What's new

Is PDF helping bring people of Pakistan and India Closer

Status
Not open for further replies.
The pashtun race did not come about one day and they decided to call themselves pashtun. This evolution happened over millenia, its not like one wakes up one day and choses to be one ethnicity for that day. Your logic is plain faulty.

Indeed the evolution happened over a few thousand years but that doesn't change the fact that at the end of the day it is a 'created' identity that people 'choose' for themselves. The time frame is irrelevant because it explains away how people eased into it & this was a subconscious choice whereas a person who decides to call himself a Tamil or a Gujrati in the here & the now would be making a deliberate choice; what that time frame fails to explain away is the common denominator between either of those two instance - the element of choice !
 
.
Indeed the evolution happened over a few thousand years but that doesn't change the fact that at the end of the day it is a 'created' identity that people 'choose' for themselves. The time frame is irrelevant because it explains away how people eased into it & this was a subconscious choice whereas a person who decides to call himself a Tamil or a Gujrati in the here & the now would be making a deliberate choice; what that time frame fails to explain away is the common denominator between either of those two instance - the element of choice !

People evolved as tamilians or gujaratis as the languages evolved. The language evolution was relatively quick. But races did not evolve quickly and there was hardly any element of choice.

I can not choose to be an arab, thats a fact.
 
.
The same as you came up with a 'Pashtun Race' a few thousand years ago ! :lol:

What is that supposed to mean?
Pashtun people have not suddently appeared in this world... Each tribe has an ancestor, e.g yousafzais are decendants of a person named yousaf. Marwats are decendants of marwat khan lodhi, so on. Which means they gradually multiplied and grew in number....
 
. .
People evolved as tamilians or gujaratis as the languages evolved. The language evolution was relatively quick. But races did not evolve quickly and there was hardly any element of choice.

I can not choose to be an arab, thats a fact.

Like I said the time-frame doesn't mean a thing if the element of choice is there & it is ! When I said 'they decided...' I wasn't talking about a deliberate decision by a panel of individuals gathered around a camp side fire deciding on Pashtuns or Punjabis as their nation's name & Pashto or Punjabi as their language's name; it was a subconscious decision by an emerging society that in turn emerged out of another society whereby the society as a whole, unknowingly & without deliberation, decided that they've got a language of their own, a culture of their own & a value system of their own & hence they continued to flock together around one another till a time came when this flock grew a sense of collective consciousness & decided to call themselves a Nation ! I say again that this 'decision' was unsaid, the change wasn't felt & it was anything but deliberate but it was a decision at the end of the day - This lies at the very heart of the anthropological evolution of societies & cultures.

You can choose to be an Arab, a Sudanese or a Martian for it is the same choice any of those cultures & civilizations made but in your case your choice would be deliberate, sudden & very much felt ! However it would not be, at the same time, something which is socially acceptable because of this innate notion as if a 'race or a culture or a linguistic group' is some sort of an exclusive group that needs to be exalted at least till such an extent that it gives rise to the sense of Nationhood ! What baffles me is how hollow that argument of exclusivity is whereby the culture or civilization under question is, after all, the progeny of some other culture or civilization before it & would, in turn, give birth to some other culture or civilization after it, that it is ever evolving, ever absorbing & at each instance in time its so-called originality is slowly being ebbed away through the influx of some other culture or civilization through the same subconscious choice that their ancestors made a few hundred or thousand years ago !

So, the way I see it, it comes down to one thing & one thing alone - Choice; subconscious or otherwise. You choose to be who you are but don't bet on others taking you seriously because of the above !

What is that supposed to mean?
Pashtun people have not suddently appeared in this world... Each tribe has an ancestor, e.g yousafzais are decendants of a person named yousaf. Marwats are decendants of marwat khan lodhi, so on. Which means they gradually multiplied and grew in number....

Of course they did but if Mr.Yousaf & Mr.Marwat Khan Lodhi were the first Pashtuns then they must also have been something before that & their first ancestor in turn would be something else & so on & so forth back to beginning ! The point I'm talking about is that our races, our ethnicities, our nations etc. are make-belief that we attach so much importance to that at times we're willing to kill or be killed over them without realizing that these are, at the end of the day, created identities just as all identities are.
 
.
It has happened throughout history. If Ghilzai's turk theory holds true then Pashtuns were all once turks and settled in the region and became Pashtuns. My ancestor Abu Ayub Ansari was an arab, he travelled, Abdullah Ansari was born from my house and is a Tajik. Then we settled in Lucknow area, one of our ancestors may have been Bayazid Ansari who went to Pakhtunkhwa and was an Ansari.

Then we have a link from the fathers side which is unproven-it is said we married a Pashtun princess-from a lower Kinglets house-A mughal vassal probably but no one knows for sure. If true I have some Pashtun blood. Ethnicity is constantly changing which is what I have explained to Luffy. Luffy declares all the characters from Pashtun history are Persians or Turks according to his own benefit in a debate. It destroys his debating power. Frankly it doesn't matter. It is my personal choice what I do.

The logical choice for me was to merge with Pashtuns anyway as Muhajir is not an identity. I explained both why adopt Pashtun identity and why refuse Muhajir identity. Frankly the only reason I say adopt is because the links are unconfirmed and my family after it moved started calling itself muhajir (those in Pakistan) and became very racist. (There are relatives in India too)

And this is centuries of evolution as an ethnicity mostly with inter-marrying with the local people
 
.
Like I said the time-frame doesn't mean a thing if the element of choice is there & it is ! When I said 'they decided...' I wasn't talking about a deliberate decision by a panel of individuals gathered around a camp side fire deciding on Pashtuns or Punjabis as their nation's name & Pashto or Punjabi as their language's name; it was a subconscious decision by an emerging society that in turn emerged out of another society whereby the society as a whole, unknowingly & without deliberation, decided that they've got a language of their own, a culture of their own & a value system of their own & hence they continued to flock together around one another till a time came when this flock grew a sense of collective consciousness & decided to call themselves a Nation ! I say again that this 'decision' was unsaid, the change wasn't felt & it was anything but deliberate but it was a decision at the end of the day - This lies at the very heart of the anthropological evolution of societies & cultures.

