MadDog
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,920
- Reaction score
- 5
Sir the simple question mr gubbi asked that why does Pakistani institutions use arabic or turkish names?
ANS: This was because:
1) Why use Arabic names in use at the time of Muslim Caliphates?
Not only were these names oftenly used when a muslim empire was present but present day Pakistan's south-western part was part of the caliphate led by Hadhrat Umar (R)...and later on most of Pakistan (60-70 % became part of Ummayad caliphate)...I repeat these were Muslim empires not nationalistic empires....thats why we share a lot in common with them.
Traditionaly the area to the left (west) of indus was under Persian influence and to the right (east) of indus was hind.
The military clash between rashidun caliphate of Hadhrat Umar (R) and Raja of Rasil of Rai Dynasty. Traditionaly Makran and balochistan was considered to be under the influence of Persian Sassanid empire but at that time it was under Rai dynasty. This was known as "Battle of Rasil". This was all part of conquest of Persia as much of present day Pakistan was part of ancient Persia The account is as follows;
Conquest of Southeastern Persia (Kerman & Makran)
"The expedition to Kerman was sent roughly at the same time when the expeditions to Sistan and Azerbaijan were sent. Suhail ibn adi was given command of this expedition. Suhail marched from Busra in 643, passing from Shiraz and Persepolis he joined with other Muslim armies and marched against Kerman, which was subdued after a pitched battle with local garrisons. Further east of Kerman laid Makran in what is now a part of present day Pakistan. It was the domain of the Hindu king of Rasil (sindh). The Rai Dynasty dominions were vast, extending from Kashmir and Kanauj to Kandhar and Seistan and on the west to Mekran and a part of Debal, while on the south to Surat their capital was Alor and during their rule Sindh was divided into four provinces: Bahmanabad, Siwistan, Chachpur (which comprised the greater part of Bahaw'alpur Division) and the province consisting of Multan and West Punjab.[35] The Raja of Rasil concentrated huge armies from Sindh and Balochistan to halt the advance of the Muslims. Suhail was reinforced by Usman ibn Abi Al Aas from Persepolis, and Hakam ibn Amr from Busra. The combined forces defeated Raja Rasil at the Battle of Rasil, who retreated to the eastern bank of the River Indus. Further east from the Indus River laid Sindh.[36] Umar, after knowing that Sindh was a poor and relatively barren land, disapproved Suhail’s proposal to cross the Indus River.[32] For the time being, Umar declared the Indus River, a natural barrier, to be the eastern most frontier of his domain. This campaign came to an end in mid 644."
Conquest of Eastern Persia (Sistan)
"Sistan was believed to be the largest province of the Sassanid Empire. In the south it bordered with Kerman and in the north with Khurasan. It stretches from what is now Balochistan, Pakistan in the east and southern Afghanistan in the north. Asim ibn Amr, veteran of the great battles of Qadisiyyah and Nihawand was appointed to conquer Sistan. Asim marched from Busra, and passing through Fars and taking under his command the Muslim troops already present in Fars, entered Sistan. No resistance was offered and cities surrendered. Asim reached Zaranj, 250 miles from Kandahar, a small town in present day southern Afghanistan, then a bustling capital of Sistan. Asim laid siege to the city which lasted several months. A pitched battle was fought outside the city and the Persians were defeated and routed. With the surrender of Zaranj, Sistan submitted to Muslim rule. Further east of Sistan was northern Sindh which was beyond the scope of the mission assigned to Asim. The Caliph, for the time being, didn’t approve of any incursion in the land east of the Persian Empire and ordered his men to consolidate power in the newly conquered land."
After Rashidun caliphates, Ummayads under Muhammad Bin Qasim captured majority area of Pakistan today...that was the reason why the north western part of subcontinent (Pakistan) was muslim majority as this area was in touch with the caliphates...the biggest lie in hostory is for the first time Islam was braught to Pakistan by Muhammad Bin Qasim, no sir, Islam came here during the time of Hadhrat Umar (R) in baluchistan....Yes Islam came to sindh and hind through Muhammad Bin Qasim....but not Pakistan..as majority of Pakistan's land was not in the land traditionaly known as hind....baluchistan itself is 45 % of Pakistan.
So Pakistan is bound to use religous names as we share a religous and cultural identity with the caliphates....and to further reinforce the point much of our land (Pakistan) was in the caliphates.....
