Rajputs, Jats and Gujjars

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Nope. I am not defining anything. What you should do is read the Objectives Resolution and then see who defined it as what, and how many shades of grey they used, or even none at all.

(It seems pretty black and white to the impartial observer. )

It's black and white to you because it serves your purpose to cast it that way. For example, here'e one of the principles of the Objectives Resolution:

The principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed

And given the complete lack of consensus within Islamic religious circles on those principles, what 'Holy laws' are you claiming should be implemented in Pakistan to align with the 'identity' that is the subject of this conversation?

...Arabs had identification based on clans , but eventually even they embraced simply being known as Muslims.

That's not true. Arabs, especially in the GCC countries, have always grouped themselves by Tribe and continue to further differentiate by country and race.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Yes they do love their tribes , but it don't mean much to me

An Arab (Speaker) in Saudia, Qater, UAE, OMAN , IRAQ , EYGYPT , SYRIA , Algeria , Tunisia , Morocco look all same to me

They themselves may spend 10 hours explaining to me how different they are

If I spoke a similar language I would have better understanding with any of them

Tribes were important when people could only travel on horses or walked 5-20 km distances so they identified with their tribe they never viewed the region as a country 5,000km region

 

[VCheng]

It's black and white to you because it serves your purpose to cast it that way. For example, here'e one of the principles of the Objectives Resolution:

The principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed

And given the complete lack of consensus within Islamic religious circles on those principles, what 'Holy laws' are you claiming should be implemented in Pakistan to align with the 'identity' that is the subject of this conversation?

Why not start quoting the very first words of that Resolution first and then see what you quoted really means Sir. Let us not be dishonest here. The principles are to be interpreted as anunciated by Islam, no ifs, ands or buts. The lack of a consensus is a totally different matter in that it speaks more of national confusion in attaining the ideals it has set for itself, not that the ideals have any shades of grey about them.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

I am not defining anything, except observing that a land claiming to be holy is not really what it claims to be without implementing the holy laws for which it claims to stand.

I actually agree with your basic point and you are 100% correct.

This doublespeak about Islam in Pakistan needs to end. Either embrace it or leave it, simply.

That Pakistanis need to agree on it first is also a point that I agree on with @AgNoStiC MuSliM

It’s easy for outsiders to say it, but for us to implement it will take some effort.

We are confused ourselves and most of our leaders have been more confused than us, that has led to the current situation.

There needs to form a mutual consensus in Pakistan about Islam’s role, and I believe finally we have reached that point with PTI/Imran Khan.

 

[VCheng]

I actually agree with your basic point and you are 100% correct.

This doublespeak about Islam in Pakistan needs to end. Either embrace it or leave it, simply.

That Pakistanis need to agree on it first is also a point that I agree on with @AgNoStiC MuSliM

It’s easy for outsides to say it, but for us to implement it will take some effort.

We are confused ourselves and most of our leaders have been more confused than us, that has led to the correct situation.

There needs to form a mutual consensus in Pakistan about Islam’s role, and I believe finally we have reached that point with PTI/Imran Khan.

I am sure that if enough people want sharia, then by all means they should get it. That is the reason Pakistan was founded in the first place.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

I am sure that if enough people want sharia, then by all means they should get it. That is the reason Pakistan was founded in the first place.

Pakistan already has fiqh rulings, the correct term for what you are calling Shariat.

It is more about the ideological foundations of the state and its destiny. More Islamic minded regions of Pakistan (like KPK and North Punjab) have finally gotten a larger say in the central government thanks to PTI.

There are fresh winds now and Pakistan has started to move in the correct direction, not just for Islamic governance, but economy, military, health, infrastructure, and foreign policy.

 

[VCheng]

Pakistan already has fiqh rulings, the correct term for what you are calling Shariat.

It is more about the ideological foundations of the state and its destiny. More Islamic minded regions of Pakistan (like KPK and North Punjab) have finally gotten a larger say in the central government thanks to PTI.

There are fresh winds now and Pakistan has started to move in the correct direction, not just for Islamic governance, but economy, military, health, infrastructure, and foreign policy.

Just so that were perfectly clear, I am personally against mixing any matters of religion with matters of State. To me, religion is a personal matter, while State affairs apply to all citizens. Thus, I think Pakistan will remain a confused mess about its identity until and unless the Objectives Resolution is repealed, but if it is in force, it should be enforced the way its authors intended: Islam above all and in everything.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Why not start quoting the very first words of that Resolution first and then see what you quoted really means Sir. Let us not be dishonest here. The principles are to be interpreted as anunciated by Islam, no ifs, ands or buts. The lack of a consensus is a totally different matter in that it speaks more of national confusion in attaining the ideals it has set for itself, not that the ideals have any shades of grey about them.

The first words of the Objectives Resolution offer no specific guidance on the structure and laws of the country - they are the equivalent to 'In God we Trust' in the United States.

Sovereignty over the entire universe belongs to Allah Almighty alone and the authority which He has delegated to the state of Pakistan, through its people for being exercised within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust.

It is the subsequent words, that I quoted in my earlier post, that start offering some degree of specificity "principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice". And the 'grey' here is the lack of consensus in Pakistani society and the religious right on what those principles of 'democracy, equality, freedom, tolerance and social justice' mean exactly.

 

[VCheng]

The first words of the Objectives Resolution offer no specific guidance on the structure and laws of the country - they are the equivalent to 'In God we Trust' in the United States.

Sovereignty over the entire universe belongs to Allah Almighty alone and the authority which He has delegated to the state of Pakistan, through its people for being exercised within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust.

