Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So, if someone dies peacefully in his/her sleep he/she isn't a Shahid.
And yes, Punjabi, Sindhi and Urdu have borrowed plenty of words from the so-called Indian languages, some with overtly Hindu symbologies as well. Satyanash, Daneshwar, etc to name a few. Many of the days of the Week are also borrowed. So, when are you reverting them to pure Arabic words?
I thought religious discussion is banned in PDF
No it is noblest to die in the cause of God which includes protecting the nation, anyway I didn't want to spend as much time on this as I have.
The dollar lol. That is irrelevant I meant from religion like you guys are taking from ours.
If you are talking about "shahid", we haven't borrowed anything religious. Only the word. These two are shahids not for dying for any religion, but for dying for the nation. Hinduism or other Indian religions have not borrowed the concept of martyrdom, and won't. It just doesn't make sense from hinduism's POV.No it is noblest to die in the cause of God which includes protecting the nation, anyway I didn't want to spend as much time on this as I have.
The dollar lol. That is irrelevant I meant from religion like you guys are taking from ours.
No, desert fighter did, when he objected to the use of what he said is an islamic word.Levina brought it up.
Who says we took the word for it's strict religious meaning? The fact that we aren't using it in the same context as you must have been the biggest clue.
If you are talking about "shahid", we haven't borrowed anything religious. Only the word. These two are not shahids for dying for any religion, but for the nation. Hinduism or other India religions have not borrowed the concept of martyrdom, and won't. It just doesn' make sense from hinduism's POV.
Never heard of them. I do not think anyone has ever used this in Pakistan lol. I am sure if any Hindu terms were borrowed Zia would have corrected it LOL.
Levina brought it up.
No it was desert fighter who did it
Never heard of them. I do not think anyone has ever used this in Pakistan lol. I am sure if any Hindu terms were borrowed Zia would have corrected it LOL.
The word itself is religious lol like I mentioned earlier without the religious connotation it doesn't make sense. We are all witness' to this thread but that would not make us shaheeds although the literal translation is the same. Anyway let us drop it.
Actually Hinduism has a concept of righteous death I just cannot find the term for it right now lol some sanskrit word.
You need to spend more time in Pakistan mate.
Daneshwar coming up at 1:03 in this video.
And Zia didn't even change Mangal, Budh and Sanichar in Urdu vocabulary. Probably because he didn't know they had mushrik origins.
No, she Didn't
@levina used the term Shaheed for Indian soldiers
a Pakistani objected to it and started the discussion
Yes, but righteous death is not for defending any religion. In the Gita, Arjuna is urged to fight and win, or die a righteous death in war, because he is a Kshatriya and so it is his duty to do so. There is no concept of defending the faith, because these are not faith based anyway, and the concept of "believer" and "unbeliever" was never present....
Actually Hinduism has a concept of righteous death I just cannot find the term for it right now lol some sanskrit word.
ofcource I can't get along with self-acclaimed ''Arseholes'' anyways browse a few pages back, youll know the truthConsidering you and the Pakistani in question do not get along I am taking your words with a pinch of salt.
How would you know which Pakistani he was referring to, unless you already know that that Pakistani derailed the thread?Considering you and the Pakistani in question do not get along I am taking your words with a pinch of salt.
Yes, but righteous death is not for defending any religion. In the Gita, Arjuna is urged to fight and win, or die a righteous death in war, because he is a Kshatriya and so it is his duty to do so. There is no concept of defending the faith, because these are not faith based anyway, and the concept of "believer" and "unbeliever" was never present.
How would you know which Pakistani he was referring to, unless you already know that that Pakistani derailed the thread?