Shaan Shahid wants govt to celebrate local heroes instead of airing 'Dirilis: Ertugrul'

[Mamoon]

Do you believe that family tree to be valid?

Yes because it is considered to be a source of pride. We actually have some artifacts in our ancestral home which are considered to be over 300 years old.

 

[Giannis]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] seriously thinks that people from the Indus plains haven't done their research lmaoo, apparently our elders didn't draw a family tree but "KPK elites' have . My maternal great grandfather being a cousin of Mir Osman Ali Khan and having photographs with the Hyderabadi royal family as well pictures from Ankara back in the early 20th century are all "fabricated" but his ancestry is correct because his papa drew a family tree

 

[Mamoon]

Once again what evidence do you have? You don't know anything about Punjab or Karachi, elite families in Punjab, Sindh and other parts of the subcontinent have a whole family tree aka shajra and what not about their heritage, you have no idea about us and our heritage. I don't care about my ancestry but your're acting like only your people have done their research lmao, you need to seriously learn more about your countrymen from other regions instead having this superiority complex.

My evidence is the family tree worked out by my father. As I said, if others have their trees family worked out, and they want to do bhangra over Arab and Turks, it is fine.

But you have people in this country who cannot name their great grand fathers but do bhangra over Ertugrul and how it represents their culture and roots.

First find out about your roots and then do your bhangra. At least you will have some basis. What is so condescending about it?

 

[Giannis]

My evidence is the family tree worked out by my father. As I said, if others have their trees family worked out, and they want to do bhangra over Arab and Turks, it is fine.

But you have people in this country who cannot name their great grand fathers but do bhangra over Ertugrul and how it represents their culture and roots.

First find out about your roots and then do your bhangra. At least you will have some basis. What is so condescending about it?

Nah bro go do attan over Turk and Afghan heritage, it's hillarious how you're indirectly mocking bhangra. I don't know what liking Ertugrul has anything to wanting to be Turkish it's popular all over the world, in Latin America, in the middle east. You'll meet muslims of all colors at the masjid (here in America) so I'm aware of how popular it is across races.

 

[Nostalgic]

But are heritage and roots dependent solely on descent? Take Turkey itself as an example. They aren’t exactly the textbook definition of Turks, and are in fact by and large Turkicized denizens of what was once Asia Minor.

 

[Mamoon]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] seriously thinks that people from the Indus plains haven't done their research lmaoo, apparently our elders didn't draw a family tree but "KPK elites' have . My maternal great grandfather being a cousin of Mir Osman Ali Khan and having photographs with the Hyderabadi royal family as well pictures from Ankara back in the early 20th century are all "fabricated" but his ancestry is correct because his papa drew a family tree

Did I question your ancestry? No. So what is the point of flexing over your maternal great grand father? When did I call your ancestry fabricated? You are making things up now.

I repeat for the third time, or perhaps the fourth time - if you have your lineage worked out and you choose to identify with the Arabs and Turks based on your roots, that is fine.

But as I said, there are people in this country who cannot name their ancestors beyond their grandparents and then they take pride and identify with Arabs and Turks because of our religion.

Tracing family trees is not limited to KP only. Large, rich and historically elite families in Punjab and Sindh do it as well because it is a source of pride for them.

 

[Mamoon]

Nah bro go do attan over Turk and Afghan heritage, it's hillarious how you're indirectly mocking bhangra. I don't know what liking Ertugrul has anything to wanting to be Turkish it's popular all over the world, in Latin America, in the middle east. You'll meet muslims of all colors at the masjid (here in America) so I'm aware of how popular it is across races.

The difference is that in these countries, Ertugrul is not forced down the public’s throats by the government itself.

Our PM was promoting the show and called this fantasy propaganda work as real history of Islam.

This show has become a source of pride for Pakistan. If you criticize it you will be treated like a traitor.

 

[Giannis]

But are heritage and roots dependent solely on descent? Take Turkey itself as an example. They aren’t exactly the textbook definition of Turks, and are in fact by and large Turkicized denizens of what was once Asia Minor.

