangerous and risky. The Shah said I am sitting next to a Syed, we will be protected. And the Moroccan King must have been really concerned knowing the reality. Royal families and leaders have forged genealogies, just ask Saddam Hussein.

khanabadoshi
05-18-2016, 02:33 PM
We don't know the DNA of the Prophet but according to the scientists we know the Y-DNA of his paternal grandfather:

"J1e is the genetic signature of the Hashemites, a clan to which the Prophet Mohammed belonged. The current King of Jordan, Abdullah II, is a Hashemite descendant, and one of the better-known living descendants of the Prophet Mohammed. Just how many will test their own DNA to find a link remains to be seen, officials say. "When it comes to the Prophet, I'd rather live in doubt than receive certainty that I'm not related to him," said Sheikh Furber."

"Because Ali and the Prophet Mohammed share the same grandfather, their paternal DNA is identical. Descendants can confirm their lineage when they reflect similar patterns. Most Islamic scholars agree there is nothing objectionable about testing individual DNA - and countries such as the UAE encourage DNA use in criminal forensics - but there are complex rulings when it comes to using DNA in court for establishing lineage."

http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/dna-could-illuminate-islams-lineage#page1

Plus I think it makes more logical sense since J1 is Pred in the Arab Peninsula. The Sayyed line descends directly from Imam Ali(AS), if I remember correctly.


I really don't understand why there is so much drama regarding any of this. What you posted is rather agreed upon. The King of Jordan and his family are among the only people living with whom there is no contest to his lineage. So while there is no way to prove one is Sayyid, one can certainly exclude who isn't. Even if you have the same haplogroup as the King of Jordan, all that proves is that you are from the line of Hashemites. However, if you aren't even of the larger Hashemite line, how can you justify a claim to being Sayyid? You can't. The Arabs were very tribal, and their male lines should produce relevant sub-clades based on that. At the very least, you have to be J1 to entertain the idea of a Sayyid lineage -- and even that I think is too broad. Even if you had the exact same subclade as the King of Jordan you can't be sure -- only one of those lines is from the Prophet and that too via his daughter's marriage to Ali -- so it isn't proof-positive for being Sayyid. There is no direct male descendant from the Prophet, the goal is to have lineage to Ali -- but Ali had 3 other brothers, there is no way to know if you are descendant of Ali's brothers or cousins even if you matched a specific subclade.

EDIT: Additionally, since many Sayyid's have a practice of only marrying other Sayyids, then technically all the mtDNAs should be the same and have a direct lineage to Fatima... which be even far more proof of relation to the Prophet, even via Fatima's sisters. However, good luck finding same mtDNAs even among 1st cousins of a Sayyid family.

Ali16
05-18-2016, 02:53 PM
I don't believe any member of the Jordanian royal family has publicized their genetic results. If they have, show me who it was.

AJL
05-18-2016, 03:03 PM
Prophets Ibrahim (Abraham), Ismael (Ishmael), Ishac (Isaac), Haroon (Aaron), and Mohamad (PBUH&P) are considered major forefathers in the J1 phylogenetic tree. Today, many groups and families claim to be direct male-descendants of these respected forefathers but they find themselves positioned in distant genetic periods. Thus far, FGC8712 is the only SNP that maintain two parallel descending lines with: one line is 100% Ishamelite-Adnanite (~100 kits) and the other one is 100% Jacobite (~30 kits)."

The trouble with this analysis is one would also have to compare to other descendants of Jacob/Yakub: Ashkenazi, Mizrahi, and Sephardi Jews; Samaritans; and Karaites. Palestinian Christians are probably just as suitable a group to look at.

There is not one single haplogroup in any of these groups, but rather all have a similar mix of yDNA with some slight differences.

Even descendants of Aron/Harun are all supposed to be descendants of Levi. I belong to the largest subclade among Levi, which is not J1. J1 is surprisingly scarce in Levi, in fact, with a fair bit of G and R2 and R1b and E-M68 combined.

In short, taking a literal interpretation of Biblical and Quranic tribal structures and genealogies is probably not compatible with DNA results.

We are then left with two broad possibilities.

The first one – and the one I prefer – is that to some degree the descriptions and ideas of of tribal structure and genealogy must be regarded as metaphorical and slightly fluid. We have a similar situation with other clan-based cultures, like Celts. A Scots or Irish clan that all claims descent from a single king or tribal leader is also rarely of one haplogroup. This is probably because it was possible to ally oneself to a clan leader based on common geography, or proving loyalty by fighting in battle against a common foe. One could become a "son" of the tribal leader through other ways than birth.

Also, leaders of a group need not have been born into a group and so might not have the same haplogroup as the bulk of tribal members. The last two royal families of England were German (Windsor, was Saxe-Coburg–Gotha; and Hanover). The ones before them were Scottish (House of Stuart), briefly Dutch (William of Orange), Welsh (Tudors), and French (Plantagenets).

The second possibility, if you wish to take everything absolutely literally, is that most clans have at least as many impostors as real descendants.

Now I can see why there would be a benefit to claiming descent from the Prophet even if it were not true. But at the same time if every clan might have more impostors than real descendants, we are left with jatt2016's point that we simply cannot be certain what haplogroup any Prophet was, and the fact that any haplogroup constitutes the majority can't be used as evidence that it was the haplogroup of a historical prophet.

(At the same time it seems rather unlikely that Sadah anywhere would not have a haplogroup typical for Arabia.)

Ali16
05-18-2016, 03:06 PM
Thanks, even JATT2016 is questioning his Jewish Punjabi roots. Instead of J-CTS2906, he may be F, H, R, or J.

There is a law in Jordan that says you should not provide any information about the royal family when it is not an official statement.

Cyaxares
05-18-2016, 03:23 PM
AJL what you say is true. I think however in relation to the Sayyed line is that the idea is genealogically they have written down there lines to prove they descendant from the Prophet via Imam Ali. Thought I guess yeh to know for sure you'd have to test all the sayyeds' Y-DNA to be sure.

khanabadoshi
05-18-2016, 03:44 PM
The debate only really exists because in the context of South Asia there is a certain status attached to the lineage. If many Sayyid's are going to hide behind the logic that one can't say for certain that they aren't Sayyid, then the same onus applies to them. They can't prove that they are Sayyid. If you are Sayyid R1a-L657 sitting in Lahore, I'm going to be inclined to believe you aren't Sayyid, and find it strange when you say I can't marry your daughter. The entire point being is that obviously either there is no such pristine line OR there are many imposters, meaning the exclusivity practiced by Sayyids in the context of South Asia is based on nothing. The title, Sayyid, uses lineage to justify current status and command a certain respect. Keeping Sayyid lineage pure is ironically the most caste-like practice among all of South Asia's Muslims directly mirroring Brahmin practices. This obviously presents a strange situation -- the "most Muslim" of people in South Asia are simultaneously the "most Vedic" in terms of keeping their lines pure. I would go so far as to say, if castes are still relevant among the Muslims of South Asia, it is very much because the Sayyid aspect keeps them relevant.

Ali16
05-18-2016, 03:50 PM
I'm in agreement that most claimants wherever they are from are imposters. And, it is not necessarily that individuals fault. They have been given that information by someone else. I was just saying you can't make a blanket statement that there can be NO Syeds in India and Pakistan.

279676 Al Shaibi Al Qurashi /آل الشيبي القرشي R-Y30

http://www.arabnews.com/saudi-arabia/sadin-kaaba-key-keeper-keeping-tradition-alive

Is this why you say R-L657?

AJL
05-18-2016, 03:58 PM
Whether the claim is justified or not at some level the human toll of maintaining the line must be huge, given the number of Sadah suffering various genetic diseases. I went to graduate school with a Pakistani Sayiddi, unfortunately she has a rare blood disease. Such things are, I understand, very common among South Asian Sadah because of repeated cousin marriage.

Ali16
05-18-2016, 04:01 PM
The point is there is no intermarriage, as they are not related because they are not Syed.

AJL
05-18-2016, 04:13 PM
Yes, I understand. It can make it very difficult for families though unless they have genetic screening. Samaritans have a similar problem, but they now take genetic screening as part of matchmaking:

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/dec/09/world/la-fg-israel-gene-testing-20121209

I am not sure if Sayiddi are using similar techniques but it would lead to better health without compromising the practice.

khanabadoshi
05-18-2016, 04:16 PM
I'm in agreement that most claimants wherever they are from are imposters. And, it is not necessarily that individuals fault. They have been given that information by someone else. I was just saying you can't make a blanket statement that there can be NO Syeds in India and Pakistan.

I totally agree. In fact, I would be surprised if there are no Sayyids in South Asia. However, I don't think anyone can argue that way too many people claim it and take advantage of the claim. It is my personal belief that if one has a haplogroup common in South Asia, then one should let go of the Sayyid belief. The simpler explanation is just profoundly more likely.

khanabadoshi
05-18-2016, 04:21 PM
I'm in agreement that most claimants wherever they are from are imposters. And, it is not necessarily that individuals fault. They have been given that information by someone else. I was just saying you can't make a blanket statement that there can be NO Syeds in India and Pakistan.

279676 Al Shaibi Al Qurashi /آل الشيبي القرشي R-Y30

http://www.arabnews.com/saudi-arabia/sadin-kaaba-key-keeper-keeping-tradition-alive

Is this why you say R-L657?

Actually, no -- I didn't realize the keyholders were L657. I said L657 because it seems to be quite common in South Asia and I believe peaks in Sindh? Parasar knows much more about L657.

khanabadoshi
05-18-2016, 04:32 PM
Yes, I understand. It can make it very difficult for families though unless they have genetic screening. Samaritans have a similar problem, but they now take genetic screening as part of matchmaking:

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/dec/09/world/la-fg-israel-gene-testing-20121209

I am not sure if Sayiddi are using similar techniques but it would lead to better health without compromising the practice.

The genetic issue is not just a problem for Sayyids, but all over Pakistan as the practice of marrying cousins to keep property in the family is quite strong. There is a medical and social initiative to educate people to marry outside of their cousins. The trend seems to be changing.

