What is PAKISTAN?

[EjazR]

No south asian before brits arrival called himself an indian

Anyone east of the river Indus was referred to as Hindi or Hindus since the earliest of times in the geographical sense on not the religious sense as we do today. Even the Prophet Muhammed (SAW) referred to India as Hind or Hindiya and the people from there as Hindi. In English, this became the present day India.

And for centuries, people would refer to themselves as Hindustani and the rulers as emperors of Hindustan. How then can we have the First war of Indian independance when Hindus and Muslims fought together against the British in Bahdur Shah Zafar's name as Emeperor of India? Even Iqbal who was Punjabi and Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan who was a Pathan referred to themselves as Indian Muslims among many others.

Even today, you will find a number of Arabs whose last name ends with Al-Hindi which means that these were people who migrated from India-any land east to the river Indus and admit to that as well. Example Hanadi al-Hindi, the first Saudi female pilot or if you want to go back in history, the famous 15th century Islamic scholar Ali Al-Hindi who wrote the famous book Kanzul Amal that is revered by everyone including Arabs even today.

As muse said, pro-Pakistan does not have to be anti-India.

 

[Omar1984]

No south asian before brits arrival called himself an indian

Anyone east of the river Indus was referred to as Hindi or Hindus since the earliest of times in the geographical sense on not the religious sense as we do today. Even the Prophet Muhammed (SAW) referred to India as Hind or Hindiya and the people from there as Hindi. In English, this became the present day India.

And for centuries, people would refer to themselves as Hindustani and the rulers as emperors of Hindustan. How then can we have the First war of Indian independance when Hindus and Muslims fought together against the British in Bahdur Shah Zafar's name as Emeperor of India? Even Iqbal who was Punjabi and Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan who was a Pathan referred to themselves as Indian Muslims among many others.

Even today, you will find a number of Arabs whose last name ends with Al-Hindi which means that these were people who migrated from India-any land east to the river Indus and admit to that as well. Example Hanadi al-Hindi, the first Saudi female pilot or if you want to go back in history, the famous 15th century Islamic scholar Ali Al-Hindi who wrote the famous book Kanzul Amal that is revered by everyone including Arabs even today.

As muse said, pro-Pakistan does not have to be anti-India.

You keep these terms for yourselves not for us. My grandfather and great-grandfather never called themselves Hindis or Hindus or Indians.

Before the independence of Pakistan we were Muslims first then Punjabi then Gujar. Same would be the case for Pathans, Baloch, Muslim Jatts, and Sindhis. Muslims first then Pathan or Baloch or Sindhi.

After the independence of Pakistan, we became Pakistanis.

But never Hindi, and yes my ancestral village is east of the river indus.

This east of indus river propaganda made by the enemies of Pakistan is made to divide Pakistanis. The Indus is only a River. I dont hear Egyptians calling themselves based on the name of their Nile River.

The purpose of a river is to provide water, not to form an identity.

This generation of Pakistanis know only PAKISTAN AND PAKISTANI.

 

[TheStrantrunCurve]

As muse said, pro-Pakistan does not have to be anti-India

And I said when any bharti distorts history I lose my temper

Anyone east of the river Indus was referred to as Hindi or Hindus since the earliest of times in the geographical sense on not the religious sense as we do today.

Yes, I have heard this nonsense from bhartis billions of times, My ancestors are from east of the river Indus and believe me they would be last in the world who would call themselves Hindustani,

Babur called the entire south asia as Hindustan, Do you think Pakistanis of eastern side of Indus river are so much identity-less and they will start claiming identity given to themselves by invaders, We are proud people, we are not Indian Muslims who claim ancestry from arbis, afghans or Persian it is you people who are suffering from identity crisis, No proud Indus person with a 5 thousand year old civilization would want any association with the Darul-Harb in the east.

We, Indus people never called ourselves Hindu; Right from the invasion of Indus valley by Aryan to the end of Delhi sultanate we were called Sindhis. The Aryans called the Indus valley sapta sindhwa while India was named Bharat Varsa in rig Veda. For the Aryans there were two countries in this sub-continent: Sapta Sindhva and Bharat Varsa. The Assyrians in the 7th century B.C. knew the north-western part of the sub-continent as Sinda. Greeks dropped the “s” named us as Indos, the Romans called us Indus, Persians as Abisind and to the Chinese as Sintow. To the Javanese the Sindhis have long been known as the Santri. When the Arabs invaded Pakistan in 7th century they called the land between Hindu Kush and Arabian sea as Sind and everything east of Sind as Hind.

