Why are Pakistanis more concerned about Muslims around the world than Non muslims in Pakistan?

[Mariyam]

28 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Neither Taimur nor Aurangzeb had any connection to "Persia".  Correct me if I'm wrong.

The Mughals spoke Farsi. Most of their official documents were in Farsi.  It was the language of administration. 

I think at that time, all of Central Asia spoke Farsi or tongues mutually intelligible with Farsi. Aside of that I don't know what connection the Aurangzeb has with Persia. Maybe @Stradlater @Muloghonto can answer this better. But the name is of Farsi extraction.

[Mariyam]

I don't know why people get so worked up over stuff that happened 500+ years ago.

 

I have another way of looking at it. The Central Asians had to send armies to rule over India. Today we make them dance to our tunes ( quite literally!) by sending a few DVDs/ making youtube vids. Every major Bollywood movie is a hit in those areas. Right from the Soviet times. They dance to our cringe songs as much as we do. That is the ultimate revenge.

[Mariyam]

3 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

I meant foreign - they take pride that their ancestors come from Arabia, Persia, Turkey, Afghanistan, Mongolia and Egypt. I don't see any Turk taking up an Arab name or Iranians taking up Arab names, even though Islam came from that region. Indonesians and Malay don't seem to have this ME fascination 

I don't think this so simplistic.

Many people take pride in their religion and not necessarily their ancestry. The feeling of superiority (however misplaced it maybe) is mainly over belief and not necessarily the gene-pool.

 

Also, it isn't right to say that Indians take up Arab names. Indian take up Islamic names which happen to be Arab. Most of these names have some significance in Islamic tradition and iconography. 

Iranians also take up Arabic first names. They also have dynasties claiming to be descendants of the Prophet (PBUH). Yet many of them are vehemently against Arabs in general.

 

 

 

 

[coffee_rules]

31 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

The Mughals spoke Farsi. Most of their official documents were in Farsi.  It was the language of administration. 

I think at that time, all of Central Asia spoke Farsi or tongues mutually intelligible with Farsi. Aside of that I don't know what connection the Aurangzeb has with Persia. Maybe @Stradlater @Muloghonto can answer this better. But the name is of Farsi extraction.

Farsi is what Iranians call their langauage which the English-speaking junta calls it as Persian. It is not the old Persian from the BC era, but changed due to advent of Islam in Persia. Moghul Babur came from Turkic regions and his bography is in some language from that region. After Humayun lost to Sher Shah Suri,  Humayun took refuge in Persia and regained the region after 15 years, with the help of Persian emperor. After Moghuls gained back the region, they came with many Persian scholars and with their influence, Persian/Farsi was the official language of the Moghuls. Their biographies and literature were all in Farsi.  Moghuls since then moved from the Central Asian roots to Persian influence. Aurangzeb, the name, was given to him , is from Persian - Jewel of the Throne. 

[Mariyam]

7 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Farsi is what Iranians call their langauage which the English-speaking junta calls it as Persian. It is not the old Persian from the BC era, but changed due to advent of Islam in Persia. Moghul Babur came from Turkic regions and his bography is in some language from that region. After Humayun lost to Sher Shah Suri,  Humayun took refuge in Persia and regained the region after 15 years, with the help of Persian emperor. After Moghuls gained back the region, they came with many Persian scholars and with their influence, Persian/Farsi was the official language of the Moghuls. Their biographies and literature were all in Farsi.  Moghuls since then moved from the Central Asian roots to Persian influence. Aurangzeb, the name, was given to him , is from Persian - Jewel of the Throne. 

So, in a nutshell, what you are trying to imply is that even the Mughals were wannabes? Persian wannabes.

 

[coffee_rules]

7 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

So, in a nutshell, what you are trying to imply is that even the Mughals were wannabes? Persian wannabes.

 

I don't know about being wannabes. But certainly they didn't consider Hindustan as their homeland and looked westward. But the Liberals in India want to build a narrative that Moghuls were different from British, because they stayed back. But in reality, Moghul Colonised India and caused widespread destruction of Hindu civilization (Iconoclasm/Destruction of temples, Jiziya, Taxation was the highest even worse that British). 

