Are Pashtuns descendents of lost tribes of Israel?

[Ahmad]

technically he is a mohajir , But the people of punjab are kind and light minded they dont care of this stuff , they welcome all.

That is his status, what is his ethnicity? If you say Panjabis are light minded, then i take your word, but they must have some ethnic name, connectin etc.

 

[StandForInsaf]

That is his status, what is his ethnicity? If you say Panjabis are light minded, then i take your word, but they must have some ethnic name, connectin etc.

His status will be a regular citizen of Punjab if he gets the domicile , nothing else, he can continue with is own identities no one forces him.

 

[Ahmad]

His status will be a regular citizen of Punjab if he gets the domicile , nothing else, he can continue with is own identities no one forces him.

well, thanks for the effort, but i didnt get the answer.

 

[RazPaK]

so what are the panjabis then? i am a little bit confused here. If not ethnic group, then what?

People that live in between the fiver rivers.

---------- Post added at 12:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:49 PM ----------

well, thanks for the effort, but i didnt get the answer.

Depends on your race/tribe. Jatts/Gujjars/Arains/Rajputs are all different tribes and you would have to read up on them.

 

[roadrunner]

If it doesn't think what I mean, write the exact reasons why and take apart the study since your an expert geneticist. Prove to me why what those people say on genetic forums is utterly wrong. You claimed the study was agenda driven and demanded I find the exact source of it. After that was done, you deny the study and say it doesn't mean what it clearly says it means.

Wrong. I didn't and don't deny the study. Post a link where I have done so.

Agenda driven most definitely. As is all genetics research such as this.

Your talking to me about racism? I've seen your posts before. It doesn't take that much effort to see you look down upon Indians. Unfortunately, people associated with one another in the past based on caste and continue to do until this day. Jatts, Khatris, Gujjars, etc. rarely marry one another so why would they marry non Punjabis and Uttar Pradesh Dalits? Even when Indian Punjabis immigrate out of Punjab, they are still likely to marrying within sub-ethnic groups of Punjabis.

You've really not understood anything, have you?

If your conclusions from the data are true, your graphs or data whatever you call them imply that Jatts, Gujjars, Dalits from Uttar Pradesh are all the same and therefore mixed to the infinitessimal degree.

Your stance is contradictory and you dont realize it. On the one hand, everyone in the northwest is genetically similar according to you, but on the other hand, Jatts, Gujjars, etc preserved their genetic differences from the Uttar Pradesh Dalits. You're clutching at very fine straws.

But because your conclusions are wrong, and you don't understand what the data you quote means, you've come to a ludicrous theory that Indian ethnic groups have remained pure over centuries. Nothing can be so incorrect. I'm not explaining such a simple thing to someone who has not yet grasped the basics of genetic marking results.

Your clearly showing your agenda. Trying to separate Pakistan from India as much as possible. You do this to the point where your essentially trying to separate Indian Punjabis from Pakistani Punjabis as much as you possibly can. I wonder if you would do the same for Afghan Pashtuns and Pakistanis Pashtuns or Iranian Baloch and Pakistani Baloch.

Religion doesn't cause huge ethnic differences between an ethnicity. Pakistani Punjabis still marry mostly Pakistani Punjabis and the same with Indian Punjabis. They are still the same ethnicity unles they intermarry with other ethnic groups. Also, North Korea is communist and mostly Buddhist influenced while South Korean is mostly atheist and Christian. There are huge cultural differences that continue to grow between North and South Korea because of the communist vs. democratic governments. North and South Koreans rarely meet one another yet alone intermarry. You would know this if you weren't so ignorant.

Pakistani Punjabis have been Muslim for centuries, Indian Punjabis have been Hindu for centuries etc.

On the whole they have not mixed as much as Koreans who have for the major part of their recent history been one country.

It does. Ask any Indian Punjabis. There should be a few on this forum. Caste and ethnicity continue to play huge roles in Indian Punjab until this day. Jatts, Khatris, Gujjars, Sainis, Aroras, Ramgharia, etc. Sikhs rarely marrying one another. If they rarely marry amongst one another, why would they marrying non Punjabis?