Even during dark ages Indo-pak subcontinent was known as Sind wa Hind by the Persian and Arabs

Even the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) referred to India as Hind or Hindiya and the people from there as Hindi. In English, this became the present day India.

Prophet Muhammad (SAW) used to say Sind wa hind,
Sind, the people of Indus and everything east of sind as hind
In the Hadith collection the Prophet Muhammad PBUH is credited with the aspiration of conquering hind. Participants in the holy war against al-Hind are promised to be saved from hell fire, like those Muslims who participate in the fight of the messiah Isa B. Maryam against the anti Christ (dajjal) in ash-Sham on the eve of the day of judgement.
Kitab al-Fitan (Book of trials) credits Prophet Muhammad PBUH with saying that God will forgive the sins of the members of the Muslim army which will attack al-Hind and give them victory.

We will re-invade your lands and re-Islamise you people, You people have become hinduised and making a mockery of Islam by marrying Hindu women, using Hindu names.

Prophet Muhammad (SAW) has seen the future of the world in his life time and what he said is true and is bound to happen

Name India was given by Alexander the Great to Indus valley which you bhartis stole. The name Hindustan was given by the Islamic conquerors. The name Bharat, which is on the passport, is in fact a name that hardly anyone uses, which commemorates a mythic king

And for centuries, people would refer to themselves as Hindustani and the rulers as emperors of Hindustan. How then can we have the First war of Indian independence when Hindus and Muslims fought together against the British in Bahadur Shah Zafar's name as Emperor of India? Even Iqbal who was Punjabi and Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan who was a Pathan referred to themselves as Indian Muslims among many others.

The Delhi sultanate was mainly a Hindustani empire it only ruled a small area of Pakistani Punjab, it never occupied any balochi, pukhtun or sindhi territory, So spare us the nonsense that Indian and Pakistani Muslim share the same history. It was only after the Pakistani Sindhi King Jalaluddin Muhammad Akbar who was born to a sindhi mother for the first time after centuries united most of Pakistan with bharat. Pakistan share a lot less history with you Indians than what you people are taught in your Hindu textbook.

Even Delhi sultanate used to differentiate between the Muslims of sindh and hind. Sindhi Muslims converted centuries earlier while Indian Muslim were new convert and in much smaller number.

Again the Indian identity was imposed on us by invaders and we rejected this colonial insult by naming ourselves Pakistan.

First war of independence was mainly a Hindustani war. The Indus people didn’t give a damn about what was happening to bahadur zaffar. We Indus people separated from Hindustan after Aurangzeb death in 1700’s. We had no relation with you Indians for 150 years when Briton with their bharti mercenary soldiers invaded our pure lands

Even today, you will find a number of Arabs whose last name ends with Al-Hindi which means that these were people who migrated from India-any land east to the river Indus and admit to that as well. Example Hanadi al-Hindi, the first Saudi female pilot or if you want to go back in history, the famous 15th century Islamic scholar Ali Al-Hindi who wrote the famous book Kanzul Amal that is revered by everyone including Arabs even today.

You will also find people with name ends with Al Sindhi.
Muslim geographers, historians and travelers such as al-Masudi, Ibn Hawqal, Istakhri, Ahmed ibn Sahl al-Balkhi, al-Tabari, Baladhuri, Nizami, al-Biruni, Saadi Shirazi, Ibn Battutah and Katip Çelebi wrote about or visited the region, sometimes using the name "Sindh" for the entire area from the Arabian Sea to the Hindu Kush.

 

[Truth Teller]

Even Iqbal who was Punjabi and Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan who was a Pathan referred to themselves as Indian Muslims among many others.

Being an "indian muslim" before 1947 is different to being an "indian muslim" today.

Before 1947 the name "indian" was applied to everyone under the british indian empire. when i say "british indian empire" i dont mean people of the subcontinent,i'm talking about everybody under "british indian empire".that includes somalia,iraq,burma,singapore,ect.

the common people of Punjab did not refer to themselves as "indians",this is what the british named the people under their empire.

my ancestors called themselves" Punjabi" for over 1000 years.in 1947 we became Pakistani Punjabis.

just because you people decided to name your newly-formed/british-made country as "india" in 1947,does not mean we're going to allow you to distort history.