Exactly, also Turks themselves claim foreign heritages - some claim Slavic, Albanian and others claim Greek and Circassian ancestry. If [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] traveled more he'd learn that claiming foreign lineage is common all over the world, go to the Arab world and numerous Arabs claim Turkish origins because of the ottomans, some claim Persian. If you to the Khaleej, you'll find Arabs who claim all kinds of foreign ancestries from India to Nepal to Balochistan to China, does that make Arabs self haters? Why do desi muslims have to prove our ancestry but every other race gets a pass? I think colorism plays a role. A white man can claim to have a Native American great grandmama and he's believed but if a brown man claimed the same he's mocked.

 

[Saeed]

He is just sharing a proverb, I don’t think it means much just like his content.

It has been 4 months, still waiting for Shaan and the likes to start working on something that celebrates local heroes.

 

[Mesozoic]

Lol this is a fun thread.

I think if someone ignores their major (80-90%) bloodline and starts boasting about or taking pride over their minor one , then I think it's not unfair to call them "self-loathers".

Take my example. I'm a South Indian with 25% Maratha/Maharashtrian lineage (paternal grandmother was from a full Marathi family). I can't speak a word in Marathi but if I go around claiming to be the descendant of the great Chatrapati or Peshwa , I'll be laughed at for obvious reasons.

In the same way, if an African American ignores all his African slave ancestry and starts claiming that he's European because he had a great grandfather who was a German , he'll be made fun of too like that girl who appeared on Dr.Phil's show.

 

[Giannis]

The difference is that in these countries, Ertugrul is not forced down the public’s throats by the government itself.

Our PM was promoting the show and called this fantasy propaganda work as real history of Islam.

This show has become a source of pride for Pakistan. If you criticize it you will be treated like a traitor.

Did Imran Khan ever say that we're Turks? No. All he said was that the Ottomans were the leaders of the Muslim world (barring Safavid Iran) for a period of history. Whether you like it or not, it's a fact that the Ottomans were the leaders of the Muslim just like how America is the leader of the west, it doesn't mean it's good or bad and the Ottomans themselves made mistakes, in fact there is a dark side to their rule but they were the the leaders of the muslim world regardless of that. The Mughals who ruled over the subcontinent around the same period had given their bayah to the Ottoman sultans, which meant they were aligned to Istanbul not Isfahan (Safavid capital), another reason is that the province of Hejaz (home to Mecca and Medina) were under Ottoman rule, so they essentially had the role Saudi Arabia has today.

 

[Giannis]

Lol this is a fun thread.

I think if someone ignores their major (80-90%) bloodline and starts boasting about or taking pride over their minor one , then I think it's not unfair to call them "self-loathers".

Take my example. I'm a South Indian with 25% Maratha/Maharashtrian lineage (paternal grandmother was from a full Marathi family). I can't speak a word in Marathi but if I go around claiming to be the descendant of the great Chatrapati or Peshwa , I'll be laughed at for obvious reasons.

In the same way, if an African American ignores all his African slave ancestry and starts claiming that he's European because he had a great grandfather who was a German , he'll be made fun of too like that girl who appeared on Dr.Phil's show.

I see your point, it's sort of like how Pashtuns view Shahrukh Khan. He's mixed, doesn't look Pashtun at all and neither does he speak the language but he takes a lot of pride in it and then you got Misbah ul Haq who is full Pashtun from a tribe that was Punjabized so despite not speaking Pashto he still looks the part but he never mentions his pashtun heritage in interviews unlike his fellow tribesman Imran Khan.

 

[Nostalgic]

Exactly, also Turks themselves claim foreign heritages - some claim Slavic, Albanian and others claim Greek and Circassian ancestry. If [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] traveled more he'd learn that claiming foreign lineage is common all over the world, go to the Arab world and numerous Arabs claim Turkish origins because of the ottomans, some claim Persian. If you to the Khaleej, you'll find Arabs who claim all kinds of foreign ancestries from India to Nepal to Balochistan to China, does that make Arabs self haters? Why do desi muslims have to prove our ancestry but every other race gets a pass? I think colorism plays a role. A white man can claim to have a Native American great grandmama and he's believed but if a brown man claimed the same he's mocked.