 

https://qz.com/india/1398093/why-aurangzeb-is-a-hero-in-pakistan-and-a-villain-in-india/

 

I agree, we have to move on and not dwell on the past, but there is no need to brush History under the carpet and whitewash their crimes. Nobody wants retribution from current generation, but don't negate History or celebrate the rule of Aurangzeb. 

[Stradlater]

2 hours ago, Mariyam said:

The Mughals spoke Farsi. Most of their official documents were in Farsi.  It was the language of administration. 

I think at that time, all of Central Asia spoke Farsi or tongues mutually intelligible with Farsi. Aside of that I don't know what connection the Aurangzeb has with Persia. Maybe @Stradlater @Muloghonto can answer this better. But the name is of Farsi extraction.

Mughals till  Babar spoke Chaghtai, a variant of many of the Turkic languages prevalent in the region. Babarnama is written in this Chaghtai Turkic language only. 

But since Persian at the time was considered as the language of the sophistos/elite and the Mughals wanted to present themselves as somewhat more refined and cultured, they fully embraced the Persian norms and customs including the language so as to distance themselves from the barbaric traditions of Central Asia(even though they continued to take pride in their Mongol/Timurid roots). 

 

 

[coffee_rules]

3 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

Mughals till  Babar spoke Chaghtai, a variant of many of the Turkic languages prevalent in the region. Babarnama is written in this Chaghtai Turkic language only. 

But since Persian at the time was considered as the language of the sophistos/elite and the Mughals wanted to present themselves as somewhat more refined and cultured, they fully embraced the Persian norms and customs including the language so as to distance themselves from the barbaric traditions of Central Asia(even though they continued to take pride in their Mongol/Timurid roots). 

 

 

As I said, Humayun used Persian emperor Safavid dynasty to regain Delhi, under whose influence, Mughuls changed their loyalties from Central Asia to Persia. But a lot of later Moghuls fought with Persian emperors as well, After Aurangzeb Nadir Shah from Persia looted Delhi. I wonder why they lost their influence with Persia

[Stradlater]

Just now, coffee_rules said:

As I said, Humayun used Persian emperor Safavid dynasty to regain Delhi, under whose influence, Mughuls changed their loyalties from Central Asia to Persia. But a lot of later Moghuls fought with Persian emperors as well, After Aurangzeb Nadir Shah from Persia looted Delhi. I wonder why they lost their influence with Persia

Actually the bone of contention was Qandahar which Humayun seemed to have promised to Shah Temehsp for providing his help against his brother Kamran and Sur dynasty rulers of Delhi. 

Till Akbar was alive, Iranian emperors didn't actually try to wrest the strategic fort from the Mughals because of the ongoing geopolitics (Abdullah Uzbeg and his shenanigans) and also the fact that former was a ruler of immense prestige. 

 

The relationship began to sour under Jahangir and reached to the point of open hostility under Shahjahan. 

[Alam_dar]

1 hour ago, Mariyam said:

So, in a nutshell, what you are trying to imply is that even the Mughals were wannabes? Persian wannabes.

I think it is a human nature to worship the rising sun. 

 

To some extent, we also became GORA Sahib, when we left our traditional dress of Lungi/Dhooti and adopted the pant/shirts. And those who still wear the traditional dresses, they are considered backwards. 

 

At that time, Persian Culture was at the top, and indeed Mughals felt themselves attracted towards it. 

 

[Alam_dar]

Identity is one issue, but I am much more concerned about the Jihaad/WAR MADNESS as the result of dramas like this. 

 

Ok, I let the religious people to make such  Dramas in name of freedom of speech. But my main concern is this that they hide the "real History". And the real history is this that these Turkish Kings were tyrants, and result of every victory of these Turkish king was this that thousands of women and girls had to become the slaves, and then had to provide the sex services to the soldiers of the Islamic caliphate. 

 

It is a shame that Iran, Pakistan, Turkey etc have been producing many such Dramas, but none of them show this Truth about the slave girls.  As a result, 99% of Muslims today don't know about it, that how the prisoner women and girls have to suffer from such victories of the Turkish kings. 

 

I wish, one day someone from Hollywood is able to make such Dramas, and they he/she shows the real Truth of the wars of these so called great warriors.  Then people will never seek their identities in such warrior kings, but even the Turkish people of today will disown them. 

