Betrayed, Arabized

[fd24]

Ok so the kill kafir and go to djannat, do jihad and go to djannat, have as many wives as you feel, behead the blasphemors, chop off hands of petty thieves, keep women in strict hijab, not listening to music, nor flying kites, nor being able to make painting, etc are much better???

Those arabis still do the same jahhaleyya even now. Where have they evolved since then?

Only difference is that sane people from other places adapted (or were coerced to adapt) these arabi traits and aped and monkey-copied the barbarism and same jahelya practices to their own land. Vegetarians became animal slaughtering flesh-eaters. The land of knowledge taxila and indus valley (now pakistan) has become breeding ground for eager momins, ready to blow themselves up for in the name of barbaric doctrinal propositions, propagated by the arabi (foreign) religion

I think this guy is being disrespectful to our religion and trying to knock it. It is disappointing to make comments like this about any religion. What is evven more disappointing is Muse is thanking him. Do you appreciate word for word what this guy has said musey for you to actually thank him??

 

[Developereo]

Fair enough, perhaps you will point out why it is not a desert, why those living there are not desert dwellers and perhaps you will also high light the rich literary history of the country -- Come on, now develepero, we are speaking of Arabia, not Egypt or Syria

Admittedly, I am not an expert in Arabic literature -- not knowing much beyond Khalil Gibran -- but the term 'Arabic' includes all Arabian countries. I will acknowledge its common usage to denote just Saudi Arabia, and it is not clear in what context the original author intended it.

 

[muse]

Easy now, Gibran is Lebanese, not a arab - when we speak of this "desert" we are speaking of the arabian peninsula -- I understand the need to be PC - but lets also be truthful. After all the author is not decrying the lebanese wahabi ideas

 

[53fd]

again refer to the lead article, look at the question:

"I will take liberty to speak for me and the third generation, I belong to too, who has the privilege to breathe in the airs of this still-not-so-pure-land and is much Pakistani now. I’m not going to mourn the Indus Valley civilization, but what is the substitute they offer me if it’s not desert?"

Firstly, the author does not have the liberty to speak for his entire generation, because what the author has written is his perceptions, & not written in stone. Secondly, what the author feels is the "air from an impure land" might be 'pure to others'.

The author says he is not going to mourn the Indus Valley civilization. Who is stopping him mourning it? "What is the substitute they offer me if it's not desert?" No one's going to offer him any substitute, not desert, nor 'flowing gardens', not anything. People themselves shape their personalities in what ever way they want to, no one will make the author act differently. The author almost seems resigned to the point that he is shirking from his individual responsibilities. My point is: most of these obstacles are in his head, yes there are challenges & difficulties in a 'hostile environment', but most of these things are in his head.

 

[MastanKhan]

Muse,

Are you a "fire starter"---.




Ok so the kill kafir and go to djannat, do jihad and go to djannat, have as many wives as you feel, behead the blasphemors, chop off hands of petty thieves, keep women in strict hijab, not listening to music, nor flying kites, nor being able to make painting, etc are much better???

Those arabis still do the same jahhaleyya even now. Where have they evolved since then?

Only difference is that sane people from other places adapted (or were coerced to adapt) these arabi traits and aped and monkey-copied the barbarism and same jahelya practices to their own land. Vegetarians became animal slaughtering flesh-eaters. The land of knowledge taxila and indus valley (now pakistan) has become breeding ground for eager momins, ready to blow themselves up for in the name of barbaric doctrinal propositions, propagated by the arabi (foreign) religion
Original Post By Tanna Tanni




I think this guy is being disrespectful to our religion and trying to knock it. It is disappointing to make comments like this about any religion. What is evven more disappointing is Muse is thanking him. Do you appreciate word for word what this guy has said musey for you to actually thank him??bY SUPERKAIF

Mr Kaif,

what is wrong with the post---nothing---just showing you the mirror----and that is all----. Muse done nothing wrong----please count my praise towards that post as well--evevn though it may not mean to much---but here it is.

 

[muse]

Firstly, the author does not have the liberty to speak for his entire generation, because what the author has written is his perceptions, & not written in stone. Secondly, what the author feels is the "air from an impure land" might be 'pure to others'.

The author says he is not going to mourn the Indus Valley civilization. Who is stopping him mourning it? "What is the substitute they offer me if it's not desert?" No one's going to offer him any substitute, not desert, nor 'flowing gardens', not anything. People themselves shape their personalities in what ever way they want to, no one will make the author act differently. The author almost seems resigned to the point that he is shirking from his individual responsibilities. My point is: most of these obstacles are in his head, yes there are challenges & difficulties, but most of these things are in his head.

You have not read the article - read it while breathing --Obstacles in the head, you say, physician?

---------- Post added at 06:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:09 AM ----------

Muse,

Are you a "fire starter"---.