 

[EjazR]

Sorry TheStrantrunCurve, I though I was communicating with someone sane. But I will just respond quickly as those who want to will understand what I am saying.

Both Iqbal and Jinnah called themselves Indian Muslims, by insulting them you have shown how deeply disturbed and conflicted you are about your own identity and how you are suffering from your crisis.When Iqbal wrote Saare Jahan se Accha, Hindustan hamara. It included his home state Punjab and there was NO mention of British, if you think he considered himself British Indian.

You will teach the correct Islam? To be honest no Muslim thinks Pakistan as an example Muslim country and hopefully Non-muslims will realise that too, no disrespect to the average Pakistani.
Enough to say that Al Hamdulillah we don't have to think twice before going to pray in a mosque and worry if we will blowm up or not.

And writers describing Sindh, doesn't mean it was seperate from Hindh. Al Beruni had the most comprehensive book about India and his book Kitabul Hind covers from present day Balochistan to the present day Bengal and as far south as Maharashtra as all of Hind and he describes all these regions there.

And btw, the Taliban use that same Hadith to say that their attack on Pakistan (which was historically Hind) is a fulfillment of the same Hadith you are quoting. That once the Pakistani state is dismantled and a new state under Taliban style sharia law is established, the prophecy will be fulfilled. Ofcourse, if you actually listen to what other Islamic scholars have actually said about it, then you and the Taliban will realise how far of the mark you are. Infact, some organisations like Hizb-ut-Tahrir actually refer to all Pakistan, India and Bangladesh as Al-Hind calling the previous names as British constructs so go figure.

If you go through the hadith of Abu Dawud which is one of the authentic six books of hadith, you have prophet Muhammed (SAW) saying more or less, that I feel the cool breeze flowing towards me from Al-Hind.

Anyways, this is my last post on this thread, Pakistanis have to figure out what they want Pakistan to be, and if you don't know your history, you will always have identity crises.

 

[Truth Teller]

Both Iqbal and Jinnah called themselves Indian Muslims, by insulting them you have shown how deeply disturbed and conflicted you are about your own identity and how you are suffering from your crisis.When Iqbal wrote Saare Jahan se Accha, Hindustan hamara. It included his home state Punjab and there was NO mention of British, if you think he considered himself British Indian.

Being an "indian muslim" before 1947 is different to being an "indian muslim" today.

Before 1947 the name "indian" was applied to everyone under the british indian empire. when i say "british indian empire" i dont mean people of the subcontinent,i'm talking about everybody under "british indian empire".that includes somalia,iraq,burma,singapore,ect.

the common people of Punjab did not refer to themselves as "indians",this is what the british named the people under their empire.

my ancestors called themselves" Punjabi" for over 1000 years.in 1947 we became Pakistani Punjabis.

just because you people decided to name your newly-formed/british-made country as "india" in 1947,does not mean we're going to allow you to distort history.

if you can prove me wong,then prove me wrong.

You will teach the correct Islam? To be honest no Muslim thinks Pakistan as an example Muslim country and hopefully Non-muslims will realise that too, no disrespect to the average Pakistani.
Enough to say that Al Hamdulillah we don't have to think twice before going to pray in a mosque and worry if we will blowm up or not.

And writers describing Sindh, doesn't mean it was seperate from Hindh. Al Beruni had the most comprehensive book about India and his book Kitabul Hind covers from present day Balochistan to the present day Bengal and as far south as Maharashtra as all of Hind and he describes all these regions there.

And btw, the Taliban use that same Hadith to say that their attack on Pakistan (which was historically Hind) is a fulfillment of the same Hadith you are quoting. That once the Pakistani state is dismantled and a new state under Taliban style sharia law is established, the prophecy will be fulfilled. Ofcourse, if you actually listen to what other Islamic scholars have actually said about it, then you and the Taliban will realise how far of the mark you are. Infact, some organisations like Hizb-ut-Tahrir actually refer to all Pakistan, India and Bangladesh as Al-Hind calling the previous names as British constructs so go figure.

If you go through the hadith of Abu Dawud which is one of the authentic six books of hadith, you have prophet Muhammed (SAW) saying more or less, that I feel the cool breeze flowing towards me from Al-Hind.

Anyways, this is my last post on this thread, Pakistanis have to figure out what they want Pakistan to be, and if you don't know your history, you will always have identity crises.

