Assuming that Jesus Christ survived the crucifixion, for what purpose would he travel, far away from his homeland, to Kashmir? Perhaps the answer might be found in the Bible:
“These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, ‘Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’”(Bible, Matthew 10: 5 & 6)
Even Christians believe that one of the Disciples, Thomas, did precisely that: he traveled to India and set up the first Christian communities there. During the ministry of Jesus Christ in Israel there were only two tribes of the Jewish people in his homeland: Yehuda and Binyomin (Judah and Benjamin). The other ten tribes had been scattered away during the First Temple Era. Proponents of the Jesus-in-India theory state that the “lost sheep” mentioned by Jesus Christ in the Bible referred to the ten tribes that had been scattered, and that the term “lost sheep” did not just mean wayward Jews who no longer followed the path of God.
So, after the Ascension of Jesus (or, according to the Jesus-in-India theory, after he began his travels through Asia), the Apostles met in Jerusalem and, in obedience to the above-mentioned Biblical instruction of Jesus Christ to go and preach his message to the remaining Jewish tribes, portioned all the countries of the world amongst themselves. India, which at that time included all Middle East to the present India, was given to Thomas. "To facilitate and further the research on the theory of Jesus in India, with particular emphasis on the Roza Bol tomb believed to be the ' Kashmir the Promised Land?
What we wish to do in this section, though, is present some interesting information concerning the issue of "The Promise Land." This is simply food for thought, and should not be interpreted as presenting anything other than what we've been presenting all along: the subject of the historical Jesus and the theory that Jesus survived the crucifixion.
In this section, we will present the view that the Promised Land was Kashmir. Far fetched? The graves of Moses, Aaron, Solomon and Jesus are all said to be located in Kashmir [See, for instance, Nazir Ahmadis' book, Jesus in Heaven on Earth]. The fact that Jews migrated to Kashmir is hardly debated anymore. The fact that a large section of the 10 lost tribes migrated to the Afghanistan and Kashmir has been recorded in many books.
It appears that the ancient Jews fully undertood that Kashmir was the peaceful place where God had intended them to find refuge. And, for centuries, Kashmir, indeed, has been one of the most peaceful places on earth, until modern times changed all that, unfortunately. Incidentally, this is not to suggest that the State of Israel should now decide to move to Kashmir! Kashmir was to be a place of refuge, not necessarily a political entity. And those tribes of Israelites did find refuge in the peaceful Valley of Kashmir.
The first part of what follows presents some information located in Holger Kersten's book.. After that, we will reproduce an extensive section of Nazir Ahmad's book regarding the issue of the Promised Land of the ancient Israelites.
The Bible (Deuteronomy 34) mentions five geographic places that pinpoint the location of Moses' tomb, though one verse ends: "but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day," which seems to be a very strange addition to a long verse that clearly stated precisely where Moses is buried. Those five places are: Mount Nebo in the Abarim Mountains, Beth-peor, the peak of Mount Pisga, Heshbon, and the plains of Moab--all places that point to Kashmir:
"And the Lord said unto him, This is the land which I swore unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, saying, I will give it unto they seed: I have caused thee to see it with thine eyes, but thou shalt not go over thither. So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord. And he buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Beth-peor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day."(Deuteronomy 34: 4-6)
The meaning of the name Beth-peor is, "a place that opens," such as a valley that spreads out into a plain. Says Kersten:
"The river Jhelum in the north of Kashmir is called "Behat" in Persian, and the small town of Bandipur at the point where the valley of the Jhelum opens out into the broad plan of Lake Wular was once called Behat- poor, which is now called Bandipur in the region of Tehsil Sopore, 80 kilometres north of Srinagar, the capital of Kashmir. Only approximately 18 kilometers northeast of Bandipur lies the small village of Hasba or Hasbal. This is referred to as Hesbon in the Bible (Deuteronomy 4, 46), and is mentioned in connection with Bethpeor and Pisga. On the cliffs of Pisga (now: Pishnag), north of Bandipur and only 1.5 kilometres northeast of the village Aham-Sharif, there is a spring famous for the healing quality of its waters. In the Bible, the valley and the plains of Mowu are called the plains of Moab, ideal pasture land, about five kilometres northwest of Mount Nebo. Mount Nebo is a single mountain in the range of Abarim and is always mentiond in context of Beth-peor [Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible, p. 115]. All five names are to be found within close proximity to one another. Mount Nebo, also called Baal Nebu or Niltoop, offers a splendid view of Bandipur and the entire highlands of Kashmir."(Jesus Lived In India, p. 53)
So the "placement" of Moses' tomb in Kashmir is not the result of some pious tomb worshippers, as Acharya S [See her book, The Christ Conspiracy] might suggest, or a mere Eastern cultural habit of tomb assigning. There are reasons that it is believed Moses is buried in Kashmir, and those reasons are connected with a Jewish presence in Kashmir in ancient times. This is the reason Jesus could have visited that area after the event of the crucifixion: because he had clear knowledge that Kashmir served as a refuge for his people, the Jews.
The keeper of the tomb of Moses, the Wali Risih, states that the Richis have been caretakers of that tomb for over 2700 years. As Kersten states:
"And in fact the grave is near the plains of Moab, near the top of Pisga, on the mountain of Nebo, across from Beth-peor [all in line with the Biblical account! See above], and from this place one has a splendid view of a fresh and blossoming land, forever green, in which 'milk and honey' flow, a true paradise. In this area, as in other parts of Kashmir, there are numerous places with biblical names, some of them called the "Muquam-I-Musa," i.e., "the place of Moses." To the north of Pisga, (Deuteronomy 4, 44-49) which is today called Hasbal; and south of Srinagar, at Bijbihara, a place on the banks of the river is still referred to as "Moses' Bath".
Concerning the issue of the Promised Land, we now reproduce a very lengthy section of Nazir Ahmad's book, in which he deals with this issue of Kashmir as the Promised Land. Nazir Ahmad wrote his book in 1950, and Kersten's 1986 coverage of the Promised Land issue summarized in brief what Nazir Ahmad had mentioned earlier in 1950. Nazir Ahmad's book was re-published in 1998 under the same title, Jesus in Heaven on Earth: Journey of Jesus to Kashmir, his preaching to the Lost Tribes of Israel and death and burial in Srinagar. The following indented material is a reproduction of Chapter 18 of Nazir Ahmad's book. That chapter is entitled, "Land of Promise." (To secure your own copy of this classic book, Jesus in Heaven on Earth, click here.) Footnote references in the following reproduction have been left out. To see those references, please obtain a copy of Jesus in Heaven on Earth, and read the relevant pages. This reproduction is taken from pages 271 to 277 of that book:
Palestine, often called the Holy Land, was the land of inheritance of the Hebrew nation. This land was promised to them through Abraham:
"And the Lord appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land."
And "this land" was particularly indicated and specified as the land wherein
"...builded he an alter unto the Lord and called upon the name of the Lord."
It was, consequently, at one time deemed to be the birthright of Hebrews to possess this land and to live in it, and that is why it was styled as 'their own land,' for it was the land of their inheritance. The Hebrew nation was, therefore, described as the people of inheritance.
The boundaries of this land were described in the promise to Abraham:
In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates.
The "river of Egypt" does not refer to the Nile, but to a brook, now identifed with the Wady el-Arish, flowing into the sea about twenty miles south of Gaza. The borders of this land are again in greater detail in the Fourth Book of Moses. But these borders are ideal rather than actual, for the area described there never wholly belonged to the Hebrew nation. It is noteworthy that the eastern border runs in an easterly course to the eastern margin of the sea of Chinnerath (Genasaret) and thence follows the Jordan to the Dead Sea. The eastern border there indicated was really the left bank of the Jordan, while, as already mentioned, the Euphrates is mentioned as the eastern limit in another place. The Biblical phrases: "On this side of Jordan" and "beyond Jordan" thus become intelligent as representing the point of view of the writer or in other words the standpoint of Canaan and, therefore, both these phrases mean on the east side of the Jordan, i.e., beyond the eastern border of the Holy Land.
Moses, after brining them out of Egypt, had to take the Hebrews to this land so that they might possess it and live in it. He exhorted his followers to enter this land, but they refused to go any further and wished to return to Egypt, and it was, therefore, ordained:
"Doubtless ye shall not come into the land, concerning which I sware to make you dwell therein, save Caleb the son of Jephunneh, Joshua the son of Nun."
The "little ones" of the Hebrew nation were, however, the only other exceptions. Moses himself was forbidden fron entering it and he was directed to appoint Joshua as his sucessor, so that he could lead the next generation to the land, and then divide the inheritance among the tribes.
It was because of the iniquities of the Hebrew people that Moses was denied entry into this land of inheritance. Moses, however, prayed for permission to enter the land.
"But the Lord was wroth with me (Moses) for your sakes and would not hear me. Let it suffice thee, speak no more unto me of this matter."
Again,
"Furthermore, the Lord was angry with me for your sakes and sware that I should not go over Jordan, and that I should not go in unto that good land, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance."
Moses then prophesied:
"I call heaven and earth to witness against you, this day, that ye shall soon utterly perish from off the land whereunto ye go over Jordan to possess it; ye shall not prolong your days upon it, but shall utterly be destroyed. And the Lord shall scatter you among the nations and ye shall be left few in numbers among the heathens, whither the Lord shall lead you."
Moses prayed for the deliverance of his people and he was made to convey a message of hope:
"When thou art in tribulation, and all these things are come upon thee, even in the latter days, if thou turn to the Lord thy God, and shall be obedient unto His voice. (For the Lord thy God is a merciful God;) He will not forsake thee, neither destroy thee."
And Moses himself was ordered to take a journey in the opposite direction beyond the Jordan; and if we take the eastern border to be the eastern bank of the Euphrates, the journey must have been towards the east beyond the Euphrates.
"And the Lord said unto Moses, Get thee unto the Mount Abarim, see the land which I have given unto the Children of Israel. And when thou hast seen it, thou also shalt be gathered unto thy people."
I pause to observe that this land was meant for the Children of Israel and not for the entire Hebrew nation. On entering this land, "in the valley over against Bethpeor," Moses was made to see this Land of Promise:
"Get thee up unto the top of Pisgah and lift up thine eyes, westward and northward and southward and eastward and behold it with thine eyes, for thou shalt not go over this Jordan."
The eastern border of Palestine, at that time, touched the river Jordan, or, if the description in Genesis is to be considered, the river Euphrates. Moses had not entered the land and, therefore, in either case he must be deemed to be standing on the eastern bank of the Jordan or Euphrates. The direction to look eastward excludes Palestine enterly, and, therefore, it was not the Holy Land which Moses was made to see.
If we follow the trend of the Discourses of Moses, we find that the burden of the first discourse is about the deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt, their being led to the land of their inheritance, their possession of it and ultimately their dispersion from it. The second discourse begins with verse 44 of Chapter IV of Deuteronomy. In this Moses mentioned many more "testimonies" and the first ones referred to the Land of Promise which God shall give them after their deliverance from captivity. Three places are mentioned in this connection: Beth-peor, Heshbon and Pisgah. In another place Mount Nebo is also mentioned in conjunction with Beth-peor. The location of these four places would enable us to ascertain the Land of Promise. All Biblical commentators have to confess that the sites of these places are still unidentified and that "they combined the literal with the metaphorical" and, therefore, they cannot be located now. Peake contents himself with the remarks that "the sites are unknown." The reason why these scholars have been unable to trace the location of these places is because they were looking for them in Palestine. They should have studied the history of the Lost Ten Tribes and searched for these places in the land where these tribes had settled. I will take these places one by one.
Beth-peor means the house (or place) of gaping or opening. Jhelum River in ancient days was called Behat in Kashmir; And Bandipur, in Tehsil Handwara (Kashmir), was called Behatpoor. It is "the place of gaping or opening" in more than one sense. From this place the Kashmir valley opens out; the river Jhelum also passes through a gap into Wullar Lake. Beth-peor, therefore, really stands for Behatpoor (Bandipur). (See illustration, page 264).
Heshbon is known by the Biblical reference to the pools of Heshbon. Tristran believed the reference to have been to the pools or streams in the valley. And we find that about twelve miles south-west of Behatpoor (Bandipur) in Kashmir is Hashba, a small village, famous for its pools of fish. It adjoins the spot near Auth Wattu--the eight ways--which is locally known as Maqam-i-Musa, the Place of Moses.
Pisgah according to Dummelow is "probably the general name for the mountain range which in Deuteronomy (32:49) is called Abarim." It is a pity that in religious matters and questions of faith probabilities have had to play a great part. Pisgah is a place in Kashmir three miles north-east of Hashba. (See illustration, page 264.)
Mount Nebo is a single peak of Mount Abarim, and, therefore, according to Dummelow is another name for Mount Abarim. It signifies "a lofty place." Moses died there, and was buried there "over against Bethpeor," and the Children of Israel, not the Hebrew nation, wept for him. Baal Nabu (See illustration, page 226), is a peak of a range about eight miles north-west of Behatpoor (Bandipur). From it Bandipur is visible and so is the entire Kashmir valley. There is a tomb on top of thispeak which is known as the tomb of Moses. Mount Abarim is the same as Pisgah of Kashmir.
How is it that all these different places in Kashmir, geographically placed within a range of a few miles of the spot said to contain the tomb of Moses, bear the very same Biblical names which are connected with the place where, according to the Bible, Moses was buried? Is this mere coincidence? There are various other common features which I will discuss when dealing with the tomb of Moses. But even these facts, I think, are sufficient to establish that Kashmir is the Land of Promise which God had promised to Moses and for the Children of Israel. The matter can, however, be taken further...