However, what I have noticed is that now many Sayyid men marry outside women, but their own women remain unmarried unless they can find another Sayyid that is distant enough. So the practice of not marrying a Sayyid women to an outside family is so strong that they will prefer their daughters to remain unmarried. Maybe others can chime in here, if they have seen the same practice.

wmehar
05-18-2016, 04:36 PM
Man. If we want to really implement logic into here, we should just do it. One way to check merit to claims of lineage is to look into consistency sets and subsets. It's confusing to try and dissect who's claiming false or unbeknownst to them a significant lineage.

Why not dissect the information to see who's uniformly more consistent? If you have people belonging to for example R-L657 claiming Quraysh lineage, and other people claiming Brahmin, or Punjab lineage sharing R-L657 subclade, along with J2a's or H's claiming punjabi and Quraysh lineage...of course we have an inconsistency. Because R-L657 is shared among many peoples (even in Arab tribes we've observed such as Dulaim and Shammar). We can't conclusively say there's empirical evidence this SNP can be strictly define any one of these populations.

Now instead, What if you have a population of J-L859's and downstream. And among all these samples, you don't see a single family/person (maybe much smaller amounts) claim anything outside of an Adnan/Quraysh/Qahtan/Hijazi tribe? In other words, you don't see J-L859 people in China with Han or Uyghur, or a punjabi gujjar with J-L859. A consistent observation that can substantiate empirical evidence. Which.. is in fact, what we are observing in the project pasted by Cyraxares.

By the way, to hammer my point Every J-L859+ Pakistani, iranian, or J-L859 invidual that was found outside of the Arabian peninsula, claimed to be Hashemi, Syed, Hussaini, Hassani or Qurayshi. If these people claimed they were anything else other than this, I'd then say this was inconsistent. So far, there's an observable statistically significant difference in variances between individuals with J-L859 with unclaimed Qurayshi/Adnan heritage, than with non-J-859's with claimed Qurayshi/Adnan heritage. I'm just looking where there is the least error.

Those of you who are interested in this and can read Arabic, I do advise you to peruse thee public database of the Arab tribes (I'd advise copying into excel, and isolating/filtering out the J-L859's and downstream or those with STR's very close to it if not confirmed), and read the names of those individuals and find me a name that doesn't refer to a northern Arab tribe. I'm saying we should hold Y-DNA results as constant since anecdotal family lineage is not constant, and base claims this way.

With more samples with time and the advent of technology/interest - I'm sure we could eventually narrow down the most consistent SNP subclade and make a compelling case as to who is of the prophet's Pbuh lineage.

By the way, the YFULL results for Mr. Shaibi will be displayed in 3 weeks, cool stuff.

wmehar
05-18-2016, 04:39 PM
The genetic issue is not just a problem for Sayyids, but all over Pakistan as the practice of marrying cousins to keep property in the family is quite strong. There is a medical and social initiative to educate people to marry outside of their cousins. The trend seems to be changing.

However, what I have noticed is that now many Sayyid men marry outside women, but their own women remain unmarried unless they can find another Sayyid that is distant enough. So the practice of not marrying a Sayyid women to an outside family is so strong that they will prefer their daughters to remain unmarried. Maybe others can chime in here, if they have seen the same practice.

Yes, my sister is marrying a "Sayyid" man, even though we are not. But from my father and what I've seen in my family in Pakistan, the Arains did try to marry within family to keep property and land within. But this practice is beginning to die out in modern generations.

Ali16
05-18-2016, 04:52 PM
Making generalizations with SNPs is impossible (they are too old). Secondly these L859s are probably all cousins. I could imagine a Saudi family has enough money to keep sampling the same person 50 or 100 times to make a point. These are not scientific. I'm not ruling out L859, and I guess I cannot rule out R-L657. My point is there were many haplogroups in Quraish 1400 years ago, I'm sure of that. You have to scientifically test a wide audience, review genealogies to make sure they are not claiming close relations, then look at the STRs and see when they had a common forefather.

You have Iranians like Rabbani who have an "oral" tradition of being Syed, and that means they don't have any genealogical records (after they lie to you and claim false descent, then when pressed they say it was maternally):

N64848 ربانی‎ (Rabbani) Iran J-FGC1050

khanabadoshi
05-18-2016, 05:13 PM
Making generalizations with SNPs is impossible (they are too old). Secondly these L859s are probably all cousins. I could imagine a Saudi family has enough money to keep sampling the same person 50 or 100 times to make a point. These are not scientific. I'm not ruling out L859, and I guess I cannot rule out R-L657. My point is there were many haplogroups in Quraish 1400 years ago, I'm sure of that.

You have Iranians like Rabbani who have an "oral" tradition of being Syed, and that means they don't have any genealogical records (after they lie to you and claim false descent, then when pressed they say it was maternally):

N64848 ربانی‎ (Rabbani) Iran J-FGC1050

I suppose then we have to reevaluate what someone means when they say, "Sayyid". Are you claiming to be of Arab descent in general, Quraysh descent, or descent from the Prophet? The broader you make it, obviously the more possibilities. Generally speaking, most everyone is claiming descent from the Prophet, not the wider Quraysh tribe. A Shaikh is one who is claiming general Arab lineage and not lineage to the Prophet. It is very possible that many of the Sayyids maybe of Arab lineage, because the term Sayyid/Syed itself is just an honorific and could have been applied to any Arab in a non-Arab land historically. Maybe, overtime the assumption became if you had any Arab lineage it was related back to the Prophet? It is also theorized the terms Syed and Shaikh were given by the Arabs or the Ghaznavids to higher-class Brahmin in the lands they ruled as a sign of their social rank, because all Sayyid means at the end of the day is, "Mister/Sir". Whose to say that wasn't the context in which it used initially, and now due to the duality of the term, it has now taken the wholly religious aspect of the term.

