Betrayed, Arabized

[Rafi]

How so ?

Just over the 41 pages - the same arguments have been made many times, mainly between Pakistani's and indian's, like deja vu.

 

[President Camacho]

Just over the 41 pages - the same arguments have been made many times, mainly between Pakistani's and indian's, like deja vu.

Well brother, you got to learn to ignore the ones that are meant only to inflame others. They are nothing more than a waste of time.

 

[Sinnerman108]

There are different objectives at play here,

Arabization is seen by some as Islamization
whereas some see Arabization as a threat to the "Persian" influence.

Both these parties act and react based upon their perceived lines of acceptance and threat.

What we as Citizens of Pakistan should debate are the pro and cons of associating with the Arabs or otherwise.

I do feel that the ordinary people of Pakistan feel closer to the Arabs than any one else, and want to associate with them.

 

[Developereo]

There are different objectives at play here,

Arabization is seen by some as Islamization
whereas some see Arabization as a threat to the "Persian" influence.

Both these parties act and react based upon their perceived lines of acceptance and threat.

What we as Citizens of Pakistan should debate are the pro and cons of associating with the Arabs or otherwise.

I do feel that the ordinary people of Pakistan feel closer to the Arabs than any one else, and want to associate with them.

Both Arab and Persian influences are important to Pakistan and we should balance both. Neither one should be sacrificed for the other.

My complaint is that Zia sold Pakistan into the Arabs' anti-Iran camp. We should stay neutral in their fight.

 

[President Camacho]

While, to some extent, this is true - Arabization is seen by some as Islamization

I would like you elaborate on this one - whereas some see Arabization as a threat to the "Persian" influence.

What we as Citizens of Pakistan should debate are the pro and cons of associating with the Arabs or otherwise.

I feel you are reading much more than written in the article. It is not the association with the Arabs that is threatening the Pakistani culture. At least not as long as the people themselves want to be associated (whomever they want with) out of their own choice.

It is the association with the Arabs that has been forced by the government and is questioned here. Such cultural aspects, when forced upon people, have a counter-effect. People may, in the end, start dejecting the Arabs, and even develop unfounded hatred toward them.

The best solution is to get rid of such parts from texts books and even the constitution that ask people to have a certain type of thinking toward certain people.

It already has had a strange counter-effect, and it seems the Pakistani texts books (open to debate though, as I haven't read a lot about them) hate India/Indians more than the Pakistani people do. And same is happening in India where people have been, for long, questioning the role of Gandhi and the Congress Party that have always been over-glorified in the text books.

 

[Sinnerman108]

Both Arab and Persian influences are important to Pakistan and we should balance both. Neither one should be sacrificed for the other.

My complaint is that Zia sold Pakistan into the Arabs' anti-Iran camp. We should stay neutral in their fight.

Amazing how you and several others can ignore the contents of the post and comment on the avatar. Open another thread and lets try and discuss your apprehensions regarding Gen Zia.

On Topic:
Look around in all major metropolis of Pakistan and see several "Khana-e-Farhang" are working for the persian influence.
now considering the % of population aligned with Persia you will notice there is a problem here.

So, while every one is going blazing guns on Pakistan's association with Arabia for good or bad,
please do mention the non arab associations and how some people have literally tried to sell themselves to those parties.

Be it the Persians for Iran, the Ultra liberals for America etc etc.

---------- Post added at 04:45 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:43 AM ----------

I feel you are reading much more than written in the article. It is not the association with the Arabs that is threatening the Pakistani culture. At least not as long as the people themselves want to be associated (whomever they want with) out of their own choice.

It is the association with the Arabs that has been forced by the government and is questioned here. Such cultural aspects, when forced upon people, have a counter-effect. People may, in the end, start dejecting the Arabs, and even develop unfounded hatred toward them.

The best solution is to get rid of such parts from texts books and even the constitution that ask people to have a certain type of thinking toward certain people.

It already has had a strange counter-effect, and it seems the Pakistani texts books (open to debate though, as I haven't read a lot about them) hate India/Indians more than the Pakistani people do. And same is happening in India where people have been, for long, questioning the role of Gandhi and the Congress Party that have always been over-glorified in the text books.

Can you please illustrate some examples where the Government of Pakistan is forcing to accept the Arab line ? or Arabic culture ....

 

[Developereo]

Amazing how you and several others can ignore the contents of the post and comment on the avatar. Open another thread and lets try and discuss your apprehensions regarding Gen Zia.

My reference to Zia had nothing to do with your avatar. I mentioned it because the original article mentioned him specifically by name and also in response to immediately preceding posts by me and others.

On Topic:
Look around in all major metropolis of Pakistan and see several "Khana-e-Farhang" are working for the persian influence.
now considering the % of population aligned with Persia you will notice there is a problem here.

So, while every one is going blazing guns on Pakistan's association with Arabia for good or bad,
please do mention the non arab associations and how some people have literally tried to sell themselves to those parties.

Be it the Persians for Iran, the Ultra liberals for America etc etc.

I already questioned why people are OK with suits and ties, but make a big deal of abayas? I agree there is a hypocrisy at play here.

PS. I completely agree with your point that some of this noise about 'Arabization' is really anti-Islamic agenda at work. The tone of the original article is typical of our pseudo-intellectuals.

 

[President Camacho]

Can you please illustrate some examples where the Government of Pakistan is forcing to accept the Arab line ? or Arabic culture ....

Opening post is full of it, but I will let you see the most obvious one:

Article 31/2 (a) of constitution of Pakistan states:

“The State shall endeavor, as respects the Muslims of Pakistan to make the teaching of the Holy Quran and Islamiat compulsory, to encourage and facilitate the learning of Arabic language..”.