It can legitimately be contended that the land promised to the Children of Israel, through Moses, must have been some land other than the Holy Land: firstly, because Palestine was never exclusively assigned to the Children of Israel inasmuch as this land was given as an inheritance to the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, i.e., the twelve tribes. Secondly, the followers of Moses from Egypt were the progeny of only a few of the original inhabitants of Palestine and the greater part of the Hebrew nation, having remained behind, was already in possession of the good land. Thirdly, the Children of Israel, having been driven from their own land, never returned to it from their captivity. A promise to them that they would possess certain land could only be about a land which they had neither seen before nor possessed at all. But we need not conjecture or speculate as to the location of this Land of Promise, for the Lord Himself has given us sufficient indications of its distinctive features, and we can fix its identity with almost certainty.
The Land of Promise was to be a "heaven on earth" [Deuteronomy, 11:21] towards the sun-rising [Deuteronomy, 4: 41], and was to be a land of hills and valleys that drinketh water of the rain of heaven [Deuteronomy, 11:11].
The rains shall fall in this land in due season [Deuteronomy, 11:14] and this land will extend "even up to the sea of the plain, under the springs of Pisgah [Deuteronomy, 4:49].
Palestine cannot answer this description. Dr. G.W.G. Masterman, writing on the General Physical Features of Palestine, says:
"Then the climate, in its broad features, is the same everywhere. A short wet winter is followed by a dry summer season with perhaps no drop of rain for five or six months...and the hot dry summer soon withers the spring's glorious promise of verdure. Miles of country in the later summer produce nothing but a few scanty prickly weeds. The scarcity of timber is marked all over the land. Springs are usually small and infrequent, and not a few become intermittent, or dry up altogether, after the summer draught...the dry and parching south-east wind (the sirocco) from the desert spoils so much of the otherwise pleasant weather in spring and autumn."
Peake, as a contrast to this Biblical description of the Land of Promise, points out that a plentiful supply of rain was always a necessity in Palestine. Againk, watering of lands by treadle methods was common in ancient Egypt and Palestine. This was necessary to meetshortage of water at higher levels. But in the Land of Promise irrigation was to be done by natural streams. These descriptions do not apply to Palestine. Of course, the past associations of Kashmiris, being Children of Israel, with Egypt and Palestine, would sometimes make them resort to this kind of device.
But is there any other country, east of the Jordan or Euphrates, except Kashmir, which is famous for its springs, streams and rivers; for its abundance in food and fruits; for the charms of its valleys and meadows? The Land of Promise was to contain a sea of the plain, a huge lake of fresh water. Kashmir has its Wullar Lake. Again, Kashmir has actually been described as Heaven on Earth by many famous writers. The Kashmiri historians call it Bagh-i- Jannat--the Garden of Paradise, and Jannat-ud-Dunia--the Paradise of the World. Saadi, the great Persian poet, sang its praise thus:
"If there is a heaven on earth,
"It is this, and it's this, and it's this.
Again, the Children of Ham, son of Cush, were to migrate to a land of:
"Fat pastures and good, and the land was wide and quiet and peaceable."
I have yet to come across a better description of Kashmir than this Biblical one.
This land was to be the valley of Charashim--the valley of Craftsman (See illustration, page 335). It goes without saying that the only valley in the world which is famous for its craftsmen is Kashmir.
The Prophet Isaiah has described the Land of Promise as:
"A place of broad rivers and streams wherein shall go no galley with oars, neither shall a gallant ship pass thereby."
Both these conditions are inapplicable to Palestine because of its sea-coast, but they befit Kashmir. The reference to the absence of "galleys and oars" and "gallant ships" signifies that no enemy fleet can attack, and none will be needed for defense. The broad rivers of Kashmir are steady, but as soon as they leave the valley they follow a circuitous route through mountains and their beds abound with submerged rocks. The rapids thus formed in the rivers make them unfit for navigation, and even a small canoe cannot pass through them.
The Prophet Isaiah had also spoken regarding the Children of Israel and about their sufferings in their captivity. He said:
"Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken; neither shall thy land any more be termed Desolate; but thou shalt be called Hephzi-bah, and thy land Beulah: for the Lord delighteth in thee, and thy land shall be married."
The words hephzi-bah and beulah respectively mean: she in whom is my delight and married; but they really are allegorical names applied by Deutero-Isaiah to Israel. It has been suggested that Hephzi-bah is a distortion of the name a Hephzibaal--delight of the Baal, i.e., delight of the husband, and that Jehovah is the Baal or the husband "who delights over the bride of Zion." This idea underlying these expressions is that people of the land as well as the other fruits arise from the fertilizing influence of the land's Baal, i.e., the Divine Husband.
The Mishna and the Talmud have always drawn a distinction between lands artificially irrigated and lands naturally watered, calling the latter the house of Baal or the field of Baal, or the land of Baal. Thus lands fertilized by natural streams, springs and subterranean waters, and not by artificial irrigation, were called the lands of Baal.
In short, the prophecy of Isaiah foretold that after their sufferings in captivity, the Children of Israel should come to a land which would not be desolate but would be fertilized by natural streams and springs and that this land would be married to them or, in other words, they would possess it and live in it.
The Lost Ten Tribes never returned to Palestine. Therefore, Isaiah could not have had the Holy Land in mind at the time he made the prophecy. On the other hand, Kashmir does answer the description. The Lost Tribes did go there and are still today to be found there. In Kashmir, except when water is lifted, by a local contrivance by foot, up to a height of only about six feet, lands are irrigated by natural streams and springs. Indeed, Kashmir is a land of valleys and springs. It is very significant that Baal in Kashmiri language means a spring.
A Search for the Historical Jesus Professor Fida Hassnain is now the single most credentialed person who has an intimate interest in and thorough knowledge of the theory concerning a post-crucifixion life of Jesus Christ. He is the former Director of Archives, Archaeology, Research and Musems for Kashmir, and was once listed in Who's Who in Archaeology. He was totally in charge of ancient Kashmiri documents that contain mention of Jesus Christ in India.
Dr. Hassnain was born in Srinagar, the city that houses the tomb of Jesus, in the year 1924. In 1954 he became the Director of the Kashmir State Archives, of Archaeological Research and Museums, and retired from that position in the year 1983.
Tomb of Jesus' in Shrinagar, Kashmir Historical Sources The JesusTomb in Kashmir
Origin:
According to the Tarikh-i-Hassan, the Wajees-ut-Tawarikh was compiled in 1857 by Abdul Nabi Khanyari (Tarikh-i-Hassan, Vol. 1, p. 377).
The appellation, “Paigambar” means, “Messenger of God.” So he is mentioned in this document as, “Messenger of God, Yuzu Asaph.”
Abdul Nabi Khanyari was known by various names: Abdul Nabi, Naba Shah and Ghulam Nabi. It is to be noted that Raja Gopananda is mentioned in this excerpt, as you will see below, and he ruled over Kashmir during 49 to 109 A.D
“The grave of Mir Sayyid Naseeruddin is in Khanyar. The place is also known as Rozabal. It is said that at that place exists the grave of Paigambar Yuzu Asaf. He was a prince who had come to this place. Due to his utmost piety and prayers, he was raised to the status of the Messenger (by God) for the people of Kashmir. He preached among the people. It is said that Raja Gopananda ruled over the country during that period. The aroma of musk used to emanate from a hole in the western wall.”
Sign Post
The following is the English translation of the information displayed on the signpost that stands outside the Tomb of Jesus Christ. The information contains the views of Khwaja Azam Deddmari , who compiled his Tarikh-i-Azam in about 1729 A.D
“Nearby is situated the stone of the grave which, according to the people, is the prophet's who arrived from a far off place during ancient times. Anointed for Kashmir: This spot is famous as the resting place of a messenger: I have read in an ancient book that a prince from a foreign land arrived here and engaged himself in piety and prayers [and] became a messenger of God for the Kashmiri people. In that ancient book his name is mentioned as Yuz Asaf.”
The Glass Mirror
"The Grub-Tha-Thamas-Chad" is a Tibetan Translation of an ancient Chinese document entitled, "The History of Religions and Doctrines--The Glass Mirror", which contains mention of "Yesu" (Jesus) and his teachings in Asia on pages 471-472.
In 'A Search for the Historical Jesus', Dr. Fida Hassnain , former Director of Kashmir State Archives and of Archeological Research and Museums, mentions a Tibetan manuscript he discovered called Grugtha Thams-chand kyi Khuna dan Dod-Thsul Ston-pe Legs Shad Shel-gyi Melong. This Tibetan document, written by Le-zan Chhes-kyi Nima , was translated from an ancient Chinese document called, The History of Religion and Doctrines—The Glass Mirror
[Courtesy of Dr. Fida Hassnain, who discovered the document and has given us formal permission to display this copy.]
“Yesu, the teacher and founder of the religion, who was born miraculously, proclaimed himself the Savior of the world. He commanded his disciples to observe the ten vows [Ten Commandments], among which includes prohibition of manslaughter and attainment of eternal joy through good deeds. He preached that evil actions plunge one into hell, where there is eternal torment and misery. A sin committed in a state of consciousness cannot be condoned or pardoned. This is one of the virtuous results emerging out of the teachings of the Buddha. His doctrines did not spread extensively, but survived in Asia, for a long period. The above information is derived from the Chinese treatises on religions and doctrines.”
We find it interesting that the above document states that, except in Asia, the teachings of Yesu (Jesus) did not spread. When one considers the differences in the teachings of Yuz Asaf/Yesu when he was in Asia, and those of Christianity as it evolved in the West, one begins to understand the above quote. It appears that for, the primary focus of Western Christianity is the death of Jesus Christ for the sins of the world, but in the East that idea does not exist.
The Tomb of Jesus Website does not represent the views of any one individual, religious or secular
Tarikh-i-Kashmir - Mullah Nadri - 1420AD
In the year 1420 Mullah Nadri compiled the first full record of the history of Kashmir in a book named "Tahrik-i-Kashmir" (History of Kashmir).
"During this time Hazrat Yuz Asaf having come from Bait-ul Muqaddas [the Holy Land] to this holy valley proclaimed his prophethood. He devoted himself, day and night, in [prayers to] God, and having attained the heights of piety and virtue, he declared himself to be a Messenger [of God] for the people of Kashmir. He invited people [to his religion]. Because the people of the valley had faith in this Prophet, Raja Gopadatta referred the objection of Hindus to him [for decision]. It was because of this Prophet’s orders that Sulaiman, whom Hindus called Sandeman, completed [the repairs of] the dome. [The year was] Fifty and four. Further, on one of the stones of the stairs he [Sulaiman] inscribed: ‘In these times Yuz Asaf proclaimed his prophethood,’ and on the other stone of the stairs he also inscribed that he [Yuz Asaf] was Yusu, Prophet of the Children of Israel."
"I have seen in a book of Hindus that this prophet was really Hazrat Isa [Jesus], the Spirit of God, on whom be peace [and salutations] and had also assumed the name of Yuz Asaf. The real knowledge is with God. He spent his life in this [valley]. After his departure [his death] he was laid to rest in Mohalla Anzmarah. It is also said that lights of prophethood used to emanate from the tomb of this Prophet. Raja Gopadatta having ruled for sixty years and two months, [then] died…"
Other 'Tahrik'
The author of this 'Tahrik' is uknown. Image courtesy of Dr Fida Hassnain.
“In early writings, it is mentioned that seventy years after the demise of Alexander the Great, Jesus Christ was born. When he reached the age of thirty years, God raised him to the status of an apostle. At the age of thirty-three years, he proceeded from Palestine towards the Holy Valley. It is mentioned in historical works that Jesus Christ reached Syria in company of his disciples and followers. It is written in authentic works that six days after his crucifixion, Jesus visited several places and met Zacharis and Mary and Disciples and then left for [an] unknown destination.”
Six Days
Note that the document states that “six days after his crucifixion, Jesus visited several places
The following is the English translation of the information displayed on the signpost that stands outside the Tomb of Jesus Christ. The information contains the views of Khwaja Azam Deddmari , who compiled his Tarikh-i-Azam in about 1729 A.D
“Nearby is situated the stone of the grave which, according to the people, is the prophet's who arrived from a far off place during ancient times. Anointed for Kashmir: This spot is famous as the resting place of a messenger: I have read in an ancient book that a prince from a foreign land arrived here and engaged himself in piety and prayers [and] became a messenger of God for the Kashmiri people. In that ancient book his name is mentioned as Yuz Asaf.”
The Glass Mirror
"The Grub-Tha-Thamas-Chad" is a Tibetan Translation of an ancient Chinese document entitled, "The History of Religions and Doctrines--The Glass Mirror", which contains mention of "Yesu" (Jesus) and his teachings in Asia on pages 471-472.
In 'A Search for the Historical Jesus', Dr. Fida Hassnain , former Director of Kashmir State Archives and of Archeological Research and Museums, mentions a Tibetan manuscript he discovered called Grugtha Thams-chand kyi Khuna dan Dod-Thsul Ston-pe Legs Shad Shel-gyi Melong. This Tibetan document, written by Le-zan Chhes-kyi Nima , was translated from an ancient Chinese document called, The History of Religion and Doctrines—The Glass Mirror
[Courtesy of Dr. Fida Hassnain, who discovered the document and has given us formal permission to display this copy.]
“Yesu, the teacher and founder of the religion, who was born miraculously, proclaimed himself the Savior of the world. He commanded his disciples to observe the ten vows [Ten Commandments], among which includes prohibition of manslaughter and attainment of eternal joy through good deeds. He preached that evil actions plunge one into hell, where there is eternal torment and misery. A sin committed in a state of consciousness cannot be condoned or pardoned. This is one of the virtuous results emerging out of the teachings of the Buddha. His doctrines did not spread extensively, but survived in Asia, for a long period. The above information is derived from the Chinese treatises on religions and doctrines.”