Ali16
05-18-2016, 05:15 PM
They have researched the British giving various titles of descent to individuals in India so they could help control the population.

khanabadoshi
05-18-2016, 05:17 PM
They have researched the British giving various titles of descent to individuals in India so they could help control the population.

This is also a strong possibility. However, I think the titles the British handed out were ones like Chaudhary and Malik.

parasar
05-18-2016, 05:47 PM
Actually, no -- I didn't realize the keyholders were L657. I said L657 because it seems to be quite common in South Asia and I believe peaks in Sindh? Parasar knows much more about L657.

True the key holders of the Kaaba are L657+ Y7+Y30+ Their function reminds me of a Brahman group in India called Pratihar/Padihar. Also later became a prominent Rajput clan.

This line perhaps entered the Quraish quite early since we see Quraish from Iran also L657+:
M6740 Al Shaibi Al Qurashi Mecca Line L657+Y7+Y30+
M7176 / Al-Alawi Al-Qurashi L657+ Bahrain
190263 / Quraish L657+ Saudi
M6629 Al Qurashi L657+ Saudi
M6736 Al-Hosaini Al-Qurashi L657+ Y7+ Iran

• • • • • • R1a1 Z94 Poltavka Outlier 4900-4700ybp

• • • • • • •R1a1 M780 Cossacks ~4600ybp

• • • • • • • • R1a1 M634 Tajiks ~4300ybp

• • • • • • • • •R1a1 L657/S347 TMRCA 3900 ybp Arabs, Iranians, South Asians

• • • • • • • • • •R1a1 Y4 Bengalis TMRCA 3700 ybp
• • • • • • • • • • •R1a1a Y6 Arabs, South Asians

• • • • • • • • • •R1a1 Y9 Arabs, Iranians, South Asians, TMRCA 3900 ybp My line splits from Y7 line here as I am Y7-
• • • • • • • • • • •R1a1a Y7 TMRCA 3900 ybp Arabs, Iranians, South Asians
• • • • • • • • • • • •R1a1 Y30 Arabs, South Asians
• • • • • • • • • • • • •R1a1 Y29 Telegus, Lankans
• • • • • • • • • • • • • •R1a1a1 Y944
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •R1a1 Y2413 Gujaratis, Telegus, Lankans
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •R1a1 Y2428 Punjabis, Gujaratis
• • • • • • • • • • • •R1a1 Y945
• • • • • • • • • • • • •R1a1a1 Y31
• • • • • • • • • • • • • •R1a1 Y2569 Punjabis, Gujaratis
• • • • • • • • • • • • •R1a1 Y879
• • • • • • • • • • • • • •R1a1Y881 Punjabis, Bengalis, Lankans

• • • • • • • • • • •R1a1 Y2351 Gujaratis TMRCA 3600 ybp
• • • • • • • • • • • •R1a1 Y353 Lankans
• • • • • • • • • • • • •R1a1 Y2392 Telugus (also my line) TMRCA 3100 ybp

For split timelines:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L657/

Hanna
05-18-2016, 05:59 PM
I always see people claiming to be descendants of the prophet. I don't believe in any of these claims unless it's recorded. Some Saudis and Gulf Arabs have documented records of their lineage. It would be worth it to test those individuals.

Ali16
05-18-2016, 06:32 PM
http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVjbGtDxX.hEA6AQnnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTEyYjV2NjB qBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDQjIwMDNfMQRzZWMDc3I-/RV=2/RE=1463625031/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fresearch.sabanciuniv.edu%2f11781% 2f1%2fcanbakal_seyyids_jesho.pdf/RK=0/RS=Boxb4UGKr90yO_MpseNA7UlfyCA-

wmehar
05-18-2016, 08:31 PM
I always see people claiming to be descendants of the prophet. I don't believe in any of these claims unless it's recorded. Some Saudis and Gulf Arabs have documented records of their lineage. It would be worth it to test those individuals.

Idris Ibn Qatada was the earliest documented descendant of Hassan, and the earliest known Sharif of Mecca on a direct paternal line from King Abdullah of Jordan. They also purportedly have their lineage documented before Qatada to Hassan Ibn 'Ali (RA).

This guy is the only guy who would have the socially acceptable account of being a Sharif and Hasani Sharif (Hassan Descendents are denoted Sharif/Sharifah, and Hussein are Sayyid/Sayyidah). Considering everyone knew everyone in medieval Arabia, and of course their culture of maintaining ancestors perfectly as possible.

Remember, All tribes of Arabia that was born of Adnan lineage, had their own tree's memorized/documented Pre-Islamic times. These lines and trees agreed to every last person up to Adnan. No dispute or inconsistency. From Banu Tamim, to Banu Abdul Qays who moved to Iran.