Typical indian response. instead of insulting like a coward,why not prove TheStrantrunCurve wrong?

and stop trying to bring Islam into this to get your agenda across.

 

[Black Widow]

Not sure what language you indians understand, but no pakistani in his right frame of mind claim any indian ancestry,

What does Megasthenes has to do with india, he wrote India is four-sided in plan where as in reality it is 3 sided with triangle shape, he was definitely not talking about india but something more similar to pakistan which is four sided.

Pakistanis descendants indians?
Same old nonsense being regurgitated, you people are mainly Dravidian, pakistanis are complex mixture of indigenous peoples who have been affected by successive waves of migrations of Aryans, Persians, Greeks, Pashtuns, Mughals, and Arabs.

60 years ago my ancestors were british indians not hindu indans which you are, In their passports it was witten british indian.

If you want to remove the british part and retain the indian then you are fooling no body, My ancestors were citizens of british empire not the country called india.

And just to let you know India was never a bharati name it has always been known by name hindustan so the indian identity was imposed on you by your british master which you still have retained while the proud dignified pakistanis have rejected the colonial insult called india.

No south asian before brits arrival called himself an indian
Bharat has not created any civilization, has only stolen civilization from its neighbours and claim it as its own

sythians, huns, kushans, arab, jews, persian, roman,greek and many nomads, all these races mostly found in pakistan


Stop insulting us by calling us indian it was a colonial name imposed on us, and we aint bharati you people were kicked out of our land in 1947 and you will be kicked out again if you dared crossed even an inch of pakistani territory,

This is how civilization build, people migrate, marry, settle at new places... Almost all world culture made in same way...

Dravidian and non Dravidian divide was abolished long ago... Now its only on paper...

Indian culture or nation: no matter there were many kingdoms were present in India India was always a nation.. (may be because of its vast history) ...

Chankya along with chandrgupta united all the kingdom (by war or friendship) to redefine the nation...

India was not made by some white man (Brits) or some Muslim king.. It always existed , it was just redefined time to time...

It may happen tomorrow that some one will redefine Indian boundary by either breaking it or assimilating small neighbors...

Pakistani Muslim were Indian Muslim (60 year ago) is as true as Jesus was Jew...

 

[Mech]

Okay "truth teller". Lets assume for a moment you are right and the name india should have gone for pakistan. Well, here is my question......SO WHAT?!. WE HAVE THE TITLE INDIANS AND OUR COUNTRY IS CALLED INDIA THE WORLD OVER.

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? let me rephrase....

WHAT "CAN" YOU DO ABOUT IT?

Tough luck bro. The name aint going nowhere.

 

[TheStrantrunCurve]

Sorry TheStrantrunCurve, I though I was communicating with someone sane. But I will just respond quickly as those who want to will understand what I am saying.

Both Iqbal and Jinnah called themselves Indian Muslims, by insulting them you have shown how deeply disturbed and conflicted you are about your own identity and how you are suffering from your crisis.When Iqbal wrote Saare Jahan se Accha, Hindustan hamara. It included his home state Punjab and there was NO mention of British, if you think he considered himself British Indian. .

Yes, already answered this thrice in a day, British India was a colonial insult imposed on us by Britons not by you bharti muslims so just by retaining the insult as your country name doesn’t mean you are still the same British indian that was ruled by the king of England or are you still ruled by King of England.

I never insulted any Jinnah or Iqbal so you making this assumption by yourself. Dont lie man, Why get emotional when i say we have 5000 year old civilization and have nothing to do with Indians. No, it is you who is suffering from identity crisis by claiming any ancestry from Pakistanis not me.

Not sure what Saare Jahan se Accha, Hindustan hamara has to do with this debate but i do know it was Iqbal who asked for the separation of Indus valley from Hindustan.
Now you have to resort to personal insults

You will teach the correct Islam? To be honest no Muslim thinks Pakistan as an example Muslim country and hopefully Non-muslims will realise that too, no disrespect to the average Pakistani.
Enough to say that Al Hamdulillah we don't have to think twice before going to pray in a mosque and worry if we will blowm up or not. .

Already answered this also, Suicide bombing is part of hindu culture, it was first introduced in South Asia by Hindu LTTE trained by Indian Raw so suicide bombing is indian culture not muslim culture and you can keep it to yourself

And writers describing Sindh, doesn't mean it was seperate from Hindh. Al Beruni had the most comprehensive book about India and his book Kitabul Hind covers from present day Balochistan to the present day Bengal and as far south as Maharashtra as all of Hind and he describes all these regions there. .

I will advice you not to challenge me in the history, Al Beruni’s account of India is largely based upon his observations about the Punjabi society to which he came with Mahmud Ghaznavi, and later on lived in for a long time. Therefore, for all practical purposes Al Beruni viewed India through his knowledge of the Punjab. Ghaznavid never occupied any Balochi or Sindhi territory only after Al beruni was dead. Balochistan was an independent kingdom in his lifetime. He lived in 14 years in Punjab and he may have visited few bharti cities but his account is mainly describing Punjab.

Show me any of his account where he mentions about balochistan other than pushtun territories, I did read Kitab-al Hind then why couldn’t i find any balochi mention may be it was not a hindu version of book.
Muslim geographers, historians and travelers such as al-Masudi, Ibn Hawqal, Istakhri, Ahmed ibn Sahl al-Balkhi, al-Tabari, Baladhuri, Nizami, al-Biruni, Saadi Shirazi, Ibn Battutah and Katip Çelebi wrote about or visited the region, sometimes using the name "Sindh" for the entire area from the Arabian Sea to the Hindu Kush.

And btw, the Taliban use that same Hadith to say that their attack on Pakistan (which was historically Hind) is a fulfillment of the same Hadith you are quoting. That once the Pakistani state is dismantled and a new state under Taliban style sharia law is established, the prophecy will be fulfilled. Ofcourse, if you actually listen to what other Islamic scholars have actually said about it, then you and the Taliban will realise how far of the mark you are. Infact, some organisations like Hizb-ut-Tahrir actually refer to all Pakistan, India and Bangladesh as Al-Hind calling the previous names as British constructs so go figure. .

Same dream of having a union of Pakistan, India and Bangladesh but you have cleverly disguised it by using Taliban propaganda. It will never be fulfilled and if it ever did it will be the same as Invaders occupying a foreign country.

I would like to see any evidence/proof in which Taliban equating Pakistan with Bharat. You are a liar and a cheat who is desperately wanting to have any association with proud Pakistanis. I used to read afghan Taliban propaganda for years i never found any mention of Pakistan, For ttp Taliban funded by bharati hindus cannot be sure.
Hizb-ut-Tahrir, Only people of your ilk has anything to do with this organistaion.

If you go through the hadith of Abu Dawud which is one of the authentic six books of hadith, you have prophet Muhammed (SAW) saying more or less, that I feel the cool breeze flowing towards me from Al-Hind. .

Again, i gave you authentic evidence in which hind will be captured and then the same army will capture Israel. Ofcourse the cool breeze flowing from Al-Hind is Bharat but only after we re-capture bharat. Pakistan is the only superpower in Muslim country so what do you expect, Is Maldives going to capture Hindh

Anyways, this is my last post on this thread, Pakistanis have to figure out what they want Pakistan to be, and if you don't know your history, you will always have identity crises.

Again, You people are massively suffering from identity crisis it needs to have a treatment.
Excuse me we know our history what is your history, pilfering Mughal/afghan/turk/persian achievements like tandoori dishes, mughal dishes, nan, palau, kebabs, bryani, language (Urdu), architecture (Taj Mahal, Red Fort etc), culture, dress (shalwar kameez, pashmina shawls, the sherwani, the achkan, the khuusa shoes

You people need to have more honour & dignity and stop claiming history/achievements which is not yours

 

[Truth Teller]

Okay "truth teller". Lets assume for a moment you are right and the name india should have gone for pakistan. Well, here is my question......SO WHAT?!. WE HAVE THE TITLE INDIANS AND OUR COUNTRY IS CALLED INDIA THE WORLD OVER.

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? let me rephrase....

WHAT "CAN" YOU DO ABOUT IT?

Tough luck bro. The name aint going nowhere.

i'm not your "bro".

nothing can be done about the name of your country now.

the best that can be done is for Pakistanis to remind indians this name "indian" was imposed onto them by their British masters,the same british who treated their ancestors lower than dogs.

the name "indian" has its origins from the Indus river in pakistan.you indians have named your country after a Pakistani river.

your so called identity comes from Pakistan.

 

[muse]

From the entries on this thread -- can we see clearly the "truth" or "reality" of "old" and "New" Pakistani nationalism?? Consider:

The notion of a new Pakistani nationalism is not new in a chronological sense. It is as old as the country itself. Its newness is in how widely it is dispersed and how explicitly divorced it is from the state-defined and military-dominated version of Pakistan’s economy, its history and its politics. Old Pakistani nationalism is India-centric, it is scared of multiple identities, it rejects indigenous cultures. Worst of all, it is confused. It often plays jump rope between being Muslim and being Islamic, being Indian and being Arab. Its fear of the Bengali language broke up the country, but has failed to break reality to it. Luckily, the new Pakistani nationalism doesn’t need an invitation. It is a product of the very realities that the old nationalism helped produce. Old Pakistan may be incapable of learning lessons from its mistakes, but it seems very likely that the new Pakistani nationalism is a product of the lessons of history

This is all very confusing for some (clearly) and very liberating for others and or others still, it's just society catching up to itself and when it dos this so called "new nationalism" will have changed -- into what??

Seems to me that's difficult to tell, because Pakistani is just way too big for it to be any one thing -- I would suggest that we look at the kinds of values that are continuing and the kinds that are changing. I'm persuaded there is much to be hopeful and grateful for.

 

[Burger Boy]

Will claiming and rating change the truth??? The truth is All Pakistani are descendant of Indian... Infact 60 year ago they were Indian, many of them fought against Brits for independence....

If your question is about there race, Then its very complex question.. India is old civilization (Refer Megasthinese). Indian Existence is older than Jesus and Prophet Muhammad. Many tribes came and merge with Indian race (sythians, huns, kushans, arab, jews, persian, roman,greek and many nomads)... Its complicated to define Indian race...

And no matter how much a Pakistani deny, he share the same race what we Indian share...

No one is denying that the land that is now India has a history that goes far back, but the existence of India in history is overstated.
During most of the history of "India" the land was made up by numerous political entities existing withing the subcontinent. There have been few times when all or nearly all of the subcontinent was ruled under a single ruler and two out of three of these periods were under the rule of a "foreign" ruler.
The three periods when this happened were:
The Mauryan Empire under Ashoka (alledged)

The Mughal Empire under Aungrazeb

The British Raj

Throughout most of the history of the region both before and after Islam arrived, what is now Pakistan has been a different political entity than the rest of India. During these periods, the occupying regime either either controlled by lands of Pakistan for themselves or the lands were incorporated into whatever political entity existed to the West.
These Periods include:
Indus Valley Civilization

Achaemenid Persians

 

[Burger Boy]

Will claiming and rating change the truth??? The truth is All Pakistani are descendant of Indian... Infact 60 year ago they were Indian, many of them fought against Brits for independence....

If your question is about there race, Then its very complex question.. India is old civilization (Refer Megasthinese). Indian Existence is older than Jesus and Prophet Muhammad. Many tribes came and merge with Indian race (sythians, huns, kushans, arab, jews, persian, roman,greek and many nomads)... Its complicated to define Indian race...

And no matter how much a Pakistani deny, he share the same race what we Indian share...

Sassanid Persians:

Ummayad and Abbasid caliphates:

Timurids:

Ghaznavids:

Durrani

As for race, "race" is hard to define. All Europeans are the same race but they have very different cultures, same for sub-saharan Africans. As for the ethnicities, the four majory ethnicities that make up Pakistan (Punjabi, Pashtun, Balochi, Sindhi) make up less than 5% of the population of India. The muhajirs of Pakistan make up 7-10% of Pakistan, but "muhajir" is not an ethnicity but is a blanket term which covers many different ethnicities. Many muhajirs have different ethnic origins than the "actual" Indians. You can actually find quite a number of muhajirs who are actually Pashtuns, such as AQ Khan, Gen. Akhtar Abdur Rahman etc. And even by judging the appearance, you can usually tell a Pakistani apart from an Indian.

 

[Burger Boy]

As for culture, there are some cultural similarities between Pakistan and India but there are many differences as well. The only main cultural similarity I see is a similar language and love of cricket I suppose.