But you see, we’re again discussing descent. My contention was that descent alone does not determine something as nebulous and constantly evolving as cultural heritage. And it is in a state of flux, subject to change.

A fascinating side debate could be over the impact a state can have in determining how its population perceives its cultural roots to be. All states peddle mythologies, all of them with various degrees of untruth to them. Why should we be any different?

 

[Mesozoic]

I see your point, it's sort of like how Pashtuns view Shahrukh Khan. He's mixed, doesn't look Pashtun at all and neither does he speak the language but he takes a lot of pride in it and then you got Misbah ul Haq who is full Pashtun from a tribe that was Punjabized so despite not speaking Pashto he still looks the part but he never mentions his pashtun heritage in interviews unlike his fellow tribesman Imran Khan.

Yes. He's half pashtun (Afghan/Peshawar) and half Kashmiri if I'm not wrong. There's a significant population of half/part pashtuns in India called the Rohilla Pathans (mostly in UP and Delhi). But never heard them speak anything other than Urdu/Hindi.

 

[Major]

But you see, we’re again discussing descent. My contention was that descent alone does not determine something as nebulous and constantly evolving as cultural heritage. And it is in a state of flux, subject to change.

A fascinating side debate could be over the impact a state can have in determining how its population perceives its cultural roots to be. All states peddle mythologies, all of them with various degrees of untruth to them. Why should we be any different?

The constantly evolving part is the main thing. Our start point is always the good people. We wont link the bad ones

How many are the descendant of changez khans rape victims

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

There is this French expression which stems from the times when Ottoman empire ruled the lands and the seas of Europe.

Fort comme un Turc

In French, to be “as strong as a Turk” means to be extremely strong.
Par exemple: He may be originally Austrian, but “Arnold Schwarzenegger est fort comme un Turc“

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The constantly evolving part is the main thing. Our start point is always the good people. We wont link the bad ones

How many are the descendant of changez khans rape victims

What if they were the descendants of Changez Khan's rape victims? Does it make any difference as to how those descendants are viewed today?

 

[Giannis]

Yes. He's half pashtun (Afghan/Peshawar) and half Kashmiri if I'm not wrong. There's a significant population of half/part pashtuns in India called the Rohilla Pathans (mostly in UP and Delhi). But never heard them speak anything other than Urdu/Hindi.

Nope, he's not half Kashmiri. He claims the Kashmiri lineage through his Pashtun side, his mother side is south indian.

Many of the Rohilla Pathans migrated to Karachi, they make a big chunk of the population.

 

[Major]

What if they were the descendants of Changez Khan's rape victims? Does it make any difference as to how those descendants are viewed today?

No, but if your descendant was a rapist would you take pride in it?

 

[Mesozoic]

Nope, he's not half Kashmiri. He claims the Kashmiri lineage through his Pashtun side, his mother side is south indian.

Oh sorry. Remember him talking about his Kashmiri grandparents in an interview. So, thought he may be a mix of Afghan/Kashmiri.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

No, but if your descendant was a rapist would you take pride in it?

I can only talk for us Brits, and we have no problem with acknowledging our descendants were raped by the Vikings. Lots of British Indian celebrities don't seem to have a problem with intermarrying with the descendants of rapists either so I really don't think it's as big an issue as you guys who live in India seem to think it is.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Yes. He's half pashtun (Afghan/Peshawar) and half Kashmiri if I'm not wrong. There's a significant population of half/part pashtuns in India called the Rohilla Pathans (mostly in UP and Delhi). But never heard them speak anything other than Urdu/Hindi.

They are not half Pashtuns. They have been mixed now with the rest of the UP Muslims, and they are only Pathan in the male line. In the same family you will see a huge variance in skin color. This is the same for the Urdu speaking families of Pathan zaat of Pakistan. Its impossible to know what percent Pashtun blood they have. Pashtuns have been setting in North India for the last 800 years, and mixing with locals.