Hasan as we all know was documented to have many wives and MANY kids that which were not all slaughtered. This family was watched like a hawk since they stayed in the Hejaz since they never left. He ended up having 15 sons, and 9 daughters from 6 wives and 3 concubines. Some of which died in infancy or really young.

I don't have a single shred of doubt in my mind that the King of Jordan is not a direct descendant of Hasan considering these people and culture. The entire population of Arabia during the time of the prophet pbuh was maybe 400,000 to 800,000 at best. Probably even less.

You'd have to be crazy not to keep track of everyone in your village with a land mass that's subsisted entirely through trade throughout the Hijaz.

wmehar
05-18-2016, 08:36 PM
Making generalizations with SNPs is impossible (they are too old). Secondly these L859s are probably all cousins. I could imagine a Saudi family has enough money to keep sampling the same person 50 or 100 times to make a point. These are not scientific. I'm not ruling out L859, and I guess I cannot rule out R-L657. My point is there were many haplogroups in Quraish 1400 years ago, I'm sure of that. You have to scientifically test a wide audience, review genealogies to make sure they are not claiming close relations, then look at the STRs and see when they had a common forefather.

You have Iranians like Rabbani who have an "oral" tradition of being Syed, and that means they don't have any genealogical records (after they lie to you and claim false descent, then when pressed they say it was maternally):

N64848 ربانی‎ (Rabbani) Iran J-FGC1050

The scientific part of my explanation, was that no person of the J-L859 claimed anything else other than to be of a Northern Adnan tribe, including Hashem/Quraysh/Kinanah and others. Which extends to the J-L859 who live outside of Arabia in Iran, Like the Rabbani guy you referenced or Pakistan etc.. But I do agree, we need more samples and cheaper/efficient technology to see if this observation maintains it's consistency.

The day we uncover a batch of people from Ethiopia, or tribal pagans somewhere that claim NO relationship to Adnan or Arabs in general, will be the day this J-L859 theory of being the Quraysh/True Arab signature falls through.

Ali16
05-18-2016, 08:37 PM
500 years is a mighty long time, Sir. And, this is what they call founder effect.

wmehar
05-18-2016, 08:55 PM
I always see people claiming to be descendants of the prophet. I don't believe in any of these claims unless it's recorded. Some Saudis and Gulf Arabs have documented records of their lineage. It would be worth it to test those individuals.

check this out lol http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/books-manuscripts/a-testament-of-lineage-going-back-to-5550954-details.aspx

topfield
05-18-2016, 10:18 PM
The Dutta Mohyals I had mentioned in my post claim an Arab connection. The story they tell is that after the (maha)Bharata war, descendants of Aswathama left India for Arabia and returned to India after their defeat in the battle of Karbala. http://watandost.blogspot.com/2008/01/brahmans-in-karbala.html

There is a Chibba Mohyal on Dr_McNinja's list who is R1a1, but Chibbas were from Sindh so does not tell us much.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xm5xp5Qxk8N8kSortwFU5Qr-KWCGNKsYgdT5Mnv8kDc/edit#gid=0

Another from Sialkot is E1b1b1a (not sure which Mohyal clan, except that he is not a Bali Mohyal).

"The Dutta Mohyals I had mentioned in my post claim an Arab connection. " - its probably a made up story (by them).

parasar
05-19-2016, 03:10 AM
"The Dutta Mohyals I had mentioned in my post claim an Arab connection. " - its probably a made up story (by them).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2859343/
"The sub-Saharan African- and Arabian-specific paternal lineages E1b1b1a and J*(xJ2) were present in three Muslim populations (Indian Shia, Indian Sunni and Mappla) with an average frequency of 2 and 8%, respectively, whereas they were rare or absent among non-Muslim populations."


While Mohyal kavyas may be incorrect about Karbala, there is no doubt in my mind that many are remembrances of genuine history.
For example I came across this couplet:
Amravati ke kenare par Raja Dahar Mal laryo
Bich Gujrat baje fateh ke nakare ji

Now this can come from only a genuine remembrance of history - the battle of Nausari. https://books.google.com/books?id=Jz0Yy053WS4C&pg=PA188
Today the river on the bank of which the battle was fought barely exists (it is only listed in some GSI maps since it is a dry channel) but the kabits remember it from 738AD.

Not only they have the name of the river, and the name of the location Gujarat, but what fascinated me that they mentioned Dahar Mal whose name does not appear on the Chalukya Vikramaditya (II) inscription on the battle:
https://books.google.com/books?id=0bkMAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA109&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U0caXTR1xogzkEZ1b6Qd8j1TWss9w&ci=48%2C619%2C863%2C861&edge=0

The Mewar records indeed mention a Dahar as one of the chiefs - "the lord of Debal [port of coastal Sindh], Dahir, Despati" - that came in support of the Vikramaditya.

drobbah
05-19-2016, 05:09 AM
In every Muslim country/region people claim Qureishi/Hashemi or being a descedant of a great Islamic figure for power,prestige and to feel connected to Islam. You will find people from Nigeria to Indonesia claiming the prophet/Sahaba/Arab origin lmaoo.I would wager majority of them are just regular natives of their country/region