We find it interesting that the above document states that, except in Asia, the teachings of Yesu (Jesus) did not spread. When one considers the differences in the teachings of Yuz Asaf/Yesu when he was in Asia, and those of Christianity as it evolved in the West, one begins to understand the above quote. It appears that for, the primary focus of Western Christianity is the death of Jesus Christ for the sins of the world, but in the East that idea does not exist.
The Tomb of Jesus Website does not represent the views of any one individual, religious or secular
Tarikh-i-Kashmir - Mullah Nadri - 1420ADIn the year 1420 Mullah Nadri compiled the first full record of the history of Kashmir in a book named "Tahrik-i-Kashmir" (History of Kashmir).
"During this time Hazrat Yuz Asaf having come from Bait-ul Muqaddas [the Holy Land] to this holy valley proclaimed his prophethood. He devoted himself, day and night, in [prayers to] God, and having attained the heights of piety and virtue, he declared himself to be a Messenger [of God] for the people of Kashmir. He invited people [to his religion]. Because the people of the valley had faith in this Prophet, Raja Gopadatta referred the objection of Hindus to him [for decision]. It was because of this Prophet’s orders that Sulaiman, whom Hindus called Sandeman, completed [the repairs of] the dome. [The year was] Fifty and four. Further, on one of the stones of the stairs he [Sulaiman] inscribed: ‘In these times Yuz Asaf proclaimed his prophethood,’ and on the other stone of the stairs he also inscribed that he [Yuz Asaf] was Yusu, Prophet of the Children of Israel."
"I have seen in a book of Hindus that this prophet was really Hazrat Isa [Jesus], the Spirit of God, on whom be peace [and salutations] and had also assumed the name of Yuz Asaf. The real knowledge is with God. He spent his life in this [valley]. After his departure [his death] he was laid to rest in Mohalla Anzmarah. It is also said that lights of prophethood used to emanate from the tomb of this Prophet. Raja Gopadatta having ruled for sixty years and two months, [then] died…"
Other 'Tahrik'
The author of this 'Tahrik' is uknown. Image courtesy of Dr Fida Hassnain.
“In early writings, it is mentioned that seventy years after the demise of Alexander the Great, Jesus Christ was born. When he reached the age of thirty years, God raised him to the status of an apostle. At the age of thirty-three years, he proceeded from Palestine towards the Holy Valley. It is mentioned in historical works that Jesus Christ reached Syria in company of his disciples and followers. It is written in authentic works that six days after his crucifixion, Jesus visited several places and met Zacharis and Mary and Disciples and then left for [an] unknown destination.”
Six Days
Note that the document states that “six days after his crucifixion, Jesus visited several places
Bagh-i-Sulaiman - Garden of Solomon
Origin: The Bagh-i-Sulaiman is a Persian work written by Mir Saadullah Shahabadi Kashmiri in 1780 A.D. It is a history of Kashmir in Persian verse.
Sayyid Naseeruddin was also burried in Roza Bol in 1451 in a grave in the Islamic direction,whilst Yus Asaph's is in the Jewish directio
“Virtuous Sayyid Naseeruddin: The assembly of believers owes its existence to him. His tomb exists in Khanyar in Anzimar. This tomb is significant because of the illuminated grave of a Prophet. All those who visit this sacred place receive aroma of perfumes! It has been narrated that a prince came, abandoned materialistic life, and adopted the path of piety and righteousness. God liked his obedience to Him [and] raised him to the status of an Apostle. He guided the people towards the Truth [and was] a mercy to the Valley (of Kashmir). It is due to this reason that his tomb is famous all over the country Decree of the Grand Mufti - The Seal Of The Justice Of Islam - Mulla Fazil - 1194 A.H.
In this High Court of Justice, in the Department of Learning and Piety of the Kingdom. Present: Rehman Khan, son of Amir Khan, submits that: the kings, the nobles, the ministers and the multitude come from all directions of the kingdom to pay their homage and offereings in cash and kind at the lofty and the holy shrine of Yuz-Asaph, the Prophet, may God bless him. Claims: That he is the only and absolute claimant, entitled to receive the offerings and utilize these, and none else has any right whatsoever on these offerings. Prays: That A writ of injunction be granted to all those who interfere and others be restrained from interfering with his rights.Verdict Now: this court, after obtaining evidence, concludes as under: It has been established that during the reign of Raja Gopadatta, who got built many temples and got repaired, especially, the Throne of Solomon on the hill of Solomon, Yuz-Asaph came to the valley. Prince by descent, he was pious and saintly and had given up earthly pursuits. He spent all his time in prayers and meditation. The people of Kashmir, having become idolaters after the great flood of Noah, the God Almighty sent Yuz-Asaph as a Prophet to the people of Kashmir. He proclaimed oneness of God till he passed away. Yuz-Asaph was buried at Khanyar on the banks of the lake, and the shrine is known as Rozabal. In the year 871 A.H. Syed Nasir-ud-Din, a descendant of Imam Musa-Raza, was also buried besides the grave of Yuz-Asaph.
Orders - Since the shrine is visited by the devotees, both high and common, and since the applicant Rahman Khan is the hereditary custodian of the shrine. It is ordered that he be entitled to receive the offerings, made at the shrine as before, and no one else shall have any right to such offerings.
Signed off:Given under our hand, 11th Jamad-ud-Sani, 1184 A.H., signed and sealed: Milla Fazil, Mohammad Azam, Hafiz Ahsan Ullah, Khizar Mohamad, Faquir Baba, Abdul Shakoor, Mohamad Akbar, Raza Akbar Atta
Origin: The Bagh-i-Sulaiman is a Persian work written by Mir Saadullah Shahabadi Kashmiri in 1780 A.D. It is a history of Kashmir in Persian verse.
Sayyid Naseeruddin was also burried in Roza Bol in 1451 in a grave in the Islamic direction,whilst Yus Asaph's is in the Jewish directio
“Virtuous Sayyid Naseeruddin: The assembly of believers owes its existence to him. His tomb exists in Khanyar in Anzimar. This tomb is significant because of the illuminated grave of a Prophet. All those who visit this sacred place receive aroma of perfumes! It has been narrated that a prince came, abandoned materialistic life, and adopted the path of piety and righteousness. God liked his obedience to Him [and] raised him to the status of an Apostle. He guided the people towards the Truth [and was] a mercy to the Valley (of Kashmir). It is due to this reason that his tomb is famous all over the country Decree of the Grand Mufti - The Seal Of The Justice Of Islam - Mulla Fazil - 1194 A.H.In this High Court of Justice, in the Department of Learning and Piety of the Kingdom. Present: Rehman Khan, son of Amir Khan, submits that: the kings, the nobles, the ministers and the multitude come from all directions of the kingdom to pay their homage and offereings in cash and kind at the lofty and the holy shrine of Yuz-Asaph, the Prophet, may God bless him. Claims: That he is the only and absolute claimant, entitled to receive the offerings and utilize these, and none else has any right whatsoever on these offerings. Prays: That A writ of injunction be granted to all those who interfere and others be restrained from interfering with his rights.Verdict Now: this court, after obtaining evidence, concludes as under: It has been established that during the reign of Raja Gopadatta, who got built many temples and got repaired, especially, the Throne of Solomon on the hill of Solomon, Yuz-Asaph came to the valley. Prince by descent, he was pious and saintly and had given up earthly pursuits. He spent all his time in prayers and meditation. The people of Kashmir, having become idolaters after the great flood of Noah, the God Almighty sent Yuz-Asaph as a Prophet to the people of Kashmir. He proclaimed oneness of God till he passed away. Yuz-Asaph was buried at Khanyar on the banks of the lake, and the shrine is known as Rozabal. In the year 871 A.H. Syed Nasir-ud-Din, a descendant of Imam Musa-Raza, was also buried besides the grave of Yuz-Asaph.
Orders - Since the shrine is visited by the devotees, both high and common, and since the applicant Rahman Khan is the hereditary custodian of the shrine. It is ordered that he be entitled to receive the offerings, made at the shrine as before, and no one else shall have any right to such offerings.
Signed off:Given under our hand, 11th Jamad-ud-Sani, 1184 A.H., signed and sealed: Milla Fazil, Mohammad Azam, Hafiz Ahsan Ullah, Khizar Mohamad, Faquir Baba, Abdul Shakoor, Mohamad Akbar, Raza Akbar Atta
Bhavishya Maha Purana The words of the 'wise teacher' are highlighted in red. Is he Jesus? "...One day, Shalivahan, the chief ot the Sakyas, went into the Himalayas. There, in the Land of the Hun (Ladakh, a part of the Kushan empire), the powerful king saw a man sitting on a mountain, who seemed to promise auspiciousness. His skin was fair and he wore white garments."The king asked the holy man who he was. The other replied: 'I am called a son of God, born of a virgin, minister of the non-believers, relentless in search of the truth.' The king then asked him: 'What is your religion?' The other replied, 'O great king, I come from a foreign country, where there is no longer truth and where evil knows no bounds. In the land of the non-believers, I appeared as the Messiah. But the demon Ihamasi of the barbarians (dasyu) manifested herself in a terrible form; I was delivered unto her in the manner of the non-believers and ended in Ihamasi's realm.'"'O king, lend your ear to the religion that I brought unto the non-believers: after the purification of the essence and the impure body and after seeking refuge in the prayers of the Naigama, man will pray to the Eternal. Through justice, truth, meditation and unity of spirit, man will find his way to Isa in the center of light. God, as firm as the sun, will finally unite the spirit of all wandering beings in himself. Thus, O king, Ihamasi will be destroyed; and the blissful image if Isa, the giver of happiness, will remain forever in the heart; and I was called Isa-Masih.' After the king heard these words, he took the teacher of the non-believers and sent him to their pitiless land."
The JesusTomb in Kashmir
The JesusTomb in Kashmir
'In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Ever Merciful'
JESUS IN KASHMIR THE fundamental doctrines of Christian Church are based upon the death of Jesus on the Cross, his resurrection and his bodily ascension to heaven. Though Christian masses continue to render lip service to these fictions, few thinkers even in Christian lands today believe in or dare assert the historic authenticity of these supposed events. There are not even prima facie considerations to sustain the theory of death upon the cross and there is no sure evidence to support the unnatural phenomena of the resurrection and the ascension.
Indeed the Gospels themselves furnish the most formidable refutations of these myths. The basic doctrine of the Church has been that Jesus being the son of God appeared in the human shape to take upon himself the accumulated burden of humanity's sins and to expiate them on the Cross so that mankind might attain salvation through belief in the atonement. Being the son of God Himself and through his death upon the cross he became "accursed" for mankind's sake and remained in that state for three days to atone for the sins of mankind. He, then, came back to life and ascended bodily to heaven. He will descend to the earth again in the latter days and judge mankind.
There is nothing in the authentic sayings and teachings of Jesus to support or justify any of this. According to him he was a prophet raised among Israel particularly for the guidance of the "lost sheep of the House of Israel." (Matthew 15: 24). Were it true that he was the very God himself and that the sole purpose of his sojourn upon earth was to expiate mankind's sins upon the cross, he would not have prayed in agony and asked his disciples to pray in the Garden of Gethsemane that if possible, the cup (of death upon the Cross) may be turned away (Matthew 26 : 39). Jesus believed that God heard his prayers. He must have believed that this prayer would also be heard. If the whole purpose of his advent was to atone for the sins of mankind through his death upon the cross why this agonized prayer to be spared such a death? This prayer is a complete refutation of the whole alleged purpose of his advent.
He must have received Divine assurance of deliverance in answer to his prayers (Hebrews 5:7). For, when, as a mortal being he perceived upon the cross that all apparent chance of his being delivered from his humiliating and agonizing demise upon the cross had disappeared, he was afflicted with the apprehension lest some default on his part should have defeated the Divine purpose of deliverance of which he had received assurance after his earnest prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane. This brought on fresh agony and he cried out "My God, my God! Why hast Thou forsaken me" ? ( Matthew 27: 46). If the death of Jesus upon the cross was the fulfillment of the very purpose for which he had been sent among mankind, the realization that death was now creeping upon him and that he was fast slipping into unconsciousness, should have filled him with a sense of exultation that he had now almost fulfilled the purpose of his advent, and that within a few hours that purpose would be completely achieved. Had that been so, his cry, instead of being one of agony and almost of despair, would have been a shout of exultation. He would have proclaimed, "Oh glory! Oh glory! the purpose is fulfilled. Mankind is redeemed through me," instead of crying in anguish "My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me.'
Had he died upon the cross and come back to life again, he would have proceeded to the highest vantage point in Jerusalem and proclaimed his triumph over death to the unbelieving Jews, and putting forward this irrefutable proof of his being the son of God, would have invited them to believe in him as such. He did not do this. Instead, he met the disciples a few times to convince them of the fact that he had not died upon the cross, had not become "accursed" and was still alive in his physical body (Matthew 28: 9, 10). He charged the disciples not to spread this news about him and he took precautions to meet them only in secret (Matthew 23: 19). There is not a single instance on record of any contemporary Jew or gentile having believed in him because he had died and had come to life, and yet had that been the case what greater miracle could anybody have desired to see? All this completely refutes the assertion that death upon the cross was the very purpose of his advent and that purpose had been fulfilled.