It is the subsequent words, that I quoted in my earlier post, that start offering some degree of specificity "principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice". And the 'grey' here is the lack of consensus in Pakistani society and the religious right on what those principles of 'democracy, equality, freedom, tolerance and social justice' mean exactly.

Spin it as you might Sir, there is no denying what the Objectives Resolution intends for Pakistan to be is as clear as day. The grey areas you wish to claim are only national confusion about how to achieve those ideals of Islam, not about the intended ideal outcomes at all, as I have mentioned before. Again, those principles are to be enunciated only according to Islam, without a doubt (the part that you left out this time ).

 

[Hamza913]

This is a question I often pose to 'religious Pakistanis' who want a 'Caliphate' or 'Shariah' - whose interpretation of Shariah given that even within the sects there is no consensus? What are the details of this Caliphate system and how does it differ from a system in which the government is elected?

The interpretation that is given authority is that of the Salaf as Salih.

There are no clans in Islam, Arabs had identification based on clans , but eventually even they embraced simply being known as Muslims.

Yes there is. Rasulullah (peace be upon him) recognised tribes/clans that genuinely denoted people's lineages, but anything from the time of jahiliya was rejected (e.g racism or pride based on one's ancestors)

An Arab (Speaker) in Saudia, Qater, UAE, OMAN , IRAQ , EYGYPT , SYRIA , Algeria , Tunisia , Morocco look all same to me

You clearly haven't met many Arabs.

Egyptians, Yemenis, Omanis (and obviously the Sudanese) tend to be much darker than the rest, Saudis, Qataris, and Emiratis are mixed, Iraqis are usually white or light brown, and the rest are typically white.

 

[M. Sarmad]

It's black and white to you because it serves your purpose to cast it that way. For example, here'e one of the principles of the Objectives Resolution:

The principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed

And given the complete lack of consensus within Islamic religious circles on those principles, what 'Holy laws' are you claiming should be implemented in Pakistan to align with the 'identity' that is the subject of this conversation?

According to Jinnah, Islam believed in absolute equality of mankind ... That's why Jinnah said that Muslims and Non-Muslims would be equal citizens of the state in Muslim Democratic Pakistan. Jinnah had said there would be no minorities in Pakistan and that religion was a personal matter and not the business of the state

Objectives Resolution was a perfect antithesis of Jinnah's vision .... the Objectives Resolution identified religious minorities separately and made religion 'the business of the state', .... It was the turning point that changed the course of our history.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Just so that were perfectly clear, I am personally against mixing any matters of religion with matters of State. To me, religion is a personal matter, while State affairs apply to all citizens. Thus, I think Pakistan will remain a confused mess about its identity until and unless the Objectives Resolution is repealed, but if it is in force, it should be enforced the way its authors intended: Islam above all and in everything.

Your opinion doesn’t have weight. It is the common people of Pakistan which will decide their destiny, and they are very religious.

Egyptians, Yemenis, Omanis (and obviously the Sudanese) tend to be much darker than the rest, Saudis, Qataris, and Emiratis are mixed, Iraqis are usually white or brown, and the rest are typically white.

And Saudi/Yemeni Arabic is the closest to fus’ha. Beautiful language.

I found the Egyptians most diverse in looks, reflecting their cosmopolitan history.

Pretty much on the ball as far a looks.

Iraqis, KSA, and rest of Gulf look a lot like us.

 

[padamchen]

They have no idea what they are talking about. Ultimately, it boils down to the same crap about taller, fairer and 'different'. Like the brand of tomato ketchup; they can't define how it is different, they just know that when they wake up in the morning, they are different.

Ignore these lazy, ignorant threads.



These are the only genuine records, but while Hindus have a very systematic and centralised repository, I am curious to know how it is preserved outside.

@Tea addict

While the repository in your parts are those who preserve the records in Hardwar, in the east it is Gaya and Puri, and the south has an incredibly accurate system. I know of one family, part of a sub-set of a larger grouping, that came to Mysore in around the year 1000 AD, and has an unbroken record of its own and its collateral lines up to date. The record is a public one, and may be seen by any interested person, and is updated by an authorised person with each birth in each generation - the information has to be forwarded. Unfortunately, as is all too frequent in our paternalistic system, only men's names are recorded.

Just as a curiousity, my own family's records are available both in Gaya and in Puri, and go back 30 generations.



I am curious to know why Pakistanis speaking on these topics are completely unable to distinguish between Rajput, Gujjar and Jat. Do they think these are the same? It is a possibility for a certain very specific reason, but I would like to know from a knowledgeable Pakistani, rather than assume something.



According to you, what is a community, what is a clan and what is a title?



Fascinating.

Would like to learn more about this.



I agree.

After all, they were Rajputs before they were Hindus. Their adoption of Hinduism and absorption into the Sanatan Dharma is very interesting, in ethnographic terms.



There is frankly not much connection theologically speaking between Zoroastrianism and Hinduism. Zoroastrians came to monotheism in the strictest sense when Hinduism only articulated it deep inside its theological speculations. I am also very uncertain about your statement about their marriage customs, but let's find out more.

@padamchen

You don't need a Parsi to educate you or anybody else.

The Parsi Marriage Act 1936 is available on Google.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Kathin_Singh]

Are there any Aheers(Yadavs) in Pakistan?

In india, Aheers / Yadavs are a big politcal force in North India.

 

[padamchen]

Jats are the closest people left on the subcontinent as our ancestral distant cousins. Blood and faith-wise.

Cheers, Doc