Coldmountains
05-19-2016, 07:32 AM
In every Muslim country/region people claim Qureishi/Hashemi or being a descedant of a great Islamic figure for power,prestige and to feel connected to Islam. You will find people from Nigeria to Indonesia claiming the prophet/Sahaba/Arab origin lmaoo.I would wager majority of them are just regular natives of their country/region

Often it is quite amusing and very obvious that they are just locals trying to get more prestige. For example there are Nuristani in Afghanistan who claim to be of Arab origin when Nuristani adopted Islam just 100 years ago and fought untill recently against muslims.

parasar
05-19-2016, 06:07 PM
Often it is quite amusing and very obvious that they are just locals trying to get more prestige. For example there are Nuristani in Afghanistan who claim to be of Arab origin when Nuristani adopted Islam just 100 years ago and fought untill recently against muslims.

Ah yes, they are also Macedonians colonists or perhaps even related to the English (if not to Russians!).
Looks like they knew of their Yamna origin well before modern theories and genetics!
:)

"The Katirs in the Bashgul Valley informed me that they came from the west, and were once part of a numerous tribe which divided into two parties. One division, consisting of all the wealthy and other notable persons, went to London, while the other, comprising menials only, settled in Kafiristan. This depreciation of themselves is in the true spirit of Oriental politeness. They warned me not to trust the Kam, or to believe them for an instant if they declared that they and I were descended from a common ancestor; for it was notorious that it was the Katirs, and not the Kam, who were of my race, the Kam being really more akin to the Russians. This also indicated that the Kafirs of the Bashgul Valley know something of the antagonistic sentiments with which the English and the Russians are supposed to regard one another in the East"

"It may fairly be conjectured that some of the Kafir tribes, at any rate, are still influenced, as the ancient Indian populations of Eastern Afghanistan were also influenced, by the Greek colonists of Alexander; and that these Kafirs having never been under the rule of Musalmans, may possibly represent some of the people of Eastern Afghanistan as they were before the victorious Moslem defeated and converted them to Islam. If the Kafirs resemble these peoples, the resemblance must be partial, and possibly unflattering. Civilisation abruptly fell asleep centuries ago in Kafiristan, and is still dormant. A conquering race may progress in the arts and in civilisation, as it progresses and excels in warlike skill; but not so an isolated people like the Kafirs. They have degenerated until their tribal headquarters are merely robbers' nests."
The Káfirs of the Hindu-Kush By Sir George Scott Robertson

jatt2016
05-19-2016, 11:25 PM
Often it is quite amusing and very obvious that they are just locals trying to get more prestige. For example there are Nuristani in Afghanistan who claim to be of Arab origin when Nuristani adopted Islam just 100 years ago and fought untill recently against muslims.

That reminds me of an ignorant person who messaged me with inappropriate /warning like messages " not to identify myself as being in a particular haplo...caz that according to him belongs to the holy syed class of Pakistan and India (probably a bhaiyya from Karachi, Patna or Bihar). Blamed me of being Blasphemy etc. etc. . The best strategy for me was to " just ignore the holy ignorant ".

Arbogan
05-20-2016, 08:18 AM
Yes, because syed does not neccesarily mean you have a real ancestral tie to the family of muhammed.

Ali16
05-20-2016, 09:44 AM
Jatt2016, you are H-M69, of course you are not a Syed. Why do you want to insist you are a Syed? Why is it that everyone from the subcontinent wants to be an Arab? Indians are an ancient civilization, I don't think Arabs were. When they asked Gandhi what he thought about western civilization, he said it would be a good idea. You should join:
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/y-haplo-group-h/about/background

Cyaxares
05-20-2016, 10:49 AM
What does it matter? Honestly at the end of the day whether you are a Sunni or Shia muslim being a Sayyed isn't going to get you any closer to God. Just be a good muslim and that is it.

jesus
05-24-2016, 04:36 AM
Naqvi Sayed. Looks North Iranian admixed, not Arab (Baku WGA are Tats/Persians from Azerbaijan)


Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_Indian 36.46
2 South_Central_Asian 26.99
3 Caucasian 15.63
4 European_Hunters_Gatherers 4.96
5 Near_East 3.14
6 Ancestral_Altaic 3.09
7 Tungus-Altaic 2.85
8 East_African 1.98
9 North_African 1.74
10 Amerindian 1.2
11 Melano_Polynesian 0.73
12 Khoisan 0.62
13 Paleo_Siberian 0.29
14 European_Early_Farmers 0.19
15 South_East_Asian 0.12

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Mumbai_Jew ( ) 6.82
2 Cochin_Jew ( ) 7.35
3 Jatt_Haryana ( ) 10.62
4 Jatt_Pahari ( ) 11.94
5 Jatt_Muslim ( ) 14.31
6 Pakistani_Pushtun ( ) 15.17
7 Pakistani ( ) 16.54
8 Pathan ( ) 17.8
9 Punjabi_Gujjar ( ) 17.9
10 Tiwari ( ) 18.31
11 GujaratiA_GIH ( ) 19.73
12 Hindi ( ) 20.3
13 GujaratiB_GIH ( ) 21.13
14 Burusho ( ) 21.26
15 Marathi ( ) 22.18
16 Brahmin_Tamil ( ) 22.18
17 Vaish ( ) 22.34
18 Sindhi ( ) 23.49
19 Brahmins_UP ( ) 23.97
20 Kshatriya ( ) 24.21