Jesus himself never taught this. He insisted that the way to salvation was through keeping "the law and the prophets." Which Law? Obviously, the Mosaic Law. Which prophets ? Clearly the Prophets who had succeeded Moses in Israel. He reiterated that he had not come to destroy the Law but to fulfill it. "Till heaven and earth pass, not one jot or title shall in no wise pass from the law." (Matthew 5: 17, 18). He exhorted his disciples and followers to do what the Scribes and Pharisees told them to do, for they sat in Moses' seat and were thus the authorized and traditional interpreters of the Law of Moses though he warned against imitation of their deeds for "they say and do not." (Matthew 23: 2, 3).
The whole body of doctrine, based upon the Law being accursed and salvation being possible only through atonement, is a later innovation and finds no support whatever in anything that Jesus said or did. It is asserted that he described himself as the son of God, but this was clearly a metaphorical use of the expression common in sacred scriptures. When charged with this he turned upon his accusers saying that if those to whom the Word of God came were called God or even the first born of God, why should he be charged with blasphemy for using the very words. If they had the right to explain them metaphorically, why should this right be denied him.( John 10: 34, 35). The Bible describes Israel (Jacob) as God's son, even the "first born".'(Exodus 4:22). The peace-makers are described as the "Children of God" (Matthew 5: 9). In the Lord's prayer God is addressed by the faithful as Father, the faithful being thus the sons of God. The Bible has frequently used this expression metaphorically to describe the chosen of God, the righteous people and even the whole of mankind.
Jesus had announced that his "wicked and adulterous" generation would be given no sign except the sign of the prophet Jonas.( Matthew 16: 4.). It is worth remembering that Jonas entered the belly of the whale alive, remained there alive, though unconscious, and emerged there from alive. So was Jesus taken down from the cross alive though unconscious, he remained in the sepulchre alive and emerged therefrom alive. Had he died upon the cross, there would have been no resemblance between his case and that of the Prophet Jonas, unless one were also to believe that Jonas too had died in the belly of the whale and had come back to life after he emerged there from, a theory which would scarcely be acceptable to the Church.( Jonah Chapter 2).
It is significant that the text of the Revised Standard Version (1946) of the New Testament, published by Thomas Nelson and Sons, New York, no longer makes mention of the bodily ascension of Jesus to heaven.
THE Muslims believe, as taught by the Holy Quran, that Jesus was a righteous Prophet raised by God among Israel. He himself emphasized that, and if the Jews rejected him the kingdom of heaven would pass to another people. Therefore, prophethood came to an end among Israel and the Comforter, the Spirit of Truth, was raised from among the descendants of Ishmael, that is to say, from among the brethren of Israel."(Deutronomy 18: 18). He was the last Law-bearing Prophet and the Law proclaimed him in the Word of God, the Holy Quran, is "all truth" through which mankind has been guided, as proclaimed by Jesus. (John, 16: l3).
The earnest prayer of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, his agonized cry from the cross, the precautions taken by him when meeting his disciples after his recovery from the swoon into which he had been plunged upon the cross - are all consistent with the truth as taught by the Holy Quran. The prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane was inspired by the natural desire of Jesus to escape the humiliation and agony of death upon the cross. This desire was all the more keen as he realized that in case the Jews succeeded in compassing his death upon the cross, they would ever after claim, as they in fact do up to this day, that Jesus having died upon the cross became 'accursed' and could not, therefore, have been a righteous Prophet (Deuteronomy, 21: 23). Far from being anxious to become "accursed" for the sake of mankind, Jesus was most anxious to escape such a stigma, for the sake of his people, so that this should not become for them a permanent barrier against their acceptance of him as a righteous Prophet. The notion of becoming "accursed" even for a short period for the sake of mankind was so alien to his mind that he assured one of the two thieves who were put upon the cross at the same time with him that the latter would be with him in Paradise that very day. By that time Jesus, finding that there was no apparent way of escape left, was beginning to be somewhat reconciled to the prospect of death, if that was the inscrutable Will of God, though he still shrank from the dreadful consequence for the Jews, if he once became "accursed" in their eyes. He thus assured the thief that if both of them did cross the valley of the shadow of death that day, they would be together in paradise!" (Luke 23:43.)
Even at the very moment when the body of Jesus was about to be taken down from the cross to be handed over to Joseph of Arimathea and was pricked in the side (possibly in the region of the pleura) by a Roman soldier with his spear, blood and water came out, a sure testimony that life was not extinct. (John 19: 2332).
It may, therefore, be accepted as beyond controversy that Jesus did not die upon the cross. He was in a swoon when his body was taken down from the cross. He was lovingly tended and cared for and healing ointments and herbs were applied to his wounds from which he recovered sufficiently by the third day to be able to leave the sepuchre. Thereafter, he met his disciples on different occasions (there is a good deal of confusion with regard to this in the Gospel account) always taking precaution lest his presence among them and, therefore, his escape from death, should become known to his enemies. Having fully established testimony to his not having died upon the cross he resolved, under Divine Command, to leave Palestine and to journey through the lands where the lost tribes of Israel then dwelt so that he could carry the Divine message to them. THUS Jesus completed his mission, died a natural death and was buried in Srinagar, Kashmir. Guided by Divine revelation and subsequent research, located his tomb in the Khanyar Street of the city of Srinagar where it can still be visited. This discovery has dispelled any doubts as to the fact that Jesus did not die on the cross and has removed all uncertainty which had enshrouded the Life of Jesus for many centuries. May God rest his soul in peace and have mercy on him Historical Sources JesusTomb in Kashmir
Islamic books which containa mention of Jesus' journey
Jesus (on whom be peace) was named the Messiah because he was a great traveller. He wore a woollen scarf on his head, and a woollen cloak on his body. He had a stick in his hand; he used to wander from country to country and from city to city. At nightfall he would stay where he was. He ate jungle vegetables, drank jungle water, and went on his travels on foot. His companions, in one of his travels, once bought a horse for him; he rode the horse one day, but as he could not make any provision for the feeding of the horse, he returned it. Journeying from his country, he arrived at Nasibain, which was at a distance of several hundred miles from his home. With him were a few of his disciples who he sent into the city to preach. In the city, however, there were current wrong and unfounded rumours about Jesus (on whom be peace) and his mother. The governor of the city, therefore, arrested the disciples and then summoned Jesus. Jesus miraculously healed some persons and exhibited other miracles. The king of the territory of Nasibain, therefore, with all his armies and his people, became a follower of his. The legend of the 'coming down of food' contained in the Holy Quran belongs to the days of his travels."
This, in brief, is the statement of Rauzat-us-Safa. The author of the book, however, has ascribed many an absurd and irrational miracle to Jesus, which I will not mention here and, keeping my account free from falsehood and absurd exaggerations, I turn to the real point at issue which leads to the conclusion that Jesus (peace be on him) in the course of his travels had arrived at Nasibain. This Nasibain is a place between Mosul and Syria which, in English maps, has been called Nasibus. If one travels from Syria towards Persia, one would pass through Nasibain, which is at a distance of 450 miles from Jerusalem: Mosul is nearly 48 miles from Nasibain and 500 miles from Jerusalem. The frontier of Persia is only at a distance of 100 miles from Mosul. This means that Nasibain is 150 miles from the frontier of Persia. The eastern frontier of Persia touches the town of Herat in Afghanistan, i.e., Herat lies on the western frontier of Afghanistan in the direction of the Persian territory and is about 900 miles from the western boundary of Persia. From Herat up to the Khyber Pass, the distance is about 500 miles. Here follows the map showing the route followed by Jesus.
The map shows the route adopted by Jesus in his journey to Kashmir. The object of his journey was that he should meet the Israelites whom the king, Shalmaneser, had taken captive to Media. It would be noticed that in the maps published by Christians, Media is shown towards the south of the Sea of Khizar (Azov), where, to-day, is Persia. This means that Media was at any rate a part of the land which to-day constitutes Persia. The eastern frontier of Persia is adjacent to Afghanistan; there is the sea towards the south and the Turkish Empire towards the west. If the report in the Rauzat-us-Safa is correct it appears that, by travelling to Nasibain, Jesus intended to come to Afghanistan through Persia, and to invite to the Truth the lost Jews who had come to be known as Afghans. The word 'Afghan' appears to be of Hebrew origin; it is a derivative which means 'brave'. It appears that at the height of their victories they adopted this name for themselves1
In short, Jesus came to the Punjab after passing through Afghanistan, with the ultimate intention of going to Kashmir after seeing the Punjab and Hindustan. It would be noticed that Chitral and a strip of the Punjab separate Kashmir from Afghanistan. If one travels from Afghanistan to Kashmir, through the Punjab, one has to journey over a distance of 80 miles or about 135 kilometers.
Jesus, however, wisely adopted the route through Afghanistan, so that the lost tribes of Israel, known as Afghans, might profit from him. The eastern frontier of Kashmir touches Tibet. From Kashmir he could easily go to Tibet. Having come to the Punjab, he had no difficulty in wandering through the important places of Hindustan before going to Kashmir or Tibet. It is, therefore, quite possible, as some old historical records of this country show, that Jesus may have seen Nepal, Benares, and other places. He then must have gone to Kashmir through Jammu or Rawalpindi. As he belonged to a cold country, it is certain that he stayed in these territories only through the winter, and, by the end of March or the beginning of April, must have started for Kashmir. As Kashmir resembles Sham [Syria and its surrounding country] he must have taken up permanent residence in this land. It is possible, moreover, that he may have stayed for some time in Afghanistan and it is not impossible that he may have married in that country. One of the tribes of Afghans is known as 'Isa Khel' -- it would not be surprising if they are descendants of Jesus. It is to be regretted, however, that the history of the Afghans is in a confused state; it is, therefore, difficult to arrive at anything definite by studying their tribal accounts. There is no doubt, however, that the Afghans are Israelites, like the Kashmiris. Those who have taken a contrary view in their books have been misled to the extreme; they have not made a minute study of the matter. The Afghans admit that they are the descendants of Qais; and Qais belongs to Israel. It is, however, not necessary to prolong this discussion here. I have already dealt with this question thoroughly in one of my books; here, I am giving an account of the journey of Jesus through Nasibain, Afghanistan, the Punjab and on to Kashmir and Tibet. He was named the 'travelling prophet', nay, the 'leader of travellers', on account of this very long journey. A Muslim savant, i.e., Ibn-al-Walid Al-Fahri Al-Tartooshi Al-Maliki, who was renowned for his learning, states about Jesus, on page 6 of his book Siraj-ul-Maluk, published by the Matba Khairiya of Egypt in 1306 A.H.: 'Where is Isa, the Ruhullah, and, the Kalimatullah, who was the leader of the righteous, and the chief of travellers?' meaning that he was dead, and that, even a great man like him had departed from this world. It should be noticed that this learned authority calls Jesus not merely 'traveller' but the 'chief of travellers'.
Likewise on page 461 of Lisan-ul-Arab it is stated: 'Jesus was named the 'Messiah', because he wandered about, and because he did not stay at one place.' The same is recorded in Tajul-Urus Sharah Qamus. There it is also stated that the Messiah is he who is given goodness and blessings i.e., he is given these qualities in such measure that even his touch is blessed; and that this name was given to Jesus, for God gives this name to whomsoever He pleases. As against this, there is another Messiah, whose touch was evil and accursed, i.e., his nature was composed of a curse and evil, so much so, that his touch gave rise to the darkness of evil and that of a curse. This name was given to the Messiah who is the Dajjal and to all those who are like him. The two names, moreover, i.e., Messiah the Traveller, and Messiah the Blessed, are not antagonistic to each other. One does not invalidate the other. For, it is a divine practice that God names a man in more than one way and that all such names apply to him. In short, Jesus being a traveller has been so well proved by Islamic history that if all the references were copied from those books, they would I think run into a big volume. What I have stated, therefore, should be enough.
On the evidence from books of historywhich show that the coming of Jesus tothe Punjab and neighbouring territories was
The question naturally arises, why Jesus after his escape from the Cross, came to this country what induced him to take such a long journey? It becomes necessary to answer this question in some detail. I have already said something about it, nevertheless, I think it would be helpful to set out the entire topic in this book.
Let it be noted,therefore, that it was extremely necessary, by reasons of his office as a divine messenger, for Jesus (on whom be peace) to have journeyed towards the Punjab and its neighbourhood, for the ten tribes of Israel, who in the Gospels have been called the Lost Sheep of Israel, had migrated to this country, a fact which is not denied by an historian. It was necessary, therefore, that Jesus (on whom be peace) should have journeyed to this country and, after finding the Lost Sheep, he should have conveyed to them his divine message.
If he had not done so, his purpose would have remained unfulfilled, for his mission was to preach to the Lost Sheep of Israel; his passing away from the world without seeking these lost sheep and, after finding them, teaching them the way to salvation, would have been like the case of a man who had been charged by his king to go to a wild tribe in order to dig a well and supply them with water, but who goes instead to some other place, spends three or four years there and takes no steps to search for the tribe. Does such a man carry out the command of the king? No, not in the least; the man cares not for that tribe: he merely looks to his own comfort.