 

[CricketCartoons]

They are not half Pashtuns. They have been mixed now with the rest of the UP Muslims, and they are only Pathan in the male line. In the same family you will see a huge variance in skin color. This is the same for the Urdu speaking families of Pathan zaat of Pakistan. Its impossible to know what percent Pashtun blood they have. Pashtuns have been setting in North India for the last 800 years, and mixing with locals.

How did the pashtuns come into being?

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

How did the pashtuns come into being?

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Pashtun

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtuns#History_and_origins

 

[CricketCartoons]

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Pashtun

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtuns#History_and_origins

The britannica link said that the origins are not clear, and didn't bother to read the wiki page. I assume you mean so say that it is not clear how the pashtuns came into being.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

The britannica link said that the origins are not clear, and didn't bother to read the wiki page. I assume you mean so say that it is not clear how the pashtuns came into being.

No what i meant to say was that you could read it yourself over there.

However since you read the Britanicca link i went over to the Wikipedia one and found this

"... the origin of the Afghans is so obscure, that no one, even among the oldest and most clever of the tribe, can give satisfactory information on this point."

"Looking for the origin of Pashtuns and the Afghans is something like exploring the source of the Amazon. Is there one specific beginning? And are the Pashtuns originally identical with the Afghans? Although the Pashtuns nowadays constitute a clear ethnic group with their own language and culture, there is no evidence whatsoever that all modern Pashtuns share the same ethnic origin. In fact it is highly unlikely"

So both links say the same thing. No one knows how the Pashtuns are formed.

 

[CricketCartoons]

No what i meant to say was that you could read it yourself over there.

However since you read the Britanicca link i went over to the Wikipedia one and found this

"... the origin of the Afghans is so obscure, that no one, even among the oldest and most clever of the tribe, can give satisfactory information on this point."

"Looking for the origin of Pashtuns and the Afghans is something like exploring the source of the Amazon. Is there one specific beginning? And are the Pashtuns originally identical with the Afghans? Although the Pashtuns nowadays constitute a clear ethnic group with their own language and culture, there is no evidence whatsoever that all modern Pashtuns share the same ethnic origin. In fact it is highly unlikely"

So both links say the same thing. No one knows how the Pashtuns are formed.

Thanks. Always like it when someone explains it to me personally. reading wiki or any link feels like homework to me.

 

[Prince of Pakistan]

come on, Fawad Khan and Shan are joke of actors. They dont know how to act. Hamza Abbasi just makes a dumb face with a dumb pose and calls it acting.

Fawad Khan was a singer and Hamza ALi Abbasi probably never went to theater or acting school.
They are just actors beased on looks.

Yes, Shan went to such schools, but he is still not as good of an actor as hollywood or even bollywood actor.

Now you have a guy like Fahad Mustafa who is a great host. Knows how to host an event, but than because of his skin color and looks you make him an actor.
They even casted Atif Aslam in BOL .

Are you serious?

Fahad Mustafa has been into acting since his college days. His father is a famous Sindhi actor, yet Fahad had to struggle to get work and his first role was of a deaf guy (small role). From there things started to blossom for him because of his talent.

He is one of the few versatile actors in Pakistan. Be it a gangster, psycho, hijra, spoilt brat or a handicapped guy, he has done everything.

He started hosting many years later from 2012/2013 on when he quit dramas and focused on movies.

 

[Bigboii]

This whole Syed thing is a joke. It's a myth similar to the one started by the Arains of how they are descended from Muhammad Bin Qasim's army. The Syed's of the sub-continent do not trace their lineage back to the Prophet's family nor to the Arabs.

Why were these myths perpetuated? It was done so lower status communities could achieve upward mobility specially during the colonial era. Colonial ethnographers used to prepare ethnographic data of the subject populations. The primary reason for this data was to identify who owned land and once you identify that you can identify potential revenues. This data was also used to identify where land would go once the current owner was no longer there and to identify inheritance patterns. Various clans or tribes or castes (whatever you want to call it) were concerned about the type of history the colonial ethnographers were producing and so out of this desire of correcting the "colonial perception" of "our communities". These communities came up with their own histories to counter the colonial perception.

There have been several studies conducted to assess the authenticity of the claimed ancestry of Syeds. If all Syeds really are in direct descent from Hassan and Hussein, the expectation would be that the Y chromosomes of Syeds would be less diverse than those of non-Syeds. Outside the Arab world, we would also expect to find that Syeds share Y chromosomes with Arab populations to a greater extent than they do with their non-Syed geographic neighbours. However, studies have found that the Y chromosomes of self-identified Syeds from India and Pakistan are no less diverse than those non-Syeds from the same regions, suggesting that there is no biological basis to the belief that self-identified Syeds in this part of the world share a recent common ancestry.

Syed thing is the biggest joke pulled in history facts

But the Syed sir name is not SC only phenomenon it's active in different shape or forms in different parts of Muslim world (even in central asia and Albania)

Go search up the case of a man claiming to be Syed in an Ottoman court and than the caliph made laws "regulating" this whole linage situation

 

[Bigboii]

Syed thing is the biggest joke pulled in history facts

But the Syed sir name is not SC only phenomenon it's active in different shape or forms in different parts of Muslim world (even in central asia and Albania)

Go search up the case of a man claiming to be Syed in an Ottoman court and than the caliph made laws "regulating" this whole linage situation

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid
They used to wear green turban to indicate their liniage

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

But are heritage and roots dependent solely on descent? Take Turkey itself as an example. They aren’t exactly the textbook definition of Turks, and are in fact by and large Turkicized denizens of what was once Asia Minor.

Exactly, but they assimilated into Turkic culture.

But you see, we’re again discussing descent. My contention was that descent alone does not determine something as nebulous and constantly evolving as cultural heritage. And it is in a state of flux, subject to change.

A fascinating side debate could be over the impact a state can have in determining how its population perceives its cultural roots to be. All states peddle mythologies, all of them with various degrees of untruth to them. Why should we be any different?

As the Muslim elite of the subcontinent followed a Persianized culture with Indian elements mixed in it, the rest of Muslims also followed that. Now its been a 1,000 years of that culture, so naturally its the culture that Pakistanis would follow. Whether people have any blood of foreign soldiers is irrelveant. They have assimilated into that culture.

 

[Bigboii]

As the Muslim elite of the subcontinent followed a Persianized culture with Indian elements mixed in it, the rest of Muslims also followed that. Now its been a 1,000 years of that culture, so naturally its the culture that Pakistanis would follow. Whether people have any blood of foreign soldiers is irrelveant. They have assimilated into that culture.

Know that's a valid point imo (unlike the whole linage situation)
Because we're a different culture not fully Persian and not fully indian

But are we that different that we can claim a different "culture" or we are just a bunch of Sub cultures made into a country (west Pak sub culture of persia) (east sub culture of North India)

 

[watson367]

Its just a show. Its not gonna make Pak celebrities become jobless lol.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Know that's a valid point imo (unlike the whole linage situation)
Because we're a different culture not fully Persian and not fully indian

But are we that different that we can claim a different "culture" or we are just a bunch of Sub cultures made into a country (west Pak sub culture of persia) (east sub culture of North India)

You can also break Indic and Iranic cultures into many different sub cultures. And western Pakistan culture, as in the Pashtun and Baloch is one of the sub cultures of Iranic culture.


However Eastern Pakistan and North India is a mix of those different cultures. Everything from language, to cuisine, music, clothing, is a mix of those different cultures. The Indo-Persian culture if you will.

The issue is that North Indian Hindus also had the same culture, however they want to remove the "foreign influence". While Muslims in those areas dont.

An example is Hindus want to remove Persian words from Hindi, while in Pakistan we dont. What Sanskrit is for Hindus, thats what Persian was for Muslims. Hence why our anthem is almost completely Persian.

You can break this culture into subcultures as well. As in Punjabi, Sindhi, etc.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Its just a show. Its not gonna make Pak celebrities become jobless lol.

These celebs want zero competition. They are shameless people, who play the Islamic and culture card, when there salaries are at stake.

 

[Nostalgic]

Exactly, but they assimilated into Turkic culture.