 

Islam and these Turkish warriors are lucky that 99%  of Muslims don't know the real face of Islam. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Vilander]

23 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Meh.

Taimur/Aurangzeb are names from Central Asia/ Persia, not Arab names.

Mufti is an honorific title for anyone who has studied Islamic jurisprudence and is of sound character, whatever that means. Not an instance of wannabe Arab syndrome there.

 

 

I dislike supporting a bigot like the poster you responded to and arguing with someone like you. But Mariyam what is your point ? Wannabe Persian is ok ? That Indian Muslims are justified in naming themselves after central Asian or Persian names vs Arabic names ? They are free to name themselves anything that’s not the contentious item here it’s their affinity to alien cultures.

[Vilander]

8 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

  As a result, 99% of Muslims today don't know about it, that how the prisoner women and girls have to suffer

They probably know and happily fiend ignorance and privately even enjoy it, as the very Islamic state did the same to yazidis. It’s pretty Islamic if you go by the holy books teachings.

[Vilander]

12 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Also, it isn't right to say that Indians take up Arab names. Indian take up Islamic names which happen to be Arab.

They are basically Arabic names. And Indians who are Muslim take them as they think arabs are superior to them. They suffer from inferiority complex perhaps.

[velu]

On 7/21/2020 at 10:48 AM, Mariyam said:

Meh.

Taimur/Aurangzeb are names from Central Asia/ Persia, not Arab names.

Mufti is an honorific title for anyone who has studied Islamic jurisprudence and is of sound character, whatever that means. Not an instance of wannabe Arab syndrome there.

 

 

 

both are persian names , not related to turkish  

central asians are mostly turkish except tajiks who are poor Persians 

[Alam_dar]

1 hour ago, Vilander said:

I dislike supporting a bigot like the poster you responded to and arguing with someone like you. But Mariyam what is your point ? Wannabe Persian is ok ? That Indian Muslims are justified in naming themselves after central Asian or Persian names vs Arabic names ? They are free to name themselves anything that’s not the contentious item here it’s their affinity to alien cultures.

I feel that despite having the Persian names, still Pakistanis don't have the "affinity" to the Persian culture.  Iranians and their culture is still "foreign" to us. Even my Shia friends, who visited Iran many times, they didn't show any affinity towards the Iranian culture  (religious affinity YES, but cultural Effinity NO).  The Persian names are still very much different than the Pakistani names.

 

Off course many name are common due to the Persian origin, still the PRONUNCIATION is sometimes totally different. It would be perhaps a surprise, but despite having the same Alphabets, Iranians pronunciation differs a lot and normal Pakistani would not be able to understand the same word, despite having it in Urdu too. 

 

Culturally, still Pakistanis are very close to the North Indians, and then to the English/Western culture. 

 

I believe that Urdu became totally indigenous to Indian Sub-continent. We can easily understand the spoken Hindi (as they are much closer to each other than any other language), but we have no chance to understand a single sentence of Persian. 

 

[MechEng]

15 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

 

ٰI  am afraid that "Wannabe Arab Syndrome" has become much more stronger in Pakistan. These are mainly "Salafists/Wahabies" who are trying to be wannabe Arabs. They have started using the Arab dresses, eat like Arabs eat in their mosques, and their women took Abaya (Hijab) the way Arab women take. 

 

Please note this important difference: 

 

(1) Religious Pakistanis try to be wannabe Arabs. 

 

(2) Little moderate Pakistanis try to be wannabe Turks (while Turkish Islamic Culture is little moderate, for example women could act in the Dramas there etc.)

 

Muslims are like the Camels: 

 

There is a story where the owner allowed his camel keep his nose inside the tent, while it was very cold outside. But then camel gradually brought his whole face inside, then front legs, then back legs and at the end he captured whole tent and compelled his owner to go out of the tent. 

 

Unfortunately, Muslims are that Camel. 

 

We Pakistanis were culturally very close to India till 1980s. There were hardly any educated people in the Universities or other higher institutions where men had beards. 

 

But then we got that "wannabe Arab" syndrome. And today our best universities are run by the people with long Arab beards, and instead of taking Dopata, girls are taking Hijab today (This Hijab fashion also started in 1980s for the first time). 