^^ I am well aware how important the religion is to Islamic people (and before you quickly pass your judgement - Not I do not think it is right, or wrong).

Because of the importance Islam plays in the life of Muslims, it was used as an instrument to motivate people and fund the war that was not Pakistan's.

The Arabian influence - It played a great role in the war because a lot of financiers were from the peninsula.

 

[Sinnerman108]

Opening post is full of it, but I will let you see the most obvious one:

Article 31/2 (a) of constitution of Pakistan states:

“The State shall endeavor, as respects the Muslims of Pakistan to make the teaching of the Holy Quran and Islamiat compulsory, to encourage and facilitate the learning of Arabic language..”.

^^ I am well aware how important the religion is to Islamic people (and before you quickly pass your judgement - Not I do not think it is right, or wrong).

Because of the importance Islam plays in the life of Muslims, it was used as an instrument to motivate people and fund the war that was not Pakistan's.

The Arabian influence - It played a great role in the war because a lot of financiers were from the peninsula.

Bad example.
The book of Islam is in Arabic and preserved word for word, and point for point since last 1500 years.
To be a Muslim is to know the book of Islam and traditions of the prophet
to know the book of Islam and the prophet's traditions is to know Arabic.

God himself, praises the Arabic language in his book.

Think about it, does it make sense to read the book of God without understanding it ?
Thus Arabic should be introduced in schools.

Thus constitutions of Pakistan is not saying anything which a Muslims is not bound to do anyway.

 

[President Camacho]

Bad example.
The book of Islam is in Arabic and preserved word for word, and point for point since last 1500 years.
To be a Muslim is to know the book of Islam and traditions of the prophet
to know the book of Islam and the prophet's traditions is to know Arabic.

God himself, praises the Arabic language in his book.

Think about it, does it make sense to read the book of God without understanding it ?
Thus Arabic should be introduced in schools.

So, please tell me, it is actually the Quran that makes it mandatory for everyone to learn Arabic, because that is what you are implying here.

If not, then you should not say this:

Thus constitutions of Pakistan is not saying anything which a Muslim is not bound to do anyway.

Because what I understand from your statements is that Arabic helps people understand Islam better. So it is not something that people are "bound" to do. So the people should be able to make their own choices regarding this "boundation" you talk of.

And if the Quran does not say that, then Zia has actually forced his views on the people by inserting it in the constitution.

 

[Developereo]

Bad example.
The book of Islam is in Arabic and preserved word for word, and point for point since last 1500 years.
To be a Muslim is to know the book of Islam and traditions of the prophet
to know the book of Islam and the prophet's traditions is to know Arabic.

God himself, praises the Arabic language in his book.

Think about it, does it make sense to read the book of God without understanding it ?

So far, so good.

Thus Arabic should be introduced in schools.

Thus constitutions of Pakistan is not saying anything which a Muslims is not bound to do anyway.

This is the part that is up for debate -- to what extent the constitution should favor Islam over other religions.

One the one hand, in a democracy, the issue should be decided by the people, always provided that minority rights are protected. Schools are tasked to produce individuals who would functions best in that particular society and the world at large. If a majority of Pakistanis want their children to be able to understand the Qur'an, then schools should cater to that.

It goes without saying that non-Muslims -- or unwilling Muslims -- should be exempt from this requirement and should be provided an alternative.

 

[Developereo]

So, please tell me, it is actually the Quran that makes it mandatory for everyone to learn Arabic, because that is what you are implying here..

I think he is saying what I and others already stated.

For us, Qur'an is God's word, and no translation is ever perfect.

So either you read God's word directly in Arabic for yourself, or you read someone else's interpretation of what God said.

 

[Sinnerman108]

So, please tell me, it is actually the Quran that makes it mandatory for everyone to learn Arabic, because that is what you are implying here.

Yes that is what I am saying.
to be able to read Quran one should know Arabic. and every one knows almost that much.
However no one understand what they are reading, because they do not know the language it self.

If not, then you should not say this:



Because what I understand from your statements is that Arabic helps people understand Islam better. So it is not something that people are "bound" to do. So the people should be able to make their own choices regarding this "boundation" you talk of.

And if the Quran does not say that, then Zia has actually forced his views on the people by inserting it in the constitution.

Again, you are commenting without knowledge.

It is impervious for any leader of an Islamic state to ensure that Islam is made a part of life of common people.
It is necessary for the leader of an Islamic state to take steps to ensure the constitution is Islam and Quran itself.

If the leader of an Islamic state fails to ensure upholding Islam and fails to make Islam part the state's religion
then it is considered a sin on his part and he will be held accountable for it.

 

[53fd]

First of all, we all need to define what "Arabization" is.

"Arabization" to some might mean Arab culture (dressing, lingual 'changes') for society, to others it might mean Arabi "Salafism" (radicalization); to others, it might mean promoting the importance of religious scripture of the Quran on a personal level etc.

a) Does promoting religious scripture of the Quran, & giving it a preference over other religious texts hurt Pakistani society in any way?

b) Does promoting Arab culture (in terms of dressing, like the Niqab; lingual 'changes', such as going from Khuda Hafez to "Allah" Hafiz) for the society, in any way compromise one's personal ethnic heritage, & is it wrong if it does hinder it, considering how societies evolve? Does it hurt society in any way?

c) Does promoting Salafi Jihadism/Wahabism like Zia ul Haq did compromise Pakistani society?

These are all complicated questions (besides the third/last one) that have no easy answers, that need a bit of clarification on one's end.

 

[Sinnerman108]

^^^
Read the full thread

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strategic-geopolitical-issues/126804-betrayed-arabized-42.html#post2065120