If, however, it is asked, how and why it should be supposed that the ten tribes of Israel came to this country, the reply is that there is clear evidence to that effect, about which even a person of a poor intellect can have no doubt; for it is well known that people like the Afghans and the original inhabitants of Kashmir are of Israelite origin. For example, the people of the hilly tract of Alai which is two or three days' journey from the district of Hazara, have called themselves Bani Israel from time immemorial; so, also the inhabitants of the Kala Dakah, another hilly tract in this region, take pride in being of Israelite origin. Then there is a tribe in the Hazara district itself which attributes their origin to Israel. Similarly, the people of the hilly region between Chalas and Kabul call themselves Israelites. About the people of Kashmir, the view expressed by Dr. Bernier on the authority of some English scholars, in the second part of his book Travels in the Moghul Empire,17 is well founded: the view, namely, that the Kashmiri people are the descendants of Israel; their dress, their features and some of their customs conclusively point to the fact that they are of Israelite origin. An Englishman, George Forster by name, states in his book18 that during his stay in Kashmir he thought himself to be amidst a tribe of the Jews. In the book called The Races of Afghanistan,19 by H. W. Bellews C.S.I., (Thacker Spink & Co., Calcutta) it is mentioned that the Afghans came from Syria. Nebuchadnezzar took them prisoner and settled them in Persia and Media, from whence at some later time they marched to the East and settled in the Ghaur hills, where they were known as Beni Israel. In proof of this there is the prophecy of the Prophet Idris (Enoch), saying that the ten tribes of Israel who were taken prisoner escaped from bondage and took refuge in the territory called Arsartat which appears to be the name of the part known as Hazara today, part of the region being called Ghaur. In Tabaqat-i-Nasri, in which there is an account of the conquest of Afghanistan by Genghiz Khan, it is stated that in the time of the Shabnisi dynasty there lived a tribe called Bani-Israel, some of whom were good traders. In 622 A.D. near about the time when our Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of God be upon him) announced his call, these people were settled in the territory towards the east of Herat. A Quraish Chief, Khalid bin Walid by name, brought to them the tidings of the Prophet's advent with a view to bringing them under the banner of the Divine Messenger (on whom be peace and blessings of God). Five or six chiefs joined him, of whom Qais was the leading one, whose other name was Kish. After accepting Islam these people fought bravely for Islam and made many conquests, the Holy Prophet (on whom be peace and the blessings of God), giving them many presents on their return, blessing them, and prophesying that those people would attain to great ascendancy. The Holy Prophet said that the chiefs of this tribe would always be known as Maliks. Qais, he named Abdul Rashid, and conferred upon him the title 'Pathan'. Afghan writers say that this is a Syriac word which means a rudder. As the newly converted Qais was a guide to his tribe like the rudder of a ship he was awarded the title 'Pathan'.
It is not possible to say at what time the Afghans of Ghaur advanced farther and came to settle in the territory around Kandhar, which is their home today. This happened probably in the first century of the Islamic calendar. The Afghans maintain that Qais married the daughter of Khalid bin Walid, by whom he had three sons whose names were Saraban, Patan, and Gurgasht. Saraban had two sons, called Sacharj Yun, and Karsh Yun, whose descendants are Afghans, i.e. the Bani-Israel. The people of Asia-Minor, and Muslim historians of the West, call Afghans 'Sulaimanis'. In The Cyclopaedia of India, Eastern and Southern Asia,20 by E. Balfour, Vol. 111, it is stated that the Jewish people are spread over the central, southern, and eastern regions of Asia. In early times these people were settled in large numbers in China; they had a temple at Yih Chu, the headquarter of the district of Shu. Dr. Wolf21 who wandered for a long time in search of the Ten Lost Tribes of Bani Israel is of the opinion that if Afghans are the progeny of Jacob they come from the Tribes of Yahuda and Bin Yamin. Another report points out that the Jews were exiled to Tartary; they were found in large numbers in the territories round about Bukhara, Merv and Khiva. Prester John, Emperor of Constantinople, writing about his dominions, says that beyond this river (Amu) there are the ten tribes of Israel who, though they claim to be under their own king, are in reality his subjects and vassals. Dr. Moore's researches22 show that the Tartar tribes named Chosan are of Jewish origin and that among them are to be found traces of the ancient Jewish faith; for example, they observe the custom of circumcision. The Afghans have a tradition that they are the ten lost tribes of Israel. After the sack of Jerusalem the king, Nebuchadnezzar, took them prisoner and settled them in the Ghaur country, near Bamiyar. Before the coming of Khalid Bin Walid they had consistently maintained the Jewish faith.
In appearance the Afghans resemble the Jews in all respects. Like them, the younger brother marries the widow of the elder brother. A French traveller, L. P. Ferrier by name, who passed through Herat, states that in this territory there are many Israelites who have complete liberty in the observance of the customs of their faith. The Rabbi Bin Yamin of Toledo (Spain) in the twelfth century A.D. ventured out in search of the lost tribes. He states that these Jews are settled in China, Iran and Tibet. Josephus,23 who wrote the ancient history of the Jews in 93 A.D. in his eleventh book, in the course of his account of the Jews who escaped from bondage with the Prophet Ezra, states that the ten tribes were settled beyond the Euphrates even at that time, and that their numbers could not be counted. By beyond the Euphrates are meant Persia and the eastern territories. St. Jerome who lived in the fifth century A.D., writing about the Prophet Hosea, concerning this subject, states in the margin that from that day the ten tribes (of the Israelites) have been under king Parthya i.e., Paras, and have not been released from bondage. In the first volume of the same book it is stated that Count Juan Steram writes on page 233-34 of his book that the Afghans admit that Nebuchadnezzar, after the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem, exiled them to the territory of Bamiyan (this lies adjacent to Ghaur, in Afghanistan). In the book, A Narrative of a Visit to Ghazni, Kabul and Afghanistan by G. T. Vigne, F.G.S. (1840), on page 166,24 it is stated that one Mullah Khuda Dad read out from a book called Majma-ul-Ansab that the eldest son of Jacob was Yahuda, whose son was Usrak; Usrak's son was Aknur; Aknur's son was Maalib; Maalib's Ka-Farlai; Farlai's Qais, Qais' Talut; Talut's Armea, and Armea's son was Afghan whose descendants are the Afghan people and after whom the latter are named. Afghan was the contemporary of Nebuchadnezzar; he was called a descendant of Israel, and had forty sons. In the 34th degree, after 2000 years, was born Qais who lived in the time of Muhammad (The Holy Prophet, on whom be peace and blessings of God). His descendants multiplied unto 64 generations. Afghan's eldest son, called Salm, migrated from his home in Syria and settled in Ghaur Mashkoh, near Herat. His descendants spread into Afghanistan,
In the Encyclopaedia of Geography,25 by James Bryce, F.G.S. (London, 1856), on page 11, it is stated that the Afghans trace their genealogy to Saul, the Israelite King, and call themselves the descendants of Israel. Alexander Burns says that the Afghans state that they are of Jewish origin; that the king, Babul, captured them and settled them in the territory of Ghaur which is to the northwest of Kabul; that up to 622 A.D. they continued in their own Jewish faith, but that Khalid bin Abdulla (mistaken for Walid) married the daughter of a chief of this tribe and made them accept Islam in that year.
In the book History of Afghanistan,26 by Col. G. R. Malleson, published in London (1878), on page 39, it is stated that Abdullah Khan of Herat, the French traveller Friar John, and Sir William Jones (who was a great orientalist) agree that the Afghan people are descended from the Beni-Israel; they are the descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes. The book History of the Afghans, by L. P. Ferrier, translated by Capt. W. M. Jasse, and published in London (1858),27 records at page 1 that the majority of oriental historians are of the opinion that the Afghan people are descendants of the Ten Tribes of Israel and that the Afghans' own opinion is the same. The same historian says at page 4 of this book, that Afghans possess evidence that at Peshawar, during his invasion of India, Nadir Shah was presented by the chiefs of the Yusaf-Zai tribe with a Bible written in Hebrew as well as several other articles preserved by their families for the performance of religious ceremonies of their old faith. There were also Jews in Nadir Shah's camp. On seeing the articles they readily recognised them. Again, the same historian states at page 4 of his book that in his opinion Abdullah Khan of Herat's view is reliable. Briefly stated this view is: Malik Talut (Saul) had two sons -- Afghan and Jalut. Afghan was the patriarch of these people. After the rule of David and Solomon there was mutual fighting between the Israel tribes as a result of which each tribe became separated from the rest, and this state of affairs continued up to the time of Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar launched an invasion and killed 70000 Jews. He sacked the city, taking the remaining Jews with him to Babel as prisoners. After this catastrophe the children of Afghan fled in fear from Judaea to Arabia and lived there for a long time. But as water and land were scarce, and man and beast were both hard pressed, they decided to migrate to India. A party of Abdalis remained in Arabia, and during the Khilafat of Hazrat Abu Bakr one of their chiefs established a link by marriage between them and Khalid Bin Walid... When Iran fell to Arabia, these people migrated from Arabia and settled themselves in the Iranian provinces of Faras and Kirman. They stayed there till the invasion of Ghangiz Khan. The Abdalis were helpless against the atrocities of Ghangiz Khan. They came to India, passing through Makran, Sindh and Multan. But they had no peace here. Ultimately they went to Koh Sulaiman and settled there. The other members of the Abdalis tribe also joined them there. They consisted of 24 tribes -- the descendants of Afghan, who had three sons, namely. Saraband (Saraban), Arkash (Gargasht), Karlan (Batan). Each of them had eight sons who multiplied into twenty-four tribes, each tribe being named after the name of each son. Their names with the names of their tribes are given below:
Sons of Saraband
Name of tribe
Abdal
Abdali
Baboor
Baboori
Wazir
Waziri
Lohan
Lohani
Barch
Barchi
Khugiyan
Khugiyani
Sharan
Sharani
Gargarsht (Arkash's) sons
Name of tribe
Khilj
Khilji
Kakar
Kakari
Jamurin
Jamurini
Saturiyan
Saturiyani
Peen
Peeni
Kas
Kasi
Takan
Takani
Nasar
Nasri
Sons of Karlan
Name of tribe
Khatak
Khataki
Afrid
Afridi
Toor
Toori
Zaz
Zazi
Bab
Babi
Banganesh
Banganeshi
Landipoor
Landipoori
The book, Makhzan-i-Afghani by Khawaja Nimatullah of Herat, written in 1018 Hijra in the time of King Jahangir, translation published by Prof. Bernhard Doran of Kharqui University (London, 1836), contains in the chapters mentioned below the following statements.
In chapter 1 there is the history of Jacob Israel with whom starts the genealogy of this people (The Afghans).
In chapter 11 there is the history of King Talut, i.e., the genealogy of the Afghans is traced to Talut.
On pages 22 and 23 it is stated: Talut had two sons -- Barkhiya and Armiyah. Barkhiya had a son, Asaf, and Afghan had 24 sons and no one among the Israelites compared with the descendants of Afghan. On page 65 it is stated that Nebuchadnezzar occupied the whole of Sham (Syria), etc., exiled the Israelite tribes and sent them to settle in Ghaur, Ghazni, Kabul, Kandhar and Koh Firoz, where the descendants of Asaf and Afghan particularly took up their abode.
On pages 37 and 38 of this book, on the authority of the author of Majma-ul-Ansab, and of Mastaufi the author of Tarikh Buzidah, it is stated that in the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (on whom be peace and blessings of God) Khalid bin Walid invited to Islam the Afghans who, after the event of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, had taken up residence in the Ghaur territory. The Afghan chiefs under the leadership of Qais, who was a descendant of Talut in the 37th degree, came to the Holy Prophet (on whom be peace and blessings of God), (Here the genealogy of Abdul Rashid Qais is given up to Talut-Saul). The Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him) conferred the title of Pathan on the chiefs, the meaning of which is 'ship's rudder'. After some time the chiefs returned to their territory and began to preach Islam.
In the same book Makhzan-i-Afghan on page 63, it is recorded that Farid-ud-Din Ahmad makes the following statement concerning the titles Beni Afghanah or Beni Afghan, in his book Rasalah Ansab-i-Afghaniyah: After Nebuchadnezzar, the Magian had conquered the Israelites and the Sham territories, and when he had sacked Jerusalem, he took the Israelites prisoners and exiled them as slaves. He took away with him several of their tribes who followed the Mosaic Law, and ordered them to forsake their ancestral faith and to worship him instead of God, which they refused to do. Consequently, Nebuchadnezzar put to death two thousand of the most intelligent and the wisest people from among them and ordered the rest that they should remove themselves from his kingdom and from the Sham territory. Some of them left Nebuchadnezzar's territory under a chief and went away to the Ghaur hills. Their descendants settled down in this place, multiplied, and the people began to call them Beni Israel, Beni Asaf and Beni Afghan.
On page 64, the said author states that trustworthy records like Tarikh-i-Afghani, Tarikh-i-Ghauri, etc., contained the assertion that the Afghans are mostly Beni Israel and some of them are of Coptic origin. Moreover, Abul Fazl states that some Afghans regard themselves as of Egyptian origin, the reason stated by them being that when the Beni Israel returned to Egypt from Jerusalem, this tribe (i.e., the Afghans) migrated to India. On page 64 Farid-ud-Din Ahmad says about the title 'Afghan': About the title Afghan, some have recorded that after exile (from Syria) they used always to 'bewail and cry' (faghan) in remembrance of their home. They were therefore named Afghans. Sir John Malcolm is also of the same opinion; see History of Persia, Vol. 1, page 101.
On page 63 is set out Mahabat Khan's statement: 'As they are the followers and relations of Solomon (on whom be peace), they are, therefore, styled Sulaimanis by the Arabs'.
On page 65 it is written that almost all oriental historians' researches show that the Afghan people's own view is that they are of Jewish origin. Some of the historians of today have adopted the same view or, very likely, have regarded it as true.
As to the adoption of Jewish names by Afghans being due to their having accepted Islam, there is nothing to support the translator Bernhard Doran's view. In northern and western Punjab there are tribes, of Hindu origin who have become Muslims but whose names are not after the names of the Jewish people, which clearly shows that by becoming Muslims people do not necessarily adopt Jewish names.