Hardly -- see MK, these ideas are what Pakistanis are talking about - I did not create this idea, I refer you to the lead article - and I also invite you comment on the substance of the article

 

[Zarvan]

Islam is the only solution and for people who want sufism for your information guys Mahmmod Ghaznavi before attacking India met Hazrat Ali Hajveri famous Data Sahab and he gave him permission to attack India and also for your kind information it was Khawaja Moin u deen Chisti who Muhammad Ghuari saw in his dream and in that dream he ordered him to take on Prithvi Raj Chohan

 

[53fd]

You have not read the article - read it while breathing --Obstacles in the head, you say, physician?

Actually Muse bhai, I have. It is a good article, but it assumes Pakistan was in its pristine state pre-1947, & now is going through 'deliberate acculturation'. Let me ask you, what do you think 'deliberate acculturation' is? Was there deliberate acculturation when the Vedas were first written 5000 years ago on this land, or when the Muslim invaders came into this region? Whenever a new culture is forced upon an older one, it causes 'acculturation'. But then, the new culture is allowed to evolve with time. Is 'deliberate acculturation' an uncommon phenomena?

Before Hinduism, this land was still in existence. Deliberate acculturation happened on this land with the rise of Hinduism, but once this deliberate acculturation took place, time was given to let Hinduism evolve naturally over a few thousand years on this land; & Islam as well. Hence, for the sake of the argument, can we, by the same token, say that we should let 'Arabization' (we can't seem to decide what this 'Arabization' is though. Can you explain to me in a few words what you think Arabization means?) evolve; now that it the deliberate acculturation has taken place?

The author implies that Pakistan is abandoning its pre-1947 roots, & is convinced that Pakistan is facing an identity crisis. I think it is the author that is confused about Pakistan's identity, not anyone else. One society evolves & displaces the other. To me, Pakistan's identity is entailed in its deep Sufi/Barelvi roots, which makes up Pakistani society. Sufism has come to the region about a thousand years ago. For Indians, their identity goes to the pre-invasion Hindu roots. If Pakistanis are abandoning their pre-invasion Hindu roots (Indus Valley Civilization), does that mean Indians are abandoning the roots prior to the advent of Hinduism in the region?

Even though I see Pakistan's identity wrapped around its Sufi/Barelvi roots, I do not look at myself abandoning my Indus Valley Civilization ones, or the ones that came before the advent of Hinduism to the region. The Indus Valley Civilization (or anything non-Islamic) holds equal importance to me as anything Sufi/Barelvi Islamic. I see all of these things as societies evolving, pure & simple. The world is not the same as it was thousands, or even hundreds of years ago.

 

[Zarvan]

Islamic system is the only solution and Islam will rule the world because ALLAH has clearly said it in the Quran Islam will takeover so nobody can stop it

 

[muse]

It is a good article, but it assumes Pakistan was in its pristine state pre-1947, & now is going through 'deliberate acculturation'

The article does not "assume" it, it asserts it and provides examples -- and yes, it is propagated, through clerics. Khuda Haifiz does not become Allah Hafiz by itself, there are ideas at work behind such a development -- we judge such ideas with the criteria good/bad right/wrong.

You suggest that we should see this as "evolution" - sure we can see it in that light as well, but that does not negate the argument the author presents -- First, are you persuaded that there is the cultural phenomenon of arabization in Pakistan? If yes, what ideas have led to this development? What is the substance of this so called arabization?

And if you are not persuaded that there is any such a thing, then your suggestion of evolution with a arabian bent makes sense how?

What the author is asking, is whether Pakistan is less than Pak, that arabization (read Islamization) has become necessary? Think ideas behind this phenomenon - then look at the examples the author provides to support his contention.

Nowhere does the author suggest that Pakistan was some paradise ruined by arabization, he merely asks if it is worth having.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Nowhere does the author suggest that Pakistan was some paradise ruined by arabization, he merely asks if it is worth having.

If that is so, is it worth having?

Does one have to abandon one's singularity at the altar of oneness (and which is debatable given the turmoil of sects), when the culture, language, ethos is dissimilar?

Iran, Indonesia, Malaysia etc are also Muslim nations and in no way do they agree that they have to follow Arab ways. In fact, Iran is totally against such a thought.

Pakistan (then India) was in no way a part of Arabia. In fact, during the Mughal times, it was Persia which had a great influence wherein the Persian culture, language and ways were the medium of life!

I had read that in UK, the Muslim (Pakistani) youth are wearing Arab dress instead of salwar. It was said that this was due to the fact that they were having a cultural identity crisis and think it is correct to be Arab centric so as to flaunt an identity that is aggressive owing to the perceived onslaught on Islam.

 

[muse]

If that is so, is it worth having?

Does one have to abandon one's singularity at the altar of oneness, when the culture, language, ethos is dissimilar?

Iran, Indonesia, Malaysia etc are also Muslim nations and in no way do they agree that they have to follow Arab ways. In fact, Iran is totally against such a thought.