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 76.8% Marathi ( ) + 23.2% North_Ossetian ( ) @ 3.51
2 66.7% Bengali ( ) + 33.3% Baku_WGA ( ) @ 3.53
3 78.8% Hindi ( ) + 21.2% Ossetian ( ) @ 3.54
4 77.2% Marathi ( ) + 22.8% Ossetian ( ) @ 3.57
5 81.5% Hindi ( ) + 18.5% Adjara ( ) @ 3.61

Hanna
05-24-2016, 07:14 AM
What does it matter? Honestly at the end of the day whether you are a Sunni or Shia muslim being a Sayyed isn't going to get you any closer to God. Just be a good muslim and that is it.
True, likewise Sunni and Shia division isn't also getting anyone closer to God, it is a political separation. Shias support a form of monarchy, while Sunnis support a form of democracy. The irony here is that most of the Sunni governments are ruled by monarchy while Iran the only official Shia state is ruled by democracy.

Hanna
05-24-2016, 07:29 AM
Why is it that everyone from the subcontinent wants to be an Arab?

Unfortunately this is something I have seen too. Some ignorant Muslims equate with having Arab ancestry as being more knowledgeable, better in Islam and closer towards God. Interestingly though there aren't many Arab Islamic scholars that are influential globally. Many of the famous Islamic scholars are not of Arab background, scholars such as Zakir Naik, Hamza Yusuf, Bilal Philips, etc.. are many of few examples.

Hanna
05-24-2016, 10:42 AM
Zakir Naik is not a scholar. He is a highly intelligent, memorizer, which helps him to be a highly effective public speaker. The arguments have been perfected over 1400 years of debate and analysis. It is debatable if Bilal Philips is a "scholar."

Yes, Zakir Naik has an excellent memory, is educated and a researcher which qualifies him to be an Islamic scholar. Not every religious scholar needs their education through a university if that's what you mean? Anyway, knowledge is limitless.

drobbah
05-24-2016, 11:10 AM
Unfortunately this is something I have seen too. Some ignorant Muslims equate with having Arab ancestry as being more knowledgeable, better in Islam and closer towards God. Interestingly though there aren't many Arab Islamic scholars that are influential globally. Many of the famous Islamic scholars are not of Arab background, scholars such as Zakir Naik, Hamza Yusuf, Bilal Philips, etc.. are many of few examples.

I think that has more to do with English being the current lingua franca in the Islamic world when it used to be Arabic.

Hanna
05-24-2016, 12:46 PM
I think that has more to do with English being the current lingua franca in the Islamic world when it used to be Arabic. Believe me most of the Arabs speak English. In the Arabian Gulf one cannot even get a job if he/she doesn't speak English.

Dnaguru
05-24-2016, 01:48 PM
Hanna a scholar does scholarly research. Ask him yourself, his arguments are not his. They are boilerplate arguments. That doesn't stop me from listening to him. I respect him. But, he is no scholar. He is an educated medical doctor.

wmehar
05-24-2016, 02:06 PM
Hanna a scholar does scholarly research. Ask him yourself, his arguments are not his. They are boilerplate arguments. That doesn't stop me from listening to him. I respect him. But, he is no scholar. He is an educated medical doctor.

What makes one a scholar know anyway? I mean who gives these "scholars" merit? Half the time Scholars disagree with each other or engage in takfir and say other ways of living or habits are hellfire bound. Do we say one can be a scholar because of his ability to memorize things to begin with? Or we say he's a scholar because they agree with our predisposed beliefs or notions? We couldn't even get things straight and ended up with the schools of Fiqh, though we're nice enough not to call each other Kaffirs.

Then we have a whole slew of of other Sects that exhibit to us how our Hadith collections/narrations and interpretation are bologna. They with their own scholars.

A scholar and imam, they differ by indicating leadership, until someone can prove or argue to me effectively, I don't see how a Scholar is much different from someone who dedicates their effort to memorizing and interpreting law. From what I know, giving one Ijaza is equivalent to bestowing scholarly authority on one's interpretation of Qu'ranic/Shariah law on the approval of another person of whom was given their authority by another person.

It seems arbitrary and superfluous and unreliable.

These same scholars we look to when they say this person is Kaffir, we'll issue a fatwah and somebody can wack him. Who filters and checks these guys? Or do all the scholars monopolize and collude together in competing groups on preconceived notions to move/shape the Islamic world suitable to their disposition?

How many "scholars" out there are quacks who couldn't hack it out there in the world and digressed to studying Religion to be an authority?

Maybe he's not an Ijaza qualified Scholar (Dr. Naik) but he has reasoning skills coupled with his boilerplate methods/private research that shed's insight appealing to many who aren't well acquainted or somewhat acquainted with matters of jurisprudence in Islam.

Hanna
05-24-2016, 04:12 PM
Hanna a scholar does scholarly research. Ask him yourself, his arguments are not his. They are boilerplate arguments. That doesn't stop me from listening to him. I respect him. But, he is no scholar. He is an educated medical doctor. If a person devotes his life to research on a topic objectively, is capable to draw conclusions and acts upon his knowledge is suitable to become a scholar. Anyway, lets not idolize knowledge, prophets were educated through life experiences not by memorizing texts.