 

Gradually, but surely, we are drifting towards becoming full Arabs. 

 

Lately, Punjab Assembly passed a bill, which forbids the Barbers to make the "Design Beards". And if they do so, then they will be fined and punished. 

 

My Assessment: 

 

The so called moderate Muslims in Pakistan have changed since 1980s. Now it seems that all of them have a hidden beard in their stomachs. This makes them sometimes much more dangerous than the Mullahs with openly visible beards. 

 

 

 

How popular is Harappa Mohen Jo Daro in Pakistan? Those places are older than Babylon.

[Alam_dar]

2 hours ago, Vilander said:

They probably know and happily fiend ignorance and privately even enjoy it, as the very Islamic state did the same to yazidis. It’s pretty Islamic if you go by the holy books teachings.

I am afraid that they still know about it "superficially". 

 

Brainwashing from the Mullah is very strong. First line of defence is this that slavery has nothing to do with Islam, but ISIS did it at it's own and thus ISIS and Al-Qaida have nothing to do with Islam.  Second defence is this that slavery was related only to that era, while other also too Muslim women as slave. 

 

There are hardly any Muslim, who knows the Actual Sharia Rulings about the slave women, i.e:

 

(1) Salve women are not allowed to take the Hijab. 

(2) Slave women are not allowed to hide their naked breasts. They only have to cover their body from navel till knees. 

(3) Owner could have "temporary" sexual relationship with his slave-woman. Once he becomes bored with her, then he could sell her in the market, and then buy new slave woman for himself. Thus the slave women were raped by 1st master, then 2nd master, then 3rd master and this chain continued. 

(4) Master also had the right to present her to his brother. And when all brothers fulfilled their sexual lust one by one, then the master sold her in the market to another family. 

(5) Master is allowed to deny his own child from the slave woman. In this case, that child would be considered as Bastard, and he/she became the slave of his/her own father, who could sell them in the market for money. 

(6) When the slave-child get two of his teeth (about 6-8 months), then master was allowed to took away the slave child from his/her slave mother, and sell in the market to get the money. 

(7) Master was allowed to undress the slave girl of even 2 years, and then drive the sexual pleasures from her naked body (except for the penetration, which he was allowed to do even at the age of 6-7 years if he felt that she could bear the pressure of sexual activity). 

(8) The prisoner women were raped by the Jihadists the same night, although those same Jihadists killed their fathers, brothers and sons in the day time. There is no bigger crime in the humanity then compelling the poor prisoner women to provide sex services the night after their beloved ones were slaughtered, and they were looted. 

As compared to this, Jews and Christians (bible) prohibited to rape the prisoner women. Jews/Christian men had to marry those women and give them full one month time to weep upon their beloved ones who were fallen the war. And after the marriage, they were like free wives, and could not be sold any further. 

(9) If any slave flees, then Islamic Sharia allows the master to punish him the way he likes, and even "slaughter" him. Thus companions of Muhammad slaughtered the throats of those slaves, who ever tried to run away. 
Muhammad also declared that Allah will not accept the prayers of a slave who runs away, and he has become Kafir/Murtad, and he will burn in eternal fire of the hell. 

 

Therefore, the most unfortunate thing is this that 99.99% of Muslims don't know these actual slave rulings of Islamic Sharia. I wonder how could Mullahs successfully hide these information in this modern era too. 

[MechEng]

1 hour ago, velu said:

 

both are persian names , not related to turkish  

central asians are mostly turkish except tajiks who are poor Persians 

Modern definition of Turkish is different. They are a mix of Central Asians and Europeans. For example Turkey is an Islamic country but culturally it has more similarities with Italy than with Arabia, Persia or Central Asia. Besides, Istanbul used to be a capital of the Roman Empire.

[Alam_dar]

17 minutes ago, MechEng said:

How popular is Harappa Mohen Jo Daro in Pakistan? Those places are older than Babylon.

People know their names, but they never visit them, as these sites have no religious value for the Pakistanis. While the religious Muslims actually forbid to visit such sites, while it could bring the foreign influence upon the Muslims.

 

Last week, a grave was found which had large Buddha statue in it. But the people broke that statue at the spot after discovering it.