2) Why Pakistan doesn't use the names of Hindu, Budhist and Persian kings who ruled the present land of Pakistan thousands of years ago ?
Now the point of my indian friends that why dont we use the names of indian, budhist or Persian kings (sassanid Persia) who ruled the present land of Pakistan....
Sir lets examine what we have in common with Hindu empires ;
Relegous beliefs Absolutely different
Dietry habbits Different
Culture Thats a huge debate but every one here knows there is not a single major common thing (urdu which is suppose to be the biggest common thing as indians speak hindi was made official by the british after they replace the Persian in 1840's which was the official language of all muslim empires in the north western part including even the Sikh empires). But still the scripts in which urdu and hindi are written are completely different(with Urdu in Arabic script and Hindi in Sanskrit script) from each other and there are alot of borrowed words in Urdu from other muslim languages.
Were these empires were friendly towards Muslim kingdoms ?
No instead they called muslims as foriegners, invaders and looters...as is evident from the views of indian members in the previous pages.
So the hindu empires have nothing in common religously, linguisticaly plus they considered our heroes to be villians...still being muslim u expect us to use hindu names for our institutions or wpn systems...i would suggest you to wake up from the dream
3) Why use Turkish names when Pakistanis arn't turks ?
An example can be of a SSG battalion being named "Yildiram"...Turkish word for thunder and named after a muslim Ottoman king " Bayezed Yildiram who faught the Roman Byzantine empire.
Turks (Ottoman empire) led the muslim world for 600 years as they were a caliphate...we being muslims feel a natural relationship with that..as Pakistan was made for muslims not for bhuddists...or hindus...yes ppl from other religions can be our citizens but the reason for Pakistan was being Muslim state so we feel related to history of muslim empires who led muslim world.
Ethinicity, culture and location doesnt matter in Islam.....these things might be used to idetify u...eg Hadhrat Salman Farsi (R) ( a companion of Prophet Muhammad (S) who was from Persia) but location and ethinicity is nothing to be proud of as every human being is equal in the sight of God.
So it is our duty to use the names of great heroes who led the muslim world and with whom even to this day we share a lot.
ANS: This was because:
1) Why use Arabic names in use at the time of Muslim Caliphates?
Not only were these names oftenly used when a muslim empire was present but present day Pakistan's south-western part was part of the caliphate led by Hadhrat Umar (R)...and later on most of Pakistan (60-70 % became part of Ummayad caliphate)...I repeat these were Muslim empires not nationalistic empires....thats why we share a lot in common with them.
Traditionaly the area to the left (west) of indus was under Persian influence and to the right (east) of indus was hind.
The military clash between rashidun caliphate of Hadhrat Umar (R) and Raja of Rasil of Rai Dynasty. Traditionaly Makran and balochistan was considered to be under the influence of Persian Sassanid empire but at that time it was under Rai dynasty. This was known as "Battle of Rasil". This was all part of conquest of Persia as much of present day Pakistan was part of ancient Persia The account is as follows;
Conquest of Southeastern Persia (Kerman & Makran)
"The expedition to Kerman was sent roughly at the same time when the expeditions to Sistan and Azerbaijan were sent. Suhail ibn adi was given command of this expedition. Suhail marched from Busra in 643, passing from Shiraz and Persepolis he joined with other Muslim armies and marched against Kerman, which was subdued after a pitched battle with local garrisons. Further east of Kerman laid Makran in what is now a part of present day Pakistan. It was the domain of the Hindu king of Rasil (sindh). The Rai Dynasty dominions were vast, extending from Kashmir and Kanauj to Kandhar and Seistan and on the west to Mekran and a part of Debal, while on the south to Surat their capital was Alor and during their rule Sindh was divided into four provinces: Bahmanabad, Siwistan, Chachpur (which comprised the greater part of Bahaw'alpur Division) and the province consisting of Multan and West Punjab.[35] The Raja of Rasil concentrated huge armies from Sindh and Balochistan to halt the advance of the Muslims. Suhail was reinforced by Usman ibn Abi Al Aas from Persepolis, and Hakam ibn Amr from Busra. The combined forces defeated Raja Rasil at the Battle of Rasil, who retreated to the eastern bank of the River Indus. Further east from the Indus River laid Sindh.[36] Umar, after knowing that Sindh was a poor and relatively barren land, disapproved Suhail’s proposal to cross the Indus River.[32] For the time being, Umar declared the Indus River, a natural barrier, to be the eastern most frontier of his domain. This campaign came to an end in mid 644."