Hanna
05-24-2016, 04:35 PM
I just noticed you also question Bilal Philips for being a scholar. For God's sake he started an online Islamic university. He has a Ph.D in Islamic theology and gives lectures in universities. Who is a scholar according to you? Real example.

Dnaguru
05-25-2016, 12:03 AM
I said it was debatable, I'm not that familiar with Bilal Philips. My apologies. I listen to Dr. Naik all the time on YouTube. If these people convince people of the right path I am all for it. But, I don't believe scholar is the right word. I personally enjoy Gary Miller.

surbakhunWeesste
05-25-2016, 12:29 AM
I said it was debatable, I'm not that familiar with Bilal Philips. My apologies. I listen to Dr. Naik all the time on YouTube. If these people convince people of the right path I am all for it. But, I don't believe scholar is the right word. I personally enjoy Gary Miller.

...and how do "they" decide what is right and what is wrong?

Dnaguru
05-25-2016, 12:48 PM
...and how do "they" decide what is right and what is wrong?

I don't believe so. Allah decides.

Dnaguru
05-25-2016, 12:55 PM
And for every Ummah (a community or a nation), there is a Messenger; when their Messenger comes, the matter will be judged between them with justice, and they will not be wronged. (Qur'ân 10:47)

AJL
05-25-2016, 02:39 PM
Let's keep the conversation focused in the original question of Sadah, genetics, etc. We are considering opening up a section for religious discussion per this thread (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7113-Religion-amp-Politics-in-Anthrogenica-Community-Poll&p=157770#post157770) but in the meantime, please confine yourself to the original genetic question and don't wander too far into theology. Thank you.

Dnaguru
05-25-2016, 03:16 PM
Even though the studies cannot prove someone is a Syed, every study so far has overwhemingly proven that most self-identied Syeds are imposters.

I am in agreement with this statement, they have done studies for Indians and Iranians, and I am aware of private studies in Pakistan.

pegasus
05-25-2016, 10:33 PM
Yes, Zakir Naik has an excellent memory, is educated and a researcher which qualifies him to be an Islamic scholar. Not every religious scholar needs their education through a university if that's what you mean? Anyway, knowledge is limitless.

Are you serious? I cannot believe someone would one even say that let alone on a genetics forum. He is nothing more than a pseudo intellectual Salafist quack and he is banned from a number of countries for good reasons. The guy does not even know or accept basic science.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk5q9TeGo14

surbakhunWeesste
05-25-2016, 10:45 PM
Are you serious? I cannot believe someone would one even say that let alone on a genetics forum. He is nothing more than a pseudo intellectual Salafist quack and he is banned from a number of countries for good reasons. The guy does not even know or accept basic science.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk5q9TeGo14

:bounce: "keletropist, "whitemeat", "paramecia".......

wmehar
05-31-2016, 04:27 PM
Are you serious? I cannot believe someone would one even say that let alone on a genetics forum. He is nothing more than a pseudo intellectual Salafist quack and he is banned from a number of countries for good reasons. The guy does not even know or accept basic science.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk5q9TeGo14

I couldn't begin to describe how absent this youtube video is in it's rebuttal of academic substance/proof to refute some of Dr. Naik's statements. Perhaps these rebuttals are true, but simply stating them without proper citation is .... practically a non-sequitur. At the least, Dr. Naik does provide citation's for most of his arguments.

Otherwise how different is the poster/rebutter of the video any different from what they accuse Dr. Naik of being? You can't just state stuff and expect to believe it.

I think it's safe to say we can't accept anything that doesn't have evidence presented no matter if it's the Dr. or anyone else. Or at least by use of inductive logic. I think some, not ALL of Dr. Naik's demonstrations can be insightful.

Presently, it's really hard for me to determine veracity of any "scholar", researcher, or any self acclaimed man of wisdom. I'm stubborn to a fault where I need to physically find ancient manuscripts, and decipher things out for myself. It's disgusting the level of preconceived bias existing in the academic culture.

Emir
06-01-2016, 08:53 PM
Let's keep the conversation focused in the original question of Sadah, genetics, etc. We are considering opening up a section for religious discussion per this thread (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7113-Religion-amp-Politics-in-Anthrogenica-Community-Poll&p=157770#post157770) but in the meantime, please confine yourself to the original genetic question and don't wander too far into theology. Thank you.


You should start a Dr. Naik is an academic and post some of his original research.

asm
03-17-2019, 09:16 AM
Sayyid title is passed through both male and female lineage (descendants of daughter of Prophet),so genetics can never determine it.

Adam A
03-17-2019, 11:20 AM
Perhaps a small amount have some genuine 'syed' claim but the vast majority are 100% South Asians with a family tall tale

subzero85
07-02-2020, 04:21 PM
In theory yes.

I have seen situations where South Asian Syeds have a high MENA % on 23andMe but a non-MENA haplogroup.

Also seen situations where South Asian Syeds have zero MENA on 23andMe but do carry a MENA haplogroup.