You can choose to be an Arab, a Sudanese or a Martian for it is the same choice any of those cultures & civilizations made but in your case your choice would be deliberate, sudden & very much felt ! However it would not be, at the same time, something which is socially acceptable because of this innate notion as if a 'race or a culture or a linguistic group' is some sort of an exclusive group that needs to be exalted at least till such an extent that it gives rise to the sense of Nationhood ! What baffles me is how hollow that argument of exclusivity is whereby the culture or civilization under question is, after all, the progeny of some other culture or civilization before it & would, in turn, give birth to some other culture or civilization after it, that it is ever evolving, ever absorbing & at each instance in time its so-called originality is slowly being ebbed away through the influx of some other culture or civilization through the same subconscious choice that their ancestors made a few hundred or thousand years ago !

So, the way I see it, it comes down to one thing & one thing alone - Choice; subconscious or otherwise. You choose to be who you are but don't bet on others taking you seriously because of the above !



Of course they did but if Mr.Yousaf & Mr.Marwat Khan Lodhi were the first Pashtuns then they must also have been something before that & their first ancestor in turn would be something else & so on & so forth back to beginning ! The point I'm talking about is that our races, our ethnicities, our nations etc. are make-belief that we attach so much importance to that at times we're willing to kill or be killed over them without realizing that these are, at the end of the day, created identities just as all identities are.

Semantics, sure you can choose to be an arab, others may or may not consider you an arab. agreed.

BUT the issue is I can not one day say I'm an arab and the next day start behaving as if i represent and speak on behalf of arabs, something we have seen in the forum.

I can decide I'm superman, but i can't blame others for not taking me seriously. We do not take Havizsultan seriously, nothing personal, its just that his assertion and pretence is unreasonable.
 
.
@Armstrong
Quran says that humans are divided into tribes and qaums for purpose of pehchan/shanakht ,identity, thats all to it.
For me pashtun is my identity or shanakht/pehchan , it is by birth....on the other hand havi is not happy with his born identity.... For him it is a superior choice to be pashtun, ignoring the message of Quran.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Afgahni Pathan tribes are confused about their identity

Some say they are Jewish who migrated, some say they are Arab, others say they are Turk

When reality is they are not even closely related to those ethnic groups
 
.
Semantics, sure you can choose to be an arab, others may or may not consider you an arab. agreed.

BUT the issue is I can not one day say I'm an arab and the next day start behaving as if i represent and speak on behalf of arabs, something we have seen in the forum.

I can decide I'm superman, but i can't blame others for not taking me seriously. We do not take Havizsultan seriously, nothing personal, its just that his assertion and pretence is unreasonable.

Not semantics at all; I'm just asking a question that appears, to me, to be fairly fundamental - If a race or ethnicity is watered down to 'choice', if it ever evolving to the point that those in the beginning can't recognize those at the end & if it is purely a creation as it is, then why the hell are we taking it ever so seriously for ? What is all that pride about ? The exclusivity about ? What is all of that if not an illogical urge to continue purporting something we know for a fact to be make-belief ?
 
.
Indeed the evolution happened over a few thousand years but that doesn't change the fact that at the end of the day it is a 'created' identity that people 'choose' for themselves. The time frame is irrelevant because it explains away how people eased into it & this was a subconscious choice whereas a person who decides to call himself a Tamil or a Gujrati in the here & the now would be making a deliberate choice; what that time frame fails to explain away is the common denominator between either of those two instance - the element of choice !

Thanks for defending me. :thumbsup:

He is stuck on that one point for ages however. And the Indians-we know their reasons. Altaf. :D
 
.
@Armstrong
Quran says that humans are divided into tribes and qaums for purpose of pehchan/shanakht ,identity, thats all to it.
For me pashtun is my identity or shanakht/pehchan , it is by birth....on the other hand havi is not happy with his born identity.... For him it is a superior choice to be pashtun, ignoring the message of Quran.

What does this Koranic verse has go to do with anything ? :lol:

I'm not completely stupid; I know that there are races, tribes & nations around me, I just can't understand the zealotry, the pride & the exclusivity associated with it because there is no denying at the end of the day that God didn't create the Pashtuns or the Hazaras - We did ! Adam was neither a Kashmiri nor a German. We made these things up just as we make our own names up - We don't fight each other over that & we certainly don't think that we're better than the other because I'm named Ahmed whereas they call you Ali ! Thats ludicrous & so 'Ethno-Linguistic Nationalism' is absolutely ludicrous.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Not semantics at all; I'm just asking a question that appears, to me, to be fairly fundamental - If a race or ethnicity is watered down to 'choice', if it ever evolving to the point that those in the beginning can't recognize those at the end & if it is purely a creation as it is, then why the hell are we taking it ever so seriously for ? What is all that pride about ? The exclusivity about ? What is all of that if not an illogical urge to continue purporting something we know for a fact to be make-belief ?

Two different topics

1) Should one take pride and excessive importance to stuff like race that is not a matter of choice (ethical question)

2) Can a Chinese one day say he's a dane and represent the danish people? (practical question)

No need to mix the two.
 
.
What are Indians doing here discussing Pathan stuff

This stuff doesnt concern you, go away PLZ.
 
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom