Arabic words replace persian as fanatics entrench in Pak

Discussion in 'International Politics' started by ashdoc, Aug 14, 2011.

  1. ashdoc

    ashdoc Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    965
    copy/paste--

    Last year it was Ramazan Kareem, instead of Ramazan Mubarak, and this year roza and Ramazan are the ‘bad’ words. We’re told it issawm and not roza; Ramadan and not Ramazan. Why they haven’t just yet realised the folly of calling salaa(t) namaaz is beyond me. Wuzu has been set right as wudu, but azaan has been left alone and not rechristened (have an Arabian equivalent?) as adhaan.

    While it is now customary to say “We’ll meet after Maghrib”, Zuhr, soon to be Dhuhr and Isha, soon to be ‘Isha’a, have been spared. Asralso has been spared the ‘Asr effect, (as has been Ali, which has yet to be respelt as ‘Ali). Fajr perhaps is too early in the day to be bothered with, so no one mentions that time, or is it because you can’t really rechristen Fajr? That’s some light for you in our clouding day!

    Khuda has long been a bad word with those obsessing about filling up Urdu diction with Arabic words. Khuda was in fact the first casualty to fall to this onslaught, as Khuda Hafiz became Allah Hafiz, not realising that Hafiz too should have been fixed, as the Arabic pronunciation of the word is Hafidh. Allah will also have to be respelt as All’ah (follow Junaid Jamshed). Maybe the likes of him, who when endorsing a certain brand of crisps calls Halal, (k)halaal and haram (k)haraam is already working on this one too.

    I shudder to think what will happen when the lot comes round to fixing people’s names and their titles, and that too is coming soon enough. While people like me who have very Arabic names will only have to change the way we spell our names, i.e. from Murtaza Razvi to Murtadha Radhvi, my dear Pakistan will be in a bigger trouble. The letter ‘P’ does not occur in the Quran, nay in the Arabic alphabet even of the Jahiliya period. For starters, they might settle for Bakistan (and Dar al-Islam for Islamabad), advancing a similar argument that they do against roza: that the Quran does not mention roza but sawm, hence when a Muslim fasts, sawm it shall be. What they won’t tell you that even an Arab Christian or Jew (God forbid, Arabs the fountainhead of Islam, still have those people among them?), calls his fast sawm because that’s the word for roza in Arabic — Muslim or non-Muslim, Quran or Psalms or the Bible.

    As for Bakistan, the controversy will only begin thence, because ‘istan’ is a Persian suffix, and totally unacceptable when referring to an Islamic republic. It will have to be translated and we may come up with something like ‘Al Khalissiya’ (of course preceded by Jamhuriya Islamia), and not to be confused with the Sikh demand for Khalistan (see how non-Muslims flock to the Persian language?).

    Our national anthem, oh, my, my… too will have to be scraped because, lo and behold, except for one word in Urdu, all of it is in Persian. And the verse with the Urdu word in it tells us that the ‘system’ to govern Pakistan will be based on the ‘will and unity of its people’, and not of Allah. Astaghfirullah! And blasphemy of blasphemies, the national anthem ends with Saaya-i-Kuda-i-Zuljalaal (under the shadow of God the Majestic).

    Now if Khuda is not the Muslim God, whose majestic shadow does our country seek? We’re in trouble. All Muslim Pakistanis will go to hell for praying this prayer in their national anthem, that is, if our puritan, born-again Pakistani Muslim brethren (and sisters) are to be held in the right. Do think about it.

    Also, if they are right, consider this too: there’s more trouble ahead for our national leaders — dead and alive. The dead ones, especially the Shaheed among them, will have to be rechristened for them to keep enjoying the status of a Muslim martyr. Ms Bhutto will become Shaheeda Lasaaniya (Benazir, as in unmatchable) al-Bhutto or Bint al-Bhutto. The Quaid-i-Azam will be called al-Quaid al-Azam; the Shaheed-i-Millat will become Shaheed al-Ummah or (Milliya), and the Madar-i-Millat, Umm al-Ummah. What will happen to our Meeras and Reemas, Javeds, Jamsheds, Parvezes and Nasreens and Parveens, is anyone’s guess.

    But it’s happening, folks. Even though Abu Bakr, Khadijah and Ali, the very first converts to Islam, did not have to change their names when they embraced the faith; nor did the many Turks, the Iranians, the Berbers or the Indonesians, subsequently. If poor Yousuf Youhana were not a Pakistani, he would have been saved the trouble, but it’s our obsession with religion in the public sphere that keeps telling us that names too must conform to a faith. A Muslim may not name his son Firaon, and understandably so, but there will be many Yazids among us for all times to come. Think about this one too.

    Meanwhile, God, err… Alla’h, bless Bakistan.

    —The writer is a member of the staff at Dawn Newspaper

    Bless Bakistan | Blog | DAWN.COM
     
  2.  
  3. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,290
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Well yes they have to get rid of anything that can be traced to India. May be one day they will declare urdu null and void and one of the languages of Kafir India and they will adopt Arabic.
     
  4. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,290
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Regarding the pronunciation of Ramadan as Ramazan and vice versa, it has to do with the phonetics of the alphabet ض‎ in رمضان . It is as an alphabet is is pronounced as Ḍād.

    Based on ancient descriptions of this sound, it appears to have represented /ɮˤ/ in Qur'anic Arabic a pharyngealized voiced alveolar lateral fricative (It is said that the Islamic prophet, Muhammad, pronounced it with both sides of his tongue).
    So the tendency to pronounce it with a "Zee" sound. Similar for other words using this alphabet.
     
  5. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    Soooo.... let me get this straight. Pakistan wants to be an Arabian extension and at the same time wants to be virtually a part of People's Republic of China??

    :rotfl:. I haven't seen more slave mentality than this in the history of any civilization!! Seesh! they even beat the Iranians at it who gave up their own Zoroastrian history to become Arabized!! :lol:
     
  6. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,163
    Location:
    EST, USA
    But most of these words aren't Indian per se, rather Persian. Urdu itself uses a mix of Persian and Hindi, depending on how far/close one is to Persia/India.
     
  7. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,163
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Pakistan shall rename itself as: The Rootless yet Pure and Fanatic Arabic Speaking Autonomous Province of the Peoples' Republic of China.
     
    Scorpio69 and Tshering22 like this.
  8. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,163
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Some comments from: Bless Bakistan | Blog | DAWN.COM

    There are many more ...
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2011
  9. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    O boi... I pity what's to come at Chinese then. They really don't know the landmine they're sleeping on, thinking that all this will boil down to India getting prickled and they riding the high tides. What happened in Kashgar is simply a small sample of what the LAND OF PURE has in store for the Commies.

    Don't understand what is causing them to be so blind to the dangers even their kafir land faces.
     
  10. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    They should have kept the Persian. At least Persians had civilization.
     
    Dovah likes this.
  11. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,163
    Location:
    EST, USA


    Have you wondered that this is also the independence day for Pakistan? Maybe they are trying to reinvent themselves. Couldn't have been a better opportune moment for this discussion.
     
    Tshering22 likes this.
  12. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,290
    Location:
    BANGalore
    And you keep calling our politicians as people of slave mentality.

    No Iranians are not Arabized. They have their distinct Persian identity. They don't use Arabic.

    Well about Pakistan, anything is possible. If they don't like Arabs, they will pretend to be Turks!!
     
  13. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,290
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Arabs had a wonderful civilization themselves. The Europeans learned a lot from them. Arabs has advanced science and tech know how for their times.
     
  14. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    You're confusing Arab civilization with Islamic civilization. It is true that Islamic civilization once flourished in the Middle East, and the reason for this was the unifying effect that Islam had on the various ethnicities of the region.

    The term 'Arab', in the modern sense, is not an ethnic term but a linguistic term. Anyone who speaks Arabic as a native tongue is considered an 'Arab', and so the modern-day peoples of Iraq, Syria, Egypt etc. are all labeled 'Arabs'. However, this does not mean that Iraqis, Syrians, and Egyptians are ethnically similar to the 'real' Arabs (that is, the Bedouin tribes of the Arabian peninsula). Rather, they are 'Arabized' peoples who are ethnically distinct but adopted the Islamic faith (and through it, the Arabic language) following their conquest by the Arab tribes. The Iraqis, Syrians, and Egyptians all had highly sophisticated civilization before the arrival of Islam. The arrival of Islam simply allowed a new golden age by promoting cultural unity among them.

    The Bedouin Arabs, on the other hand, never had a sophisticated civilization. With the exception of a few merchant city-states like Mecca, the Arabs mostly lived as nomadic warmongering tribes. The centers of Islamic civilization during the Middle Ages were not in the Arabian Peninsula, but in great cities like Baghdad and Cairo. Some would argue that the Bedouins do not have civilization even today, judging by the behavior displayed by the Saudis (arguably the most primitive and unrefined in the whole Islamic world).
     
  15. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    Oh puhleese! Don't tell me you believe that baloney. It has been proven otherwise by scores of researchers around the world. Google it.

    99% of Arabs' 'science' was nothing but stolen knowledge from the civilizations they and their stooges raided. All the crap they claim as theirs was actually from ancient India, ancient Iran, ancient Egypt and ancient China. From medicine, to mathematics, to astronomy, to paper to farming and what not, everything was non-Arab.

    Whatever they claimed to enlighten Europe with was long known in eastern civilizations thousands of years before Arabs even were there. Just because Europeans were a bunch of cave-dwelling idiots in those days and got enamored by what the Arabs "brought" into their world, doesn't mean that everything was theirs.

    And whatever tiny ingenuity any Islamic culture ever had was that from Persians and somewhat from Turks. Arabs were nothing more than a bunch of goat herders and camel traders who just got lucky spreading their mentality around.

    Yeah? Well their Persian just got hijacked by Arabs who completely changed their language. How about you clarify this with a Parsi Scholar who'd tell you more about Persian culture than anyone else? There is a huge difference in what Iranians are taught today and what was their real way of culture. From their ancient language Avestan to modern Arab-scriptured Persian, everything is different. The whole bogus of their government "proud of ancient culture" is as reasonable as Pakistanis claiming "Indus Pakistani civilization of 5000 years old". :lol:

    Why is Iran having such an iron fist on conversion then? I know at least a dozen Persian origin people who migrated to west to re-convert back to ancient Zoroastrianism and tell me about thousands more who are "mentally captive" in Iran. There are only a few high horse mulla-minded Iranians in the country compared to most who are fed up but too scared to go against the "will of God" by their government.

    If the Iranian mullas are so proud of their ancient culture, then why are they so hell bent on not embracing it again? Who's stopping them? So much so that more than 80% of Iranians have been fed up of religion and have become either atheists or run away to West to become Zoroastrians.

    I don't claim to be a know-it-all or something but been fortunate enough to move around enough and learn from a lot of learned people (since I personally exploring these aspects as well).
     
    ashdoc and pack leader like this.
  16. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    ^^Many Persians today still have great pride in their pre-Islamic history, especially the Achaemenid and Sassanid eras.

    Shia Islam is basically a Persianized version of Islam, while Sunni Islam is the 'original' Arabic variety. The very fact that the Persians were able to recreate Islam in their own image shows that they were never intent on being 'Arabized'. It was impossible to 'Arabize' a civilization as sophisticated and firmly established as Persia's.
     
  17. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    Based on knowledge stolen from different regions their Turkic plunderers raided and acquired and re-exported it with an Islamic sales tag. For years Europeans were glorifying this until recently many researcher simply dashed it to the ground. From this civlization's weapons like artillery (common in ancient China and Mongolia) to their science, mathematics, medicine... everything was not theirs.

    Medicine what they call 'Yunani' is nothing but what ancient Greeks learnt from ancient India and during the Greko-Indian contact of ancient era, developed into a mixed system. Heck! the term itself in Sanskrit language means "Greek". The so-called tall claims of inventing trigonometry is nothing but lies which was again called "Trikonmiti" in ancient India. The game of chess whose origin was "Chatur ranga" in Sanskrit, developed into what ancient Persians (called 'Shatranj' from the Sanskrit word mentioned before) modified and became the modern Chess.

    Their so called "architectural marvels" were inspired by ancient Armenian and Mediterranean Christian cultures who were the first innovators of the dome type constructions.

    There you go with the "flourishing civilizations".
     
    pack leader likes this.
  18. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    So is what they make you believe and show the world.

    Islam can never be localized mate. It is one religion that has to be uniformly followed around the world. Their holy book mentions only one single form of practise which is only valid in Islamic communities. All these divisions are invalid in Islam. So you saying "Persianized Islam" is simply hobblegobble. It is not applicable.

    This is why I am asking you, if their government and society are so proud of their ancient culture, why do they have to run out of their ancient homeland, become a political refugee in Western nations to proudly embrace what they actually were? Who's stopping them from embracing the original rather than creating "persianized Islam"? :)

    Come on, give me a plausible answer.

    You see, you will get a lot of knowledge if you speak to Zoroastrian scholars both in India and those who escaped abroad of Iranian origin.
     
  19. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    What is your point? All cultures borrow from others and recreate/refine certain aspects that they find useful. That does not change the fact that the Middle East prospered in the Middle Ages.
     
  20. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    My point is not refuting their prospering. That part what you say is true. What I am trying to convey that there was nothing genuine in their inventions that was not known to the ancient eastern world before. Just because during the pre-colonial times their re-exports of eastern knowledge got the attention of Europeans who were learning to come out of caves and trade with people, doesn't mean all the knowledge was the Islamic civilizations (Both Arab and Non-Arab).

    Just like China ripping off Su-27 and renaming it as J-11 and say tomorrow exporting it to Uganda, doesn't really make it a new "invention".

    And that was a quite a lot of "borrowing" that they did, you're talking about to be re-exported with a false tag to the western world. :lol:.
     
  21. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    The very existence of two distinct brands of Islam, 'Shia' and 'Sunni', show that Islam can and has been divided. There is nothing particularly special about Islam that makes it immune to internal conflict and division.


    Most Iranians are not political refugees in Western nations...

    People adopt new faiths as history marches on. Religion is only one aspect of culture.
     

Share This Page