In features, the Afghans have a striking resemblance to the Jews, a fact which is admitted even by those scholars who do not subscribe to the view that the Afghans are of Jewish origin. This may be the only available proof of their Jewish descent. In this connection Sir John Malcolm's words are:
The origin of the Afghan tribes who inhabit the mountainous tract between Khorasan and the Indus is variously traced by different historians. Some assert that they are lineally descended from the Jewish tribes, made prisoners by Nebuchadnezzar, and the principal chiefs are said to trace their families to David and Saul. Although their right to this proud descent is very doubtful, it is evident from their personal appearance and many of their usages that they are a distinct race from the Persians, Tartars and Indians and this alone seem to give some credibility to a statement which is contradicted by many strong facts, and of which no direct proof has been produced.
If similarity of features between one people and another can point to anything, the Kashmiris with their Jewish features would certainly be found to be of Jewish origin. This has been mentioned not only by Bernier but also by Forster, and perhaps other scholars.
Although Forster does not accept Bernier's opinion, he admits that when he was among the Kashmiris he thought he was amidst a Jewish people.
Regarding the word 'Kashmiri', there occur the following words on page 250 of A. K. Johnston's Dictionary of Geography:
On page 250, under the heading CASHMERE:
The natives are of a tall, robust frame of body, with manly features -- the women full-formed and handsome, with aquiline nose and features, resembling the Jewish.
In the Civil & Military Gazette (23 November 1898, page 4), under the heading 'Sawati and Afridi', there is reproduced a very valuable and interesting paper presented to the Anthropological section of the British Association at one of its recent meetings, which will be read at the winter session before the Committee on Anthropological Research. The paper is set out below:
Below we are enabled to give the complete text of the highly valuable and interesting paper contributed to the Anthropological Section at the recent meeting of the British Association, and still to be read before the Anthropological Institute at one of its winter meetings.
The original Paktan or Pathan inhabitants of these western gates of India are recognised in very early history, many of the tribes being mentioned by Herodotus and the historians of Alexander. In mediaeval times the rough uncultivated wilderness of mountains they held was called Roh, and its inhabitants Rohillas, and there can be little doubt that most of these early Rohilla or Pathan tribes were in their places long before the overlying Afghan tribes were thought of. All Afghans whatsoever now counted as Pathans, because they all speak the Pathan language, Pushto, they acknowledge no direct kinship, claiming themselves to be Beni Israel, the descendants of those tribes who were carried captive to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar. All of them have, however, adopted the Pushto tongue, and all recognise the same Pathan, code of common civil observances called Paktanwali, which is, in many of its provisions, curiously suggestive both of the old Mosaic dispensation and of ancient observances of the Rajput races.
ISRAELITISH TRACES
Thus the Pathans, with whom we have lately been so largely concerned, may be divided into two great communities, i.e. tribes and clans such as Waziris, Afridis, Orakzais, etc. who are of Indian origin, and those who are Afghans, who claim to be Semitic and who represent the dominant race throughout our frontier; and it seems at least to be possible that the Paktanwali, which is an unwritten code and which is acknowledged by them all alike, may be of very mixed origin indeed. We may find in it Mosaic ordinances grafted on to Rajput traditions and modified by Moslem custom. The Afghans, who call themselves Duranis and who have done so ever since the foundation of the Durani Empire about a century and a half ago, say that they trace their descent from the Israelitish tribes through an ancestor named Kish, to whom the prophet Mohomet gave the name Pathan (which is Syriac for a rudder), because he was to steer his people into the currents of Islam. We have already noted, however, that the Paktan or Pathan nationality is very much older than Islam. It is difficult to account for the universal prevalence of Israelitish names amongst Afghans without admitting some early connection with the Israelitish nation. Still more difficult is it to account for certain observances, such for instance as the keeping of the Feast of the Passover (which, by the Afghan race, is at least most curiously well imitated) or for the persistence with which the least educated Afghans maintain this tradition, without some original basis of truth for it. Bellew thinks that this Israelitish connection may be a real one; but he points out that one at least of the three great branches of the Afghan family traditionally sprung from Kish, is call the name Sarabaur, which is but the Pushtu form of the ancient name applied to the solar race of Rajputs, colonies of whom are know to have immigrated into Afghanistan after their defeat by the Chandrabans -- the lunar race in the great contest, the Mahabharat, of early Indian records. Thus the Afghan may possibly be an Israelite absorbed into ancient Rajput tribes, and this has always appeared to me to be the most probable solution of the problem of his origin. Anyhow, the modern Afghan takes his stand, on the grounds of tradition, to be one of the chosen race, a descendant of Abraham, and he only recognises affinity with other Pathans through the medium of a common language, and a common code of tribal custom.
All these quotations from the books of well-known writers considered together, will convince a just person that Afghans and Kashmiris, who are to be found in India, on the frontier and in its neighbourhood, are really Beni Israel. In the second part of this book, God willing, I shall prove in more detail that the ultimate object underlying Jesus' long journey to India was that he might discharge the duty of preaching to all the Israelite tribes, a fact to which he has alluded in the gospels. It is not surprising, therefore, that he should have come to India and Kashmir. On the other hand, it would indeed be surprising if, without discharging his duties, he should have ascended into heaven. Here I close the present discussion.
Peace be on those who are guided aright.
JESUS IN KASHMIR THE fundamental doctrines of Christian Church are based upon the death of Jesus on the Cross, his resurrection and his bodily ascension to heaven. Though Christian masses continue to render lip service to these fictions, few thinkers even in Christian lands today believe in or dare assert the historic authenticity of these supposed events. There are not even prima facie considerations to sustain the theory of death upon the cross and there is no sure evidence to support the unnatural phenomena of the resurrection and the ascension.
Indeed the Gospels themselves furnish the most formidable refutations of these myths. The basic doctrine of the Church has been that Jesus being the son of God appeared in the human shape to take upon himself the accumulated burden of humanity's sins and to expiate them on the Cross so that mankind might attain salvation through belief in the atonement. Being the son of God Himself and through his death upon the cross he became "accursed" for mankind's sake and remained in that state for three days to atone for the sins of mankind. He, then, came back to life and ascended bodily to heaven. He will descend to the earth again in the latter days and judge mankind.
There is nothing in the authentic sayings and teachings of Jesus to support or justify any of this. According to him he was a prophet raised among Israel particularly for the guidance of the "lost sheep of the House of Israel." (Matthew 15: 24). Were it true that he was the very God himself and that the sole purpose of his sojourn upon earth was to expiate mankind's sins upon the cross, he would not have prayed in agony and asked his disciples to pray in the Garden of Gethsemane that if possible, the cup (of death upon the Cross) may be turned away (Matthew 26 : 39). Jesus believed that God heard his prayers. He must have believed that this prayer would also be heard. If the whole purpose of his advent was to atone for the sins of mankind through his death upon the cross why this agonized prayer to be spared such a death? This prayer is a complete refutation of the whole alleged purpose of his advent.
He must have received Divine assurance of deliverance in answer to his prayers (Hebrews 5:7). For, when, as a mortal being he perceived upon the cross that all apparent chance of his being delivered from his humiliating and agonizing demise upon the cross had disappeared, he was afflicted with the apprehension lest some default on his part should have defeated the Divine purpose of deliverance of which he had received assurance after his earnest prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane. This brought on fresh agony and he cried out "My God, my God! Why hast Thou forsaken me" ? ( Matthew 27: 46). If the death of Jesus upon the cross was the fulfillment of the very purpose for which he had been sent among mankind, the realization that death was now creeping upon him and that he was fast slipping into unconsciousness, should have filled him with a sense of exultation that he had now almost fulfilled the purpose of his advent, and that within a few hours that purpose would be completely achieved. Had that been so, his cry, instead of being one of agony and almost of despair, would have been a shout of exultation. He would have proclaimed, "Oh glory! Oh glory! the purpose is fulfilled. Mankind is redeemed through me," instead of crying in anguish "My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me.'
Had he died upon the cross and come back to life again, he would have proceeded to the highest vantage point in Jerusalem and proclaimed his triumph over death to the unbelieving Jews, and putting forward this irrefutable proof of his being the son of God, would have invited them to believe in him as such. He did not do this. Instead, he met the disciples a few times to convince them of the fact that he had not died upon the cross, had not become "accursed" and was still alive in his physical body (Matthew 28: 9, 10). He charged the disciples not to spread this news about him and he took precautions to meet them only in secret (Matthew 23: 19). There is not a single instance on record of any contemporary Jew or gentile having believed in him because he had died and had come to life, and yet had that been the case what greater miracle could anybody have desired to see? All this completely refutes the assertion that death upon the cross was the very purpose of his advent and that purpose had been fulfilled.
Jesus himself never taught this. He insisted that the way to salvation was through keeping "the law and the prophets." Which Law? Obviously, the Mosaic Law. Which prophets ? Clearly the Prophets who had succeeded Moses in Israel. He reiterated that he had not come to destroy the Law but to fulfill it. "Till heaven and earth pass, not one jot or title shall in no wise pass from the law." (Matthew 5: 17, 18). He exhorted his disciples and followers to do what the Scribes and Pharisees told them to do, for they sat in Moses' seat and were thus the authorized and traditional interpreters of the Law of Moses though he warned against imitation of their deeds for "they say and do not." (Matthew 23: 2, 3).
The whole body of doctrine, based upon the Law being accursed and salvation being possible only through atonement, is a later innovation and finds no support whatever in anything that Jesus said or did. It is asserted that he described himself as the son of God, but this was clearly a metaphorical use of the expression common in sacred scriptures. When charged with this he turned upon his accusers saying that if those to whom the Word of God came were called God or even the first born of God, why should he be charged with blasphemy for using the very words. If they had the right to explain them metaphorically, why should this right be denied him.( John 10: 34, 35). The Bible describes Israel (Jacob) as God's son, even the "first born".'(Exodus 4:22). The peace-makers are described as the "Children of God" (Matthew 5: 9). In the Lord's prayer God is addressed by the faithful as Father, the faithful being thus the sons of God. The Bible has frequently used this expression metaphorically to describe the chosen of God, the righteous people and even the whole of mankind.
Jesus had announced that his "wicked and adulterous" generation would be given no sign except the sign of the prophet Jonas.( Matthew 16: 4.). It is worth remembering that Jonas entered the belly of the whale alive, remained there alive, though unconscious, and emerged there from alive. So was Jesus taken down from the cross alive though unconscious, he remained in the sepulchre alive and emerged therefrom alive. Had he died upon the cross, there would have been no resemblance between his case and that of the Prophet Jonas, unless one were also to believe that Jonas too had died in the belly of the whale and had come back to life after he emerged there from, a theory which would scarcely be acceptable to the Church.( Jonah Chapter 2).
It is significant that the text of the Revised Standard Version (1946) of the New Testament, published by Thomas Nelson and Sons, New York, no longer makes mention of the bodily ascension of Jesus to heaven.
THE Muslims believe, as taught by the Holy Quran, that Jesus was a righteous Prophet raised by God among Israel. He himself emphasized that, and if the Jews rejected him the kingdom of heaven would pass to another people. Therefore, prophethood came to an end among Israel and the Comforter, the Spirit of Truth, was raised from among the descendants of Ishmael, that is to say, from among the brethren of Israel."(Deutronomy 18: 18). He was the last Law-bearing Prophet and the Law proclaimed him in the Word of God, the Holy Quran, is "all truth" through which mankind has been guided, as proclaimed by Jesus. (John, 16: l3).
The earnest prayer of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, his agonized cry from the cross, the precautions taken by him when meeting his disciples after his recovery from the swoon into which he had been plunged upon the cross - are all consistent with the truth as taught by the Holy Quran. The prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane was inspired by the natural desire of Jesus to escape the humiliation and agony of death upon the cross. This desire was all the more keen as he realized that in case the Jews succeeded in compassing his death upon the cross, they would ever after claim, as they in fact do up to this day, that Jesus having died upon the cross became 'accursed' and could not, therefore, have been a righteous Prophet (Deuteronomy, 21: 23). Far from being anxious to become "accursed" for the sake of mankind, Jesus was most anxious to escape such a stigma, for the sake of his people, so that this should not become for them a permanent barrier against their acceptance of him as a righteous Prophet. The notion of becoming "accursed" even for a short period for the sake of mankind was so alien to his mind that he assured one of the two thieves who were put upon the cross at the same time with him that the latter would be with him in Paradise that very day. By that time Jesus, finding that there was no apparent way of escape left, was beginning to be somewhat reconciled to the prospect of death, if that was the inscrutable Will of God, though he still shrank from the dreadful consequence for the Jews, if he once became "accursed" in their eyes. He thus assured the thief that if both of them did cross the valley of the shadow of death that day, they would be together in paradise!" (Luke 23:43.)
Even at the very moment when the body of Jesus was about to be taken down from the cross to be handed over to Joseph of Arimathea and was pricked in the side (possibly in the region of the pleura) by a Roman soldier with his spear, blood and water came out, a sure testimony that life was not extinct. (John 19: 2332).