 

[muse]

Some argue that what unites Pakistan is something called Islamic Ideology -- but consider, Which Islam, which Shariah, which sect, which group are Mujahid or terrorist and then witness the attacks of one so called islamic group against others, suicide attacks, attacks on shrines, etc. etc; below is an idea whose time may not have arrived in public life but is strong in private:


A metaphor for secularism
By Murtaza Razvi

‘SECULARISM’ may be a bad word in the dictionary of our ideologues, but it unites Pakistanis like nothing else. Take cricket as a binding force, for instance.

There’s nothing Islamic or un-Islamic about the sport, and in that it defines what the much-mistaken term ‘secularism’ means: neither religious nor explicitly irreligious, and certainly not anti-religion; secularism is religion-neutral; it can hold all religions in its fold, like in India and Bangladesh.

Of course, there are a handful of those on the fringes of society who oppose even cricket because it is too ‘secular’ for their liking. It is not about going up in the rugged mountains and training to kill in the name of God, but a sport that is enjoyed and played most passionately right down to the grass-roots level — from the dusty streets of Gwadar to the valleys of Hunza. It is everything, including popular, that the Taliban are not.

That is perhaps why they attacked the Sri Lankan team in Lahore in March 2009, putting an end to Pakistan as an international cricket host; they even called football ‘a waste of time’ when football fever was high during last year’s World Cup, ostensibly because it distracts the youth from their mission which is to kill and maim to enforce their version of Islam.

It can be argued that historically populism in Pakistan is tied to secular causes, the kind of populism that sweeps across the land and brings people together. Basant did that for years in Punjab before the killer twine killed it under orders from the highest court.

In the 2008 election, none of the political parties that got the popular vote harped on religious idiom because they knew that since the imposition of the Islamisation process by Gen Zia’s martial law regime, religion had become more of a dividing rather than a uniting force. Among the top victims of that controversial process have been women and the minorities; sectarianism amongst Muslims also sprung up as its ungodly offspring.

That is why Maulana Fazlur Rahman’s JUI-F, a religious party, now practises public issue-based politics, believing in the electoral process even if their goal is to enforce Sharia — a demand that should be more popular than, say, cricket, as the proponents of Islamic ideology would insist, but what to do when it is not? That’s why the Taliban have come to hate him too.

Then, take the 2007-2009 lawyers’ movement for the restoration of the judges sent packing by Gen Musharraf. It united the legal community from across the board, as indeed did the election last year of Asma Jahangir to the post of the president of the Supreme Court Bar. The only ideology embraced by the legal fraternity and which won the day was pushing for ‘rule of law’. And this too leads us to a very interesting point in the sphere of law itself. Consider the Raymond Davis case.

When pressure did not work, the US was forced to fight out his case under Pakistan’s existing, controversial Qisas and Diyat law, which favours the rich — no conditions of faith or nationality or the nature of the crime committed attached — as opposed to serving the cause of justice. The outrage over Davis’s acquittal was shared equally by Pakistanis across the land.

Paradoxically, the religious right which wants more such laws enacted in the name of Sharia was most vocal about the ‘injustice’ done in the case. Paradoxically again, instead of the religious right, the Americans were embarrassed before their own voters for having paid for the release of Davis. Washington denied paying any blood money itself; it was arranged through diplomatic channels with help from friendly governments which had no such qualms.

Davis would have gone to trial and probably have been convicted under secular laws, which Ziaul Haq and after him Ghulam Ishaq Khan and Nawaz Sharif replaced with the controversial Sharia laws. Dare anyone today say that the cause of justice was served by Davis paying blood money and walking away a free man?

Granted all Pakistanis today want the rule of law under which justice is served and also seen to be done. For this do we need laws that are abused or dispense injustice under the pretext of having divine sanction? In fact, they don’t, for Sharia laws are just as man-made as so-called secular laws. We had rather have laws that we can change to meet the demands of justice as human intellect evolves and embraces values that are universally applicable.

When secular causes can bring and keep Pakistanis together why not secular laws? Secularism does not negate Islam as a popular faith as it was practised before the imposition of controversial laws, under which rape victims can be locked up if they cannot prove the crime; mothers can forgive their sons for murdering their own daughters; the rich can pay blood money to escape punishment while a poor man goes to the gallows for committing the same crime; and minorities are booked for blaspheming against Islam. All this brings Islam only disrepute and no glory.

For God, for unity, for the country, we need to rethink our laws. Meanwhile, keep counting on cricket as the secular binding force at a time when all else, especially an obscurantist state ideology, does all to divide and rule us with its misrule.