As the author, in my opinion, effectively demonstrates, there is a malicious, vile idea at work - Islam=Arab -- this idea has been so enthusiastically embraced in Pakistan that it is embarrassing -- and arbis don't realize that Pakistanis are die hards, when they come to the realization that they have been had, arbi won't have any place to hide.

This is an old idea in the subcontinet - Shah Valiollah Dehlvi has been foremost in arguing to the Muslims of the subcontinent to not confuse islam with the culture of a specific tribe, town in time and geography....this confusion is the primary cause that religiosity of Muslims in the subcontinent is utilitarian, unreasoned, inherited, unconscious and restricted to outward appearances, whereas, experiential religiosity is cherished but cannot be openly embraced.

 

[53fd]

The article does not "assume" it, it asserts it and provides examples -- and yes, it is propagated, through clerics. Khuda Haifiz doe snot become Allah Hafiz by itself.

You suggest that we should see this as "evolution" - sure we can see it in that light as well, but that does not negate the argument the author presents -- First, are you persuaded that there is the cultural phenomenon of arabization in Pakistan? If yes, what ideas have led to this development?

Actually, it does "assume" is, because what was Pakistan's pristine state? Was it the advent of Islam in the subcontinent, was it when Hinduism got its birth here 5000 years ago, or was it life before that? What is Pakistan's pristine state according to you?

Actually, you misunderstand my position. There is deliberate acculturation in society when a new culture is enforced upon an old one, but then this new forced culture is allowed to evolve over a period of time. This has happened to all the nations in the world at some point in history. And this is what happened in the Indian subcontinent as well. Which is why I can argue what we saw in pre-1947 Indian subcontinent was not its pristine state either.

Secondly, what does Arabization mean to you? Because just by looking at this thread, Arabization means different things to different people. To some, it is Takfiri Salafization. For others, it is lingual: Khuda Hafiz becomes Allah Hafiz, or people speaking Arabic. For others, it is dress. Etc. So I'm not sure what you specifically are referring to as Arabization. Can you explain it to me? I'm not sure what your argument exactly is. Can you tell me succinctly, which aspect of Arabization is bothering you (lingual, dress, religious aspect)? All three of them? Which one is wrong in your opinion?

You seem to be implying that the Pakistani society is become more 'Arabized'? Is there one type of 'Arab' society though? How would you define an 'Arab society' to be? If Pakistani society is becoming more 'Arabized', why are the Pakistani people much more culturally similar to Indians than they are to Arabs?

For me, there is no cultural Arabization movement in Pakistan. Pakistanis are still much more culturally similar to Indians, Afghans, Iranians etc than they are to Arabs. Most Pakistanis do not live like Arabs, or dress like Arabs. I would argue that most things in Pakistan, from the Khuda Hafiz to Allah Hafiz, to the Niqab is the result of the "Arabic religious beliefs" Tafkiri ideology creeping into Pakistani society during Zia-ul-Haq's time in the 80s; not as a result of "Arabic culture" dominating our "local culture". No one says "Allah Hafiz" in an Arab country, this is not Arab culture. Which is why I wanted to make a distinction between "Arabic religious beliefs" aka Salafization, & "Arabic culture". Most Pakistanis do not want to be culturally like the Arabs, & only a 'very small minority' wants to emulate the "Arabic religious beliefs" aka Salafization.

What the author is asking, is whether Pakistan is less than Pak, that arabization (read Islamization) has become necessary? Think ideas behind this phenomenon - then look at the examples the author provides to support his contention.

What is the Pak state of Pakistan though? Please read what I have written above.

 

[Jango]

Well, the Arabs here say,
' Hindi Bakistani kullu same same '. Which means that Indians and Pakistanis are all the same. I argue with them on this.
Now, we are generalizing Arabization. which means we are saying, ' Omani, Saudi , Kuwaiti saray aik jaisay hain' . Now wont they feel it awkward. Every Arab country is different . Now if the antagonist of this thread wants to potray arab culture being ingrained into us, he should then also mention, is it the Saudi influence or what.

 

[53fd]

As the author, in my opinion, effectively demonstrates, there is a malicious, vile idea at work - Islam=Arab -- this idea has been so enthusiastically embraced in Pakistan that it is embarrassing -- and arbis don't realize that Pakistanis are die hards, when they come to the realization that they have been had, arbi won't have any place to hide.

Is this idea being embraced by a few Pakistanis, or the state of Pakistan? Because the last time I remembered, Pakistan is not following the path of authoritarian Saudi Arabia, which is why women can drive & vote here. Some people might think Islam=Arab, but most of the people don't think like that. Which is why shrines are revered here, we have qawaalis, Eid Milad un Nabvi; all shirk/haram according to Saudi Arabia's Salafi Takfiri ideology are practiced here by the majority of the people.