It may, therefore, be accepted as beyond controversy that Jesus did not die upon the cross. He was in a swoon when his body was taken down from the cross. He was lovingly tended and cared for and healing ointments and herbs were applied to his wounds from which he recovered sufficiently by the third day to be able to leave the sepuchre. Thereafter, he met his disciples on different occasions (there is a good deal of confusion with regard to this in the Gospel account) always taking precaution lest his presence among them and, therefore, his escape from death, should become known to his enemies. Having fully established testimony to his not having died upon the cross he resolved, under Divine Command, to leave Palestine and to journey through the lands where the lost tribes of Israel then dwelt so that he could carry the Divine message to them. THUS Jesus completed his mission, died a natural death and was buried in Srinagar, Kashmir. Guided by Divine revelation and subsequent research, located his tomb in the Khanyar Street of the city of Srinagar where it can still be visited. This discovery has dispelled any doubts as to the fact that Jesus did not die on the cross and has removed all uncertainty which had enshrouded the Life of Jesus for many centuries. May God rest his soul in peace and have mercy on him Historical Sources JesusTomb in Kashmir
Islamic books which containa mention of Jesus' journey
Jesus (on whom be peace) was named the Messiah because he was a great traveller. He wore a woollen scarf on his head, and a woollen cloak on his body. He had a stick in his hand; he used to wander from country to country and from city to city. At nightfall he would stay where he was. He ate jungle vegetables, drank jungle water, and went on his travels on foot. His companions, in one of his travels, once bought a horse for him; he rode the horse one day, but as he could not make any provision for the feeding of the horse, he returned it. Journeying from his country, he arrived at Nasibain, which was at a distance of several hundred miles from his home. With him were a few of his disciples who he sent into the city to preach. In the city, however, there were current wrong and unfounded rumours about Jesus (on whom be peace) and his mother. The governor of the city, therefore, arrested the disciples and then summoned Jesus. Jesus miraculously healed some persons and exhibited other miracles. The king of the territory of Nasibain, therefore, with all his armies and his people, became a follower of his. The legend of the 'coming down of food' contained in the Holy Quran belongs to the days of his travels."
This, in brief, is the statement of Rauzat-us-Safa. The author of the book, however, has ascribed many an absurd and irrational miracle to Jesus, which I will not mention here and, keeping my account free from falsehood and absurd exaggerations, I turn to the real point at issue which leads to the conclusion that Jesus (peace be on him) in the course of his travels had arrived at Nasibain. This Nasibain is a place between Mosul and Syria which, in English maps, has been called Nasibus. If one travels from Syria towards Persia, one would pass through Nasibain, which is at a distance of 450 miles from Jerusalem: Mosul is nearly 48 miles from Nasibain and 500 miles from Jerusalem. The frontier of Persia is only at a distance of 100 miles from Mosul. This means that Nasibain is 150 miles from the frontier of Persia. The eastern frontier of Persia touches the town of Herat in Afghanistan, i.e., Herat lies on the western frontier of Afghanistan in the direction of the Persian territory and is about 900 miles from the western boundary of Persia. From Herat up to the Khyber Pass, the distance is about 500 miles. Here follows the map showing the route followed by Jesus.
The map shows the route adopted by Jesus in his journey to Kashmir. The object of his journey was that he should meet the Israelites whom the king, Shalmaneser, had taken captive to Media. It would be noticed that in the maps published by Christians, Media is shown towards the south of the Sea of Khizar (Azov), where, to-day, is Persia. This means that Media was at any rate a part of the land which to-day constitutes Persia. The eastern frontier of Persia is adjacent to Afghanistan; there is the sea towards the south and the Turkish Empire towards the west. If the report in the Rauzat-us-Safa is correct it appears that, by travelling to Nasibain, Jesus intended to come to Afghanistan through Persia, and to invite to the Truth the lost Jews who had come to be known as Afghans. The word 'Afghan' appears to be of Hebrew origin; it is a derivative which means 'brave'. It appears that at the height of their victories they adopted this name for themselves1
In short, Jesus came to the Punjab after passing through Afghanistan, with the ultimate intention of going to Kashmir after seeing the Punjab and Hindustan. It would be noticed that Chitral and a strip of the Punjab separate Kashmir from Afghanistan. If one travels from Afghanistan to Kashmir, through the Punjab, one has to journey over a distance of 80 miles or about 135 kilometers.
Jesus, however, wisely adopted the route through Afghanistan, so that the lost tribes of Israel, known as Afghans, might profit from him. The eastern frontier of Kashmir touches Tibet. From Kashmir he could easily go to Tibet. Having come to the Punjab, he had no difficulty in wandering through the important places of Hindustan before going to Kashmir or Tibet. It is, therefore, quite possible, as some old historical records of this country show, that Jesus may have seen Nepal, Benares, and other places. He then must have gone to Kashmir through Jammu or Rawalpindi. As he belonged to a cold country, it is certain that he stayed in these territories only through the winter, and, by the end of March or the beginning of April, must have started for Kashmir. As Kashmir resembles Sham [Syria and its surrounding country] he must have taken up permanent residence in this land. It is possible, moreover, that he may have stayed for some time in Afghanistan and it is not impossible that he may have married in that country. One of the tribes of Afghans is known as 'Isa Khel' -- it would not be surprising if they are descendants of Jesus. It is to be regretted, however, that the history of the Afghans is in a confused state; it is, therefore, difficult to arrive at anything definite by studying their tribal accounts. There is no doubt, however, that the Afghans are Israelites, like the Kashmiris. Those who have taken a contrary view in their books have been misled to the extreme; they have not made a minute study of the matter. The Afghans admit that they are the descendants of Qais; and Qais belongs to Israel. It is, however, not necessary to prolong this discussion here. I have already dealt with this question thoroughly in one of my books; here, I am giving an account of the journey of Jesus through Nasibain, Afghanistan, the Punjab and on to Kashmir and Tibet. He was named the 'travelling prophet', nay, the 'leader of travellers', on account of this very long journey. A Muslim savant, i.e., Ibn-al-Walid Al-Fahri Al-Tartooshi Al-Maliki, who was renowned for his learning, states about Jesus, on page 6 of his book Siraj-ul-Maluk, published by the Matba Khairiya of Egypt in 1306 A.H.: 'Where is Isa, the Ruhullah, and, the Kalimatullah, who was the leader of the righteous, and the chief of travellers?' meaning that he was dead, and that, even a great man like him had departed from this world. It should be noticed that this learned authority calls Jesus not merely 'traveller' but the 'chief of travellers'.
Likewise on page 461 of Lisan-ul-Arab it is stated: 'Jesus was named the 'Messiah', because he wandered about, and because he did not stay at one place.' The same is recorded in Tajul-Urus Sharah Qamus. There it is also stated that the Messiah is he who is given goodness and blessings i.e., he is given these qualities in such measure that even his touch is blessed; and that this name was given to Jesus, for God gives this name to whomsoever He pleases. As against this, there is another Messiah, whose touch was evil and accursed, i.e., his nature was composed of a curse and evil, so much so, that his touch gave rise to the darkness of evil and that of a curse. This name was given to the Messiah who is the Dajjal and to all those who are like him. The two names, moreover, i.e., Messiah the Traveller, and Messiah the Blessed, are not antagonistic to each other. One does not invalidate the other. For, it is a divine practice that God names a man in more than one way and that all such names apply to him. In short, Jesus being a traveller has been so well proved by Islamic history that if all the references were copied from those books, they would I think run into a big volume. What I have stated, therefore, should be enough.
On the evidence from books of historywhich show that the coming of Jesus tothe Punjab and neighbouring territories was
The question naturally arises, why Jesus after his escape from the Cross, came to this country what induced him to take such a long journey? It becomes necessary to answer this question in some detail. I have already said something about it, nevertheless, I think it would be helpful to set out the entire topic in this book.
Let it be noted,therefore, that it was extremely necessary, by reasons of his office as a divine messenger, for Jesus (on whom be peace) to have journeyed towards the Punjab and its neighbourhood, for the ten tribes of Israel, who in the Gospels have been called the Lost Sheep of Israel, had migrated to this country, a fact which is not denied by an historian. It was necessary, therefore, that Jesus (on whom be peace) should have journeyed to this country and, after finding the Lost Sheep, he should have conveyed to them his divine message.
If he had not done so, his purpose would have remained unfulfilled, for his mission was to preach to the Lost Sheep of Israel; his passing away from the world without seeking these lost sheep and, after finding them, teaching them the way to salvation, would have been like the case of a man who had been charged by his king to go to a wild tribe in order to dig a well and supply them with water, but who goes instead to some other place, spends three or four years there and takes no steps to search for the tribe. Does such a man carry out the command of the king? No, not in the least; the man cares not for that tribe: he merely looks to his own comfort.
If, however, it is asked, how and why it should be supposed that the ten tribes of Israel came to this country, the reply is that there is clear evidence to that effect, about which even a person of a poor intellect can have no doubt; for it is well known that people like the Afghans and the original inhabitants of Kashmir are of Israelite origin. For example, the people of the hilly tract of Alai which is two or three days' journey from the district of Hazara, have called themselves Bani Israel from time immemorial; so, also the inhabitants of the Kala Dakah, another hilly tract in this region, take pride in being of Israelite origin. Then there is a tribe in the Hazara district itself which attributes their origin to Israel. Similarly, the people of the hilly region between Chalas and Kabul call themselves Israelites. About the people of Kashmir, the view expressed by Dr. Bernier on the authority of some English scholars, in the second part of his book Travels in the Moghul Empire,17 is well founded: the view, namely, that the Kashmiri people are the descendants of Israel; their dress, their features and some of their customs conclusively point to the fact that they are of Israelite origin. An Englishman, George Forster by name, states in his book18 that during his stay in Kashmir he thought himself to be amidst a tribe of the Jews. In the book called The Races of Afghanistan,19 by H. W. Bellews C.S.I., (Thacker Spink & Co., Calcutta) it is mentioned that the Afghans came from Syria. Nebuchadnezzar took them prisoner and settled them in Persia and Media, from whence at some later time they marched to the East and settled in the Ghaur hills, where they were known as Beni Israel. In proof of this there is the prophecy of the Prophet Idris (Enoch), saying that the ten tribes of Israel who were taken prisoner escaped from bondage and took refuge in the territory called Arsartat which appears to be the name of the part known as Hazara today, part of the region being called Ghaur. In Tabaqat-i-Nasri, in which there is an account of the conquest of Afghanistan by Genghiz Khan, it is stated that in the time of the Shabnisi dynasty there lived a tribe called Bani-Israel, some of whom were good traders. In 622 A.D. near about the time when our Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of God be upon him) announced his call, these people were settled in the territory towards the east of Herat. A Quraish Chief, Khalid bin Walid by name, brought to them the tidings of the Prophet's advent with a view to bringing them under the banner of the Divine Messenger (on whom be peace and blessings of God). Five or six chiefs joined him, of whom Qais was the leading one, whose other name was Kish. After accepting Islam these people fought bravely for Islam and made many conquests, the Holy Prophet (on whom be peace and the blessings of God), giving them many presents on their return, blessing them, and prophesying that those people would attain to great ascendancy. The Holy Prophet said that the chiefs of this tribe would always be known as Maliks. Qais, he named Abdul Rashid, and conferred upon him the title 'Pathan'. Afghan writers say that this is a Syriac word which means a rudder. As the newly converted Qais was a guide to his tribe like the rudder of a ship he was awarded the title 'Pathan'.
It is not possible to say at what time the Afghans of Ghaur advanced farther and came to settle in the territory around Kandhar, which is their home today. This happened probably in the first century of the Islamic calendar. The Afghans maintain that Qais married the daughter of Khalid bin Walid, by whom he had three sons whose names were Saraban, Patan, and Gurgasht. Saraban had two sons, called Sacharj Yun, and Karsh Yun, whose descendants are Afghans, i.e. the Bani-Israel. The people of Asia-Minor, and Muslim historians of the West, call Afghans 'Sulaimanis'. In The Cyclopaedia of India, Eastern and Southern Asia,20 by E. Balfour, Vol. 111, it is stated that the Jewish people are spread over the central, southern, and eastern regions of Asia. In early times these people were settled in large numbers in China; they had a temple at Yih Chu, the headquarter of the district of Shu. Dr. Wolf21 who wandered for a long time in search of the Ten Lost Tribes of Bani Israel is of the opinion that if Afghans are the progeny of Jacob they come from the Tribes of Yahuda and Bin Yamin. Another report points out that the Jews were exiled to Tartary; they were found in large numbers in the territories round about Bukhara, Merv and Khiva. Prester John, Emperor of Constantinople, writing about his dominions, says that beyond this river (Amu) there are the ten tribes of Israel who, though they claim to be under their own king, are in reality his subjects and vassals. Dr. Moore's researches22 show that the Tartar tribes named Chosan are of Jewish origin and that among them are to be found traces of the ancient Jewish faith; for example, they observe the custom of circumcision. The Afghans have a tradition that they are the ten lost tribes of Israel. After the sack of Jerusalem the king, Nebuchadnezzar, took them prisoner and settled them in the Ghaur country, near Bamiyar. Before the coming of Khalid Bin Walid they had consistently maintained the Jewish faith.