Conquest of Eastern Persia (Sistan)
"Sistan was believed to be the largest province of the Sassanid Empire. In the south it bordered with Kerman and in the north with Khurasan. It stretches from what is now Balochistan, Pakistan in the east and southern Afghanistan in the north. Asim ibn Amr, veteran of the great battles of Qadisiyyah and Nihawand was appointed to conquer Sistan. Asim marched from Busra, and passing through Fars and taking under his command the Muslim troops already present in Fars, entered Sistan. No resistance was offered and cities surrendered. Asim reached Zaranj, 250 miles from Kandahar, a small town in present day southern Afghanistan, then a bustling capital of Sistan. Asim laid siege to the city which lasted several months. A pitched battle was fought outside the city and the Persians were defeated and routed. With the surrender of Zaranj, Sistan submitted to Muslim rule. Further east of Sistan was northern Sindh which was beyond the scope of the mission assigned to Asim. The Caliph, for the time being, didn’t approve of any incursion in the land east of the Persian Empire and ordered his men to consolidate power in the newly conquered land."
After Rashidun caliphates, Ummayads under Muhammad Bin Qasim captured majority area of Pakistan today...that was the reason why the north western part of subcontinent (Pakistan) was muslim majority as this area was in touch with the caliphates...the biggest lie in hostory is for the first time Islam was braught to Pakistan by Muhammad Bin Qasim, no sir, Islam came here during the time of Hadhrat Umar (R) in baluchistan....Yes Islam came to sindh and hind through Muhammad Bin Qasim....but not Pakistan..as majority of Pakistan's land was not in the land traditionaly known as hind....baluchistan itself is 45 % of Pakistan.
So Pakistan is bound to use religous names as we share a religous and cultural identity with the caliphates....and to further reinforce the point much of our land (Pakistan) was in the caliphates.....
2) Why Pakistan doesn't use the names of Hindu, Budhist and Persian kings who ruled the present land of Pakistan thousands of years ago ?
Now the point of my indian friends that why dont we use the names of indian, budhist or Persian kings (sassanid Persia) who ruled the present land of Pakistan....
Sir lets examine what we have in common with Hindu empires ;
Relegous beliefs Absolutely different
Dietry habbits Different
Culture Thats a huge debate but every one here knows there is not a single major common thing (urdu which is suppose to be the biggest common thing as indians speak hindi was made official by the british after they replace the Persian in 1840's which was the official language of all muslim empires in the north western part including even the Sikh empires). But still the scripts in which urdu and hindi are written are completely different(with Urdu in Arabic script and Hindi in Sanskrit script) from each other and there are alot of borrowed words in Urdu from other muslim languages.
Were these empires were friendly towards Muslim kingdoms ?
No instead they called muslims as foriegners, invaders and looters...as is evident from the views of indian members in the previous pages.
So the hindu empires have nothing in common religously, linguisticaly plus they considered our heroes to be villians...still being muslim u expect us to use hindu names for our institutions or wpn systems...i would suggest you to wake up from the dream
3) Why use Turkish names when Pakistanis arn't turks ?
An example can be of a SSG battalion being named "Yildiram"...Turkish word for thunder and named after a muslim Ottoman king " Bayezed Yildiram who faught the Roman Byzantine empire.
Turks (Ottoman empire) led the muslim world for 600 years as they were a caliphate...we being muslims feel a natural relationship with that..as Pakistan was made for muslims not for bhuddists...or hindus...yes ppl from other religions can be our citizens but the reason for Pakistan was being Muslim state so we feel related to history of muslim empires who led muslim world.
Ethinicity, culture and location doesnt matter in Islam.....these things might be used to idetify u...eg Hadhrat Salman Farsi (R) ( a companion of Prophet Muhammad (S) who was from Persia) but location and ethinicity is nothing to be proud of as every human being is equal in the sight of God.
So it is our duty to use the names of great heroes who led the muslim world and with whom even to this day we share a lot.
Last edited:
Amir Khan boxer not historian. He repeat whatever somebody tell him like parrot.
We Pakistanis are indeed proud to have a World Champion - It is the height of arrogance to tell another person - what or who, he or she is. 
