Tomb of Jesus-Qadiani view

[Dr_Sufi]

Re: Tomb of Jesus-Qadiani view

@ahmadjee

Ahmadi view on Hazrat Isa(as) Crucifixion is that, he was put to cross but he didn’t die on it. Instead he was unconscious, probably in a comma. Later when came back to consciousness, he along with his mother, migrated to the lost tribes of Israel, which were spread thought the (Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, NWFP, Kashmir) region. He finally passed away in Kashmir.

If you want specific information on why/how Ahmadis believe that, please read Jesus in India

Also, let me point out that there had been attempts by secular scholars to carbon date the Tomb of Jesus to find out the authenticity of the claim. So far the Indian government is not co-operating citing security and religious tension in Kashmir. Recently a lot of secular and non-secular scholars give the theory that Jesus didn’t die on cross a lot of credibility. BBC, National Geographic and some other main stream media channels have also run programs on it. Jesus migrating towards India is also referenced in such programs.

I personally believe its only a matter of time that it will become a popular belief that Jesus (as) actually survived the Crucifixion. Mainly because the theory that he ascended to heaven before being crucified (like most Muslims believe) or after (the Christian fundamental belief) is hard pill to swallow based on the evidence.

Oh and one last thing. Ahmadis also believe that the prophecy of AnHazoor (saw) that his messiah will break the cross (among other things) is fulfilled by Hazrat Ahmad (as) pin pointing the exact location of the tomb of Jesus. Because if it is actual tomb of Jesus, then there was no death on crucifixion, no sacrifice for mankind, the whole christian doctrine of son of God falls apart, thus breaking the cross.

Respected ahmadjee

Regards and Blessings

Whatever you have written may be true from a specific ponit of view. On the other hand, if you let me share my humble deliberations, I would say that probably it is incorrect on account of some other accounts.

1. The tomb in question, situated in the Khan Yar quarter of Srinagar was actually that of a Prince, either Buddhist by the name Badhasaf or Iranian by th name Badhasap.

2. Historical evidence suggests that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad **Qadiani never claimed to be a Messiah till 1891. **He only claimed himself to be a Mujaddid till 1890s.

3. The suggestion of an expression Replica of Messiah or Promised Messiah was probably first used by Hakim Nur-ud-Din Bhairavi (i.e., of Bhaira, a town near Sargodha), the First Caliph of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani. He was the Royal Hakim to the ruler of Jammu, Kashmir and Poonch.

4. Hakim Nur-ud-Din Bhairavi first met Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani in 1885 at Qadian. He very was much impressed by the initial works of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani like Baraheen-e-Ahmadiya. He even wrote a book to support Baraheen-e-Ahmadiya.

5. After the initial meeting in 1885, regular correspondance followed between the two. Th earliest letter from Mirza Ghulam Ahmad **Qadiani **to Hakim Nur-ud-Din Bhairavi dates 08-03-1885.

6. In January 1888, Hakim Nur-ud-Din Bhairavi invited Mirza Ghulam Ahmad **Qadiani **to Srinagar, Kashmir where he stayed with his future Caliph for one month.

7. On 24-01-1891, in a reply to a letter from Hakim Nur-ud-Din Bhairavi, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad **Qadiani **wrote *“Whatever has been said by you, sir, that there is no harm in proclaiming myself to be the Promised Messiah, even independant of the the one referred to in the Damascene Hadith this humble one has no ned of becoming a replica ofthe Messiah. I mereely want that Allah include me among HIS humble and obedient servants. But we cannot escape from being put to test. The Exalted Allah has made trial the only way to advancement…” *(**Collection of Letters of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani **)

8. Later in the same year 1891, we see Mirza Ghulam Ahmad **Qadiani **accepting the suggestions of Hakim Nur-ud-Din Bhairavi when he claimed to be a Promised Messiah and Replica of Messiah in his book Fath-e-Islam.

9. Afterwards, the detailed knowledge of Hakim Nur-ud-Din Bhairavi about the intricate geography and layout of Srinagar, and his devout love to his mentor, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad **Qadiani **bore fruit when he found this tomb with an un-substantiated history, and labelled it to be that of Jesus Christ.

10. Later Mirza Ghulam Ahmad **Qadiani **with the help of Royal Hakim of Jammu, Kashmir and Poonch, Hakim Nur-ud-Din Bhairavi, tried to prove that the real pronounciation of Kashmir in native language was Kashir, which is composed of a compound Hbrew word K + Ashir. K means resemblence and Ashir is Syria in Hebrew. So ***K+Ashir ***or Kashir means Area resembling Syria.

11. Before these events, there is no mention whatsoever of Jesus coming to Kashmir. So in my humble opinion, the tomb in question may belong to anybody, but not at all to Jesus Christ.

With profound regards.