In appearance the Afghans resemble the Jews in all respects. Like them, the younger brother marries the widow of the elder brother. A French traveller, L. P. Ferrier by name, who passed through Herat, states that in this territory there are many Israelites who have complete liberty in the observance of the customs of their faith. The Rabbi Bin Yamin of Toledo (Spain) in the twelfth century A.D. ventured out in search of the lost tribes. He states that these Jews are settled in China, Iran and Tibet. Josephus,23 who wrote the ancient history of the Jews in 93 A.D. in his eleventh book, in the course of his account of the Jews who escaped from bondage with the Prophet Ezra, states that the ten tribes were settled beyond the Euphrates even at that time, and that their numbers could not be counted. By beyond the Euphrates are meant Persia and the eastern territories. St. Jerome who lived in the fifth century A.D., writing about the Prophet Hosea, concerning this subject, states in the margin that from that day the ten tribes (of the Israelites) have been under king Parthya i.e., Paras, and have not been released from bondage. In the first volume of the same book it is stated that Count Juan Steram writes on page 233-34 of his book that the Afghans admit that Nebuchadnezzar, after the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem, exiled them to the territory of Bamiyan (this lies adjacent to Ghaur, in Afghanistan). In the book, A Narrative of a Visit to Ghazni, Kabul and Afghanistan by G. T. Vigne, F.G.S. (1840), on page 166,24 it is stated that one Mullah Khuda Dad read out from a book called Majma-ul-Ansab that the eldest son of Jacob was Yahuda, whose son was Usrak; Usrak's son was Aknur; Aknur's son was Maalib; Maalib's Ka-Farlai; Farlai's Qais, Qais' Talut; Talut's Armea, and Armea's son was Afghan whose descendants are the Afghan people and after whom the latter are named. Afghan was the contemporary of Nebuchadnezzar; he was called a descendant of Israel, and had forty sons. In the 34th degree, after 2000 years, was born Qais who lived in the time of Muhammad (The Holy Prophet, on whom be peace and blessings of God). His descendants multiplied unto 64 generations. Afghan's eldest son, called Salm, migrated from his home in Syria and settled in Ghaur Mashkoh, near Herat. His descendants spread into Afghanistan,
In the Encyclopaedia of Geography,25 by James Bryce, F.G.S. (London, 1856), on page 11, it is stated that the Afghans trace their genealogy to Saul, the Israelite King, and call themselves the descendants of Israel. Alexander Burns says that the Afghans state that they are of Jewish origin; that the king, Babul, captured them and settled them in the territory of Ghaur which is to the northwest of Kabul; that up to 622 A.D. they continued in their own Jewish faith, but that Khalid bin Abdulla (mistaken for Walid) married the daughter of a chief of this tribe and made them accept Islam in that year.
In the book History of Afghanistan,26 by Col. G. R. Malleson, published in London (1878), on page 39, it is stated that Abdullah Khan of Herat, the French traveller Friar John, and Sir William Jones (who was a great orientalist) agree that the Afghan people are descended from the Beni-Israel; they are the descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes. The book History of the Afghans, by L. P. Ferrier, translated by Capt. W. M. Jasse, and published in London (1858),27 records at page 1 that the majority of oriental historians are of the opinion that the Afghan people are descendants of the Ten Tribes of Israel and that the Afghans' own opinion is the same. The same historian says at page 4 of this book, that Afghans possess evidence that at Peshawar, during his invasion of India, Nadir Shah was presented by the chiefs of the Yusaf-Zai tribe with a Bible written in Hebrew as well as several other articles preserved by their families for the performance of religious ceremonies of their old faith. There were also Jews in Nadir Shah's camp. On seeing the articles they readily recognised them. Again, the same historian states at page 4 of his book that in his opinion Abdullah Khan of Herat's view is reliable. Briefly stated this view is: Malik Talut (Saul) had two sons -- Afghan and Jalut. Afghan was the patriarch of these people. After the rule of David and Solomon there was mutual fighting between the Israel tribes as a result of which each tribe became separated from the rest, and this state of affairs continued up to the time of Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar launched an invasion and killed 70000 Jews. He sacked the city, taking the remaining Jews with him to Babel as prisoners. After this catastrophe the children of Afghan fled in fear from Judaea to Arabia and lived there for a long time. But as water and land were scarce, and man and beast were both hard pressed, they decided to migrate to India. A party of Abdalis remained in Arabia, and during the Khilafat of Hazrat Abu Bakr one of their chiefs established a link by marriage between them and Khalid Bin Walid... When Iran fell to Arabia, these people migrated from Arabia and settled themselves in the Iranian provinces of Faras and Kirman. They stayed there till the invasion of Ghangiz Khan. The Abdalis were helpless against the atrocities of Ghangiz Khan. They came to India, passing through Makran, Sindh and Multan. But they had no peace here. Ultimately they went to Koh Sulaiman and settled there. The other members of the Abdalis tribe also joined them there. They consisted of 24 tribes -- the descendants of Afghan, who had three sons, namely. Saraband (Saraban), Arkash (Gargasht), Karlan (Batan). Each of them had eight sons who multiplied into twenty-four tribes, each tribe being named after the name of each son. Their names with the names of their tribes are given below:
Sons of Saraband
Name of tribe
Abdal
Abdali
Baboor
Baboori
Wazir
Waziri
Lohan
Lohani
Barch
Barchi
Khugiyan
Khugiyani
Sharan
Sharani
Gargarsht (Arkash's) sons
Name of tribe
Khilj
Khilji
Kakar
Kakari
Jamurin
Jamurini
Saturiyan
Saturiyani
Peen
Peeni
Kas
Kasi
Takan
Takani
Nasar
Nasri
Sons of Karlan
Name of tribe
Khatak
Khataki
Afrid
Afridi
Toor
Toori
Zaz
Zazi
Bab
Babi
Banganesh
Banganeshi
Landipoor
Landipoori
The book, Makhzan-i-Afghani by Khawaja Nimatullah of Herat, written in 1018 Hijra in the time of King Jahangir, translation published by Prof. Bernhard Doran of Kharqui University (London, 1836), contains in the chapters mentioned below the following statements.
In chapter 1 there is the history of Jacob Israel with whom starts the genealogy of this people (The Afghans).
In chapter 11 there is the history of King Talut, i.e., the genealogy of the Afghans is traced to Talut.
On pages 22 and 23 it is stated: Talut had two sons -- Barkhiya and Armiyah. Barkhiya had a son, Asaf, and Afghan had 24 sons and no one among the Israelites compared with the descendants of Afghan. On page 65 it is stated that Nebuchadnezzar occupied the whole of Sham (Syria), etc., exiled the Israelite tribes and sent them to settle in Ghaur, Ghazni, Kabul, Kandhar and Koh Firoz, where the descendants of Asaf and Afghan particularly took up their abode.
On pages 37 and 38 of this book, on the authority of the author of Majma-ul-Ansab, and of Mastaufi the author of Tarikh Buzidah, it is stated that in the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (on whom be peace and blessings of God) Khalid bin Walid invited to Islam the Afghans who, after the event of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, had taken up residence in the Ghaur territory. The Afghan chiefs under the leadership of Qais, who was a descendant of Talut in the 37th degree, came to the Holy Prophet (on whom be peace and blessings of God), (Here the genealogy of Abdul Rashid Qais is given up to Talut-Saul). The Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him) conferred the title of Pathan on the chiefs, the meaning of which is 'ship's rudder'. After some time the chiefs returned to their territory and began to preach Islam.
In the same book Makhzan-i-Afghan on page 63, it is recorded that Farid-ud-Din Ahmad makes the following statement concerning the titles Beni Afghanah or Beni Afghan, in his book Rasalah Ansab-i-Afghaniyah: After Nebuchadnezzar, the Magian had conquered the Israelites and the Sham territories, and when he had sacked Jerusalem, he took the Israelites prisoners and exiled them as slaves. He took away with him several of their tribes who followed the Mosaic Law, and ordered them to forsake their ancestral faith and to worship him instead of God, which they refused to do. Consequently, Nebuchadnezzar put to death two thousand of the most intelligent and the wisest people from among them and ordered the rest that they should remove themselves from his kingdom and from the Sham territory. Some of them left Nebuchadnezzar's territory under a chief and went away to the Ghaur hills. Their descendants settled down in this place, multiplied, and the people began to call them Beni Israel, Beni Asaf and Beni Afghan.
On page 64, the said author states that trustworthy records like Tarikh-i-Afghani, Tarikh-i-Ghauri, etc., contained the assertion that the Afghans are mostly Beni Israel and some of them are of Coptic origin. Moreover, Abul Fazl states that some Afghans regard themselves as of Egyptian origin, the reason stated by them being that when the Beni Israel returned to Egypt from Jerusalem, this tribe (i.e., the Afghans) migrated to India. On page 64 Farid-ud-Din Ahmad says about the title 'Afghan': About the title Afghan, some have recorded that after exile (from Syria) they used always to 'bewail and cry' (faghan) in remembrance of their home. They were therefore named Afghans. Sir John Malcolm is also of the same opinion; see History of Persia, Vol. 1, page 101.
On page 63 is set out Mahabat Khan's statement: 'As they are the followers and relations of Solomon (on whom be peace), they are, therefore, styled Sulaimanis by the Arabs'.
On page 65 it is written that almost all oriental historians' researches show that the Afghan people's own view is that they are of Jewish origin. Some of the historians of today have adopted the same view or, very likely, have regarded it as true.
As to the adoption of Jewish names by Afghans being due to their having accepted Islam, there is nothing to support the translator Bernhard Doran's view. In northern and western Punjab there are tribes, of Hindu origin who have become Muslims but whose names are not after the names of the Jewish people, which clearly shows that by becoming Muslims people do not necessarily adopt Jewish names.
In features, the Afghans have a striking resemblance to the Jews, a fact which is admitted even by those scholars who do not subscribe to the view that the Afghans are of Jewish origin. This may be the only available proof of their Jewish descent. In this connection Sir John Malcolm's words are:
The origin of the Afghan tribes who inhabit the mountainous tract between Khorasan and the Indus is variously traced by different historians. Some assert that they are lineally descended from the Jewish tribes, made prisoners by Nebuchadnezzar, and the principal chiefs are said to trace their families to David and Saul. Although their right to this proud descent is very doubtful, it is evident from their personal appearance and many of their usages that they are a distinct race from the Persians, Tartars and Indians and this alone seem to give some credibility to a statement which is contradicted by many strong facts, and of which no direct proof has been produced.
If similarity of features between one people and another can point to anything, the Kashmiris with their Jewish features would certainly be found to be of Jewish origin. This has been mentioned not only by Bernier but also by Forster, and perhaps other scholars.
Although Forster does not accept Bernier's opinion, he admits that when he was among the Kashmiris he thought he was amidst a Jewish people.
Regarding the word 'Kashmiri', there occur the following words on page 250 of A. K. Johnston's Dictionary of Geography:
On page 250, under the heading CASHMERE:
The natives are of a tall, robust frame of body, with manly features -- the women full-formed and handsome, with aquiline nose and features, resembling the Jewish.
In the Civil & Military Gazette (23 November 1898, page 4), under the heading 'Sawati and Afridi', there is reproduced a very valuable and interesting paper presented to the Anthropological section of the British Association at one of its recent meetings, which will be read at the winter session before the Committee on Anthropological Research. The paper is set out below:
Below we are enabled to give the complete text of the highly valuable and interesting paper contributed to the Anthropological Section at the recent meeting of the British Association, and still to be read before the Anthropological Institute at one of its winter meetings.
The original Paktan or Pathan inhabitants of these western gates of India are recognised in very early history, many of the tribes being mentioned by Herodotus and the historians of Alexander. In mediaeval times the rough uncultivated wilderness of mountains they held was called Roh, and its inhabitants Rohillas, and there can be little doubt that most of these early Rohilla or Pathan tribes were in their places long before the overlying Afghan tribes were thought of. All Afghans whatsoever now counted as Pathans, because they all speak the Pathan language, Pushto, they acknowledge no direct kinship, claiming themselves to be Beni Israel, the descendants of those tribes who were carried captive to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar. All of them have, however, adopted the Pushto tongue, and all recognise the same Pathan, code of common civil observances called Paktanwali, which is, in many of its provisions, curiously suggestive both of the old Mosaic dispensation and of ancient observances of the Rajput races.
ISRAELITISH TRACES
Thus the Pathans, with whom we have lately been so largely concerned, may be divided into two great communities, i.e. tribes and clans such as Waziris, Afridis, Orakzais, etc. who are of Indian origin, and those who are Afghans, who claim to be Semitic and who represent the dominant race throughout our frontier; and it seems at least to be possible that the Paktanwali, which is an unwritten code and which is acknowledged by them all alike, may be of very mixed origin indeed. We may find in it Mosaic ordinances grafted on to Rajput traditions and modified by Moslem custom. The Afghans, who call themselves Duranis and who have done so ever since the foundation of the Durani Empire about a century and a half ago, say that they trace their descent from the Israelitish tribes through an ancestor named Kish, to whom the prophet Mohomet gave the name Pathan (which is Syriac for a rudder), because he was to steer his people into the currents of Islam. We have already noted, however, that the Paktan or Pathan nationality is very much older than Islam. It is difficult to account for the universal prevalence of Israelitish names amongst Afghans without admitting some early connection with the Israelitish nation. Still more difficult is it to account for certain observances, such for instance as the keeping of the Feast of the Passover (which, by the Afghan race, is at least most curiously well imitated) or for the persistence with which the least educated Afghans maintain this tradition, without some original basis of truth for it. Bellew thinks that this Israelitish connection may be a real one; but he points out that one at least of the three great branches of the Afghan family traditionally sprung from Kish, is call the name Sarabaur, which is but the Pushtu form of the ancient name applied to the solar race of Rajputs, colonies of whom are know to have immigrated into Afghanistan after their defeat by the Chandrabans -- the lunar race in the great contest, the Mahabharat, of early Indian records. Thus the Afghan may possibly be an Israelite absorbed into ancient Rajput tribes, and this has always appeared to me to be the most probable solution of the problem of his origin. Anyhow, the modern Afghan takes his stand, on the grounds of tradition, to be one of the chosen race, a descendant of Abraham, and he only recognises affinity with other Pathans through the medium of a common language, and a common code of tribal custom.
All these quotations from the books of well-known writers considered together, will convince a just person that Afghans and Kashmiris, who are to be found in India, on the frontier and in its neighbourhood, are really Beni Israel. In the second part of this book, God willing, I shall prove in more detail that the ultimate object underlying Jesus' long journey to India was that he might discharge the duty of preaching to all the Israelite tribes, a fact to which he has alluded in the gospels. It is not surprising, therefore, that he should have come to India and Kashmir. On the other hand, it would indeed be surprising if, without discharging his duties, he should have ascended into heaven. Here I close the present discussion.
Peace be on those who are guided aright.