As the Muslim elite of the subcontinent followed a Persianized culture with Indian elements mixed in it, the rest of Muslims also followed that. Now its been a 1,000 years of that culture, so naturally its the culture that Pakistanis would follow. Whether people have any blood of foreign soldiers is irrelveant. They have assimilated into that culture.

That’s what I was implying...

Another example are the Arabs. Notwithstanding the cultural differences between a place as far west as Morocco or as far east as Oman, apart from the ones in the Arabia of yore, the rest are by and large Arabized. There is little Arab “blood” in them, because how many of them could actually trace descent from the few Arab conquerors of centuries past, yet they are Arabs all the same. Arabia proper would be limited to what we today call the Gulf, and a place as close by to it as the Levant was considered non-Arab before the Muslim conquests.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

That’s what I was implying...

Another example are the Arabs. Notwithstanding the cultural differences between a place as far west as Morocco or as far east as Oman, apart from the ones in the Arabia of yore, the rest are by and large Arabized. There is little Arab “blood” in them, because how many of them could actually trace descent from the few Arab conquerors of centuries past, yet they are Arabs all the same. Arabia proper would be limited to what we today call the Gulf, and a place as close by to it as the Levant was considered non-Arab before the Muslim conquests.

Yea i know you get it. The explanation was more for the other posters, who have a hard time understanding this.

Also agree with the gulf arab thing. In places like Lebanon people are almost white. And in the gulf, alot of arabs there are darker skin color than people in the subcontinent. It should be obvious that they are different, but a lot of people dont get it.

 

[Lurker_Ind]

But are heritage and roots dependent solely on descent? Take Turkey itself as an example. They aren’t exactly the textbook definition of Turks, and are in fact by and large Turkicized denizens of what was once Asia Minor.

Modern day Turkey people do not look like their ancestors. Their ancestors looked similar to Mongols.
Thanks to their conquering abilities, they mixed heavily with the conquered people. In the case of modern day Turkey, the Turkic nomads could not keep their hands away from Greek, Armenian and Eastern Europe’s women. The result is there is to see for all.

Modern day Turks are a mix of Greek, Bulgarian, Armenian and Asian looking Turkic people.

 

[Lurker_Ind]

Many Muslims try to claim invader ancestry because it is cool to do so and they feel superior to the dark skinned native people of the land.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Many Muslims try to claim invader ancestry because it is cool to do so and they feel superior to the dark skinned native people of the land.

Don't a significant number of light skin Hindus feel superior to darker shade Hindus? Or is colorisim only among subcontinent Muslims?

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Modern day Turkey people do not look like their ancestors. Their ancestors looked similar to Mongols.
Thanks to their conquering abilities, they mixed heavily with the conquered people. In the case of modern day Turkey, the Turkic nomads could not keep their hands away from Greek, Armenian and Eastern Europe’s women. The result is there is to see for all.

Modern day Turks are a mix of Greek, Bulgarian, Armenian and Asian looking Turkic people.

The majority of the ancestors of modern day Turks were not from Central Asia at all. They were locals who converted to Islam and adopted Turkish as their mother tounge. The others were mixed of Central Asian and local population, which is why people in Turkey look like Greeks and not Kazakhs.

 

[Nostalgic]

The majority of the ancestors of modern day Turks were not from Central Asia at all. They were locals who converted to Islam and adopted Turkish as their mother tounge. The others were mixed of Central Asian and local population, which is why people in Turkey look like Greeks and not Kazakhs.

It’s a shame the term Turkistan has fallen out of vogue for the Central Asian lands that are still the home of the Turks proper: Kazakhs and Kyrgyz and Turkmen and Uzbeks, and others that don’t have states of their own.

 

[Nostalgic]

... and then there’s the fascinating case of the Azeris: the ones in Iran outnumber the ones in Azerbaijan, are predominantly Shia, have intermarried extensively with the Persians, don’t really look stereotypically Turkic, but are classed as Turkic and because of a proximity to what is now Turkey, speak the language that is the closest to Turkish out of all the Turkic languages.