If you understood that Aryan and Dravidian aren't scientific words, your comments wouldn't sound entirely baseless and agenda driven.

It's dumb? Is it as dumb as your comments about people being more or less Aryan and Dravidian?

I'm not saying Indian Punjabis are genetically similar to Pakistani Punjabis based on Rosenberg's research. I never stated that and you'll never find a quote to prove it. I'm saying they are genetically similar because they are the same ethnic group that have similar sub-ethnic groups/castes that make up the majority of their populations. In this case, Jatts, Khatris, Rajputs, Gujjars etc.

You quoted Rosenberg's research in the first place claiming everyone was similar based on that as evidence (even though it's not).

The idea that Pakistani Punjabis are on average the same as Indian Punjabis is silly. If for no reason that for centuries Pakistani Punjabis would have had one religion, and Indian Punjabis another.

Then there's the fact that a different set of sub ethnicities populate Pakistani Punjab compared to Indian Punjab.

I think what i've said is more scientific than quoting a paper that you dont have a clue of the meaning of.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

yeah i dont need ''bergs'' or ''steins'' or ''bergenhausers'' or ''rosenblatts'' to speak on my behalf

 

[Infiltrator]

Wrong. I didn't and don't deny the study. Post a link where I have done so.

Agenda driven most definitely. As is all genetics research such as this.

Post a link? Just like when I linked the thread where you made a mockery of yourself and made genetics to be some pseudo-science garbage based on who is more Aryan and Dravidian?

Anyways, that's pretty funny. You call this scientific study done by a respected processional geneticist agenda driven. Who are you to say that? You don't have a PHD in genetics or an expertise in the genetics field. Furthermore, you have clearly shown you have an agenda to separate Pakistan from India as much as possible

Also, are you that thick? You are denying the validity of the study by say its agenda driven like all genetic research which is a ridiculous and baseless claim. In addition, your claiming its results and meaning are different than what it clearly said on the source page and other genetic/dna websites throughout the web have agreed upon.

You've really not understood anything, have you?

If your conclusions from the data are true, your graphs or data whatever you call them imply that Jatts, Gujjars, Dalits from Uttar Pradesh are all the same and therefore mixed to the infinitessimal degree.

No, it wouldn't. It would imply Jatts, Gujjars and others like Sindhis, Kashmiris, Pashtuns and other Punjabis are genetically similar. Of course, these same groups would have genetic relationships with other South Asian groups like Uttar Pradesh Dalits but they would be closer to one another than these other groups. The fact is all South Asian populations are related to one another but to slightly different extents. This is what the research indicates. Also all populations in the world are mixed to varying degrees so it would be no different for South Asians.

Your stance is contradictory and you dont realize it. On the one hand, everyone in the northwest is genetically similar according to you, but on the other hand, Jatts, Gujjars, etc preserved their genetic differences from the Uttar Pradesh Dalits. You're clutching at very fine straws.

No, it's not and your making an *** out of yourself. Everyone in the northwest of the subcontinent is genetically similar save for isolated populations like the Kalash who are related but cluster with themselves. Jatts, Gujjars, etc. have preserved their sub-ethnicity and they are closer to other Punjabi, Kashmiri, Sindhi and Pashtun populations but that doesn't mean they are completely separate from Uttar Pradesh Dalits which I haven't seen any studies on. Why don't you look at the other ethnic groups that are listed in Rosenberg's research like Marwaris, Gujaratis, and Marathis? There is an obvious relationship between them and more northwest populations like Punjabis and Kashmiris.

If you look at the clusters, you'll see the Northwest populations still have clear genetic relationships with people more south and east in the subcontinent. Anyone without an agenda can see this.

Your the one clutching at straws with your agenda. Why don't you go back to deciphering the Aryan and Dravidian admixture in South populations based on their ethnic groups. That's the kind of pseudo-science bullshit you're an expert in.

But because your conclusions are wrong, and you don't understand what the data you quote means, you've come to a ludicrous theory that Indian ethnic groups have remained pure over centuries. Nothing can be so incorrect. I'm not explaining such a simple thing to someone who has not yet grasped the basics of genetic marking results.

My conclusions are wrong? I already asked you to take apart all of the research done by professional geneticists and explain to me why I'm wrong yet you completely ignore that simple requst. With your expert knowledge on Aryaness and Dravidianess, I'm sure you'll have an easy time. I haven't come to the opinion that these ethnic groups are pure. I've come to the conclusions that certain sub-ethnic groups of Punjabis and other ethnicities rarely mix with other populations so the ethnic populations has remained relatively the same as of recently. Obviously, these groups are all admixed like any other populations but Punjabis, Pashtuns, Sindhis and Kashmiris are closer to one another than to other populations.

Pakistani Punjabis have been Muslim for centuries, Indian Punjabis have been Hindu for centuries etc.

Indian Punjabis have remained majority Sikh in the most recent centuries. Also, religion has little effect on genetic relations of populations who still mostly marry based on sub-ethnicity/caste/tribe like Jatts, Gujjars, Khatris, Aroras, Rajputs, etc. Again, feel free to ask Indian Punjabis if you don't believe me.

On the whole they have not mixed as much as Koreans who have for the major part of their recent history been one country.

Mixed with who exactly? You claim Punjabis are extremely mixed with other populations when most of their admixture comes from centuries ago or even more ancient admixture when ethnic groups were still forming.

You quoted Rosenberg's research in the first place claiming everyone was similar based on that as evidence (even though it's not).

Explain why using Rosenberg's own research and data on the source page. Not using your agenda driven bullshit opinion. It will likely be difficult using your Aryan and Dravidian based scientific expertise.

The idea that Pakistani Punjabis are on average the same as Indian Punjabis is silly. If for no reason that for centuries Pakistani Punjabis would have had one religion, and Indian Punjabis another.

So, your saying Pakistani Punjabis are extremely different from their Indian Punjabi counterparts on the basis of religion? What a joke. If you said that on a genetics forum, you would be mocked for showing your agenda so blatantly but on this forum your applauded by a few incompetent users who love to see more separation between Pakistan and India on the basis of ethnicity.

Then there's the fact that a different set of sub ethnicities populate Pakistani Punjab compared to Indian Punjab.

What are these sub-ethnicities you speak? Please list them and their approximate populations. Jatts, Gujjars, Khatris, Rajputs, Aroras, Dogras etc. are all found in Indian Punjab and other groups mostly found in Pakistan like Aheers, Hindkowans and Saraikis are closely related to them. Don't list honorific titles like Syeds, Qureshis, etc. which aren't ethnic groups.

I think what i've said is more scientific than quoting a paper that you dont have a clue of the meaning of.

I think the fact that you used the terms Aryan and Dravidian as scientific terms makes all your statements on genetics baseless and your agenda drive opinion of Rosenberg's research completely invalid.

Honestly, you can't just take back all of the comments your vehemently supported in the other thread. They make your claims and opinions on genetics appear to be nothing more than pseudo-science.



---------- Post added at 12:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:09 PM ----------

yeah i dont need ''bergs'' or ''steins'' or ''bergenhausers'' or ''rosenblatts'' to speak on my behalf

Yeah, I also think these famous Jewish geneticists don't care whether you disapprove of them speaking on Pakistani ethnic groups.

They'll continue to do their research and write papers while you sit there on your computer and disapprove.

 

[YellowDragon]

Pushtuns weren't Jewish technically, just like Jesus Christ (Isa as) was not a Christian. Pushtuns remained true to Abrahamic faith and followed Ibrahim (alay salaam) and Musa (pbuh) and when last prophet's message came they called themselves Muslims like all those who heard the message spread from prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Yes, Pushtuns can be genetically semite and the lost tribe of Israel though. I bet Israel calls them lost not bcz they got lost but bcz Israel can't identify that their tribe stayed true to God's messengers. In their eyes, Pushtuns are lost..but Alhumdolillah they are ones who kept their faith strong.
Which points out...Pakistan came together so beautifully...every group one can possibly need to thrive in today's world but Pakistan isn't umited only because there's no justice for all. Anyway, wonderful information here.

 

[KhyberShikan]

Quest of the Lost Tribes of Israel by Simcha Jacobovici.
vimeo video no. 61098596
Sorry Can't post the link dueto less number of posts.

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

this theory is based on just few pashto and hebrew words. scientifically it hasn't been proved.

 

[Hallian_Khan]

yes not pashtuns but pathans are decedent of Hazrat Musa(P.B.U.H)

 

[Taimoor Khan]

I have done lot of research on this. People get confused and cant differentiate between Bani Israel and Jews. Jews are followers of a religion, its not a race, however Bani Israel is the race. Just like Arab is a race and you can have a Muslim or Christian within Arabs. From Yaqoob (AS) (Jacob) came 12 sons. We all know Yusuf (AS) (Joseph) and his brothers story. 12 sons = 12 tribes. And thats where the Bani Israel came from. Jews as we see today, and this is the very important point, are only from two tribes of Bani Israel . The rest, the ten tribes were NOT Jewish or got anything to do with the Jews. Pakhtoons are the Bani Israel as mentioned in Quran. They are the ones who comprised of the ten tribes and they are ones who carved the northern kingdom Israel and called themselves Isrealites while the southern kingdom, the Kingdom of Judah comprised of the rest of the tribes, and here in Judah, the Jews came from. The two were sworn enemies and fought for nearly a century until both were destroyed by outside forces and taken captive. In the case of Pakhtoon (the Israelities) by Assyrians who later moved them to Indus plains. and the Jews by the Babylonians. So when Pakhtoon find it repugnant to be classed as Jews, there is a history to it being sworn enemies of Judah even in ancient times. Pakhtoon have keep their bloodline from Jacob intact, we all know Pakthoon culture, while Jews unfortunately have lost their Bani Israel gene. Infact most Jews today are from Khazar lineage. And that is where the confusion arise about the gene and "scientific" proof of Pakhtoons being bani Isreal as people are compare them to "Khazar" gene which is not Bani Israel to being with. One more thing, the Pakhtoon revered this person called Qais Abdur Rasheed. According to them, he was the first among them to accept Islam and did bait on Prophet (PBUH) hands. He is the one who later turned all of them to Islam. And guess what, Qais was the 35th descendant of Talut (mentioned in Quran in reference to David and Goliath) also known in western world as King Saul.

For me the most astonishing thing is, that the ancient Hebrew, according to the research done by Aristotle, were a tribe of Indus, who were displaced by the "Noah Deluge". Quran also mentioned that ancestors of Bani Isreal were with Noah. Which resolved the puzzle about those ancient Indus cities/settlements buried ten feet under sand all over Pakistan and surrounding areas. So yeah, we Pakistanis are basically the original nation of Noah. And as for Pakhtoons, they just came back to the lands from where their ancient ancestors took the Journey towards holy lands.

 

[sady]

It is plausible. The history of this area makes genetics very complex study and almost impossible to prove anything. I generally go with obvious Phenotypical and cultural differences and similarities when comparing just as a reference but nothing concrete.
A Kasmiri pundit, pakhtun , a dalit or a Baruhi or Makrani have visible Phenotypical differences so you can assume there are genotypical differences as well. If you would go for markers and special gene types and mitochondrial Dna studies eventually there is so much mixing as a result of pre historic or archaic man types and their modern counterparts plus intruding races that a discerning factor may never be quite a solid piece of evidence. ANI and ASI debate is still on, Dravidian Indo Aryan debate still lingers. It is like trying to differentiate coal from diamond by going into sub particle level where it will be found both are carbon. However that could have been avoided by just plain naked eye exam or in other case anthropological data etc and stopping at that.
The other bias involved in these studies is racial superiority. These are viewed to either reject or approve possible forced migrations and resultantly racial inferiority. This bias will never lead to objective analysis of such studies and will mostly be inconclusive.

 

[RazaGujjar]

No, i believe certain sects in kashmir have a better shot of being descendants of the lost tribes.

 

[sady]

No, i believe certain sects in kashmir have a better shot of being descendants of the lost tribes.

Do you have interest in Gujjar history and origins?