 

[Giannis]

... and then there’s the fascinating case of the Azeris: the ones in Iran outnumber the ones in Azerbaijan, are predominantly Shia, have intermarried extensively with the Persians, don’t really look stereotypically Turkic, but are classed as Turkic and because of a proximity to what is now Turkey, speak the language that is the closest to Turkish out of all the Turkic languages.

It's believed that Azeris are actually Turkified Iranic people, their culture is more Persian. In fact central asia, which today is Turkic used to be Iranic-speaking. Bukhara was an Iranic city that is now turkified.

 

[Giannis]

The majority of the ancestors of modern day Turks were not from Central Asia at all. They were locals who converted to Islam and adopted Turkish as their mother tounge. The others were mixed of Central Asian and local population, which is why people in Turkey look like Greeks and not Kazakhs.

That's western Turkey that is more Greek looking, the eastern Turks are more Kurdish/Armenian looking while the southern ones look more Arab like Syrians.

 

[Giannis]

Many Muslims try to claim invader ancestry because it is cool to do so and they feel superior to the dark skinned native people of the land.

There's a place called India where claiming invader ancestry was institutionalized in something called the caste system. Even to this day, so called high caste claim to be Aryans despite looking no different from their "low" caste countrymen.

 

[Giannis]

Don't a significant number of light skin Hindus feel superior to darker shade Hindus? Or is colorisim only among subcontinent Muslims?

Lol yeah, everyone knows about the North India vs South Indian beef, I've heard Indians say the most racist things about south indians.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Lol yeah, everyone knows about the North India vs South Indian beef, I've heard Indians say the most racist things about south indians.

I think its more that upper caste Hindus on average have lighter skin tone than the lower caste Hindus. At least in North India. There are Hindus in North India with very dark tone, and they are mostly lower castes.

 

[Nostalgic]

It's believed that Azeris are actually Turkified Iranic people, their culture is more Persian. In fact central asia, which today is Turkic used to be Iranic-speaking. Bukhara was an Iranic city that is now turkified.

I’ve heard that theory too. There has been plenty of movement across the Iranic-Turkic divide over the centuries. I read once how when the Uzbeks first began interacting with the Tajiks (or Iranians if you will) around Samaqand and Bukhara, they were nomads and the Tajiks were settled townsfolk. Over the centuries, if an Uzbek settled down, he would eventually be classified as Tajik, and the reverse was true for any Tajik who for whatever reason became a nomad.

I believe a quarter of the population of today’s Uzbekistan is Tajik, and it’s all to do with the culture they currently practice, because there has been so much admixture over the centuries.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Did I question your ancestry? No. So what is the point of flexing over your maternal great grand father? When did I call your ancestry fabricated? You are making things up now.

I repeat for the third time, or perhaps the fourth time - if you have your lineage worked out and you choose to identify with the Arabs and Turks based on your roots, that is fine.

But as I said, there are people in this country who cannot name their ancestors beyond their grandparents and then they take pride and identify with Arabs and Turks because of our religion.

Tracing family trees is not limited to KP only. Large, rich and historically elite families in Punjab and Sindh do it as well because it is a source of pride for them.

The common man in almost every country can mostly trace his history till his great grandparents. They take pride in the culture of their country, which was built by the elites.

For Muslims of Eastern Pakistan and North India this would be the Muslim elite of the land, not Arabs and Turks. Even if the Muslim elite of subcontinent had Arab and Turk blood, most of their bloodline was local.

An example Babur was a Turk. His descendant Bahadur Shah Zafar was a local with some Turkic blood.

 

[Giannis]

KPK has a lot of Native blood, the Sultan of Swat was a Gujjar - his family still exists and they've intermarried with Pashtun women thus their descendants are culturally Pashtun now, there are numerous Native famlies in KP to this day and intermarriage is not uncommon. The Nawab of Kalabagh for example is a native Punjabi from the Awan tribe and rules over a land bordering KP yet he married Baloch women, similarly the Abassi tribe of the Murree hills have married Pashtuns despite being Punjabis or Potohari to be more accurate.

 

[Giannis]

Also Chitral is technically an Indic/Dardic region - the Chitralis still follow their non-Iranic culture although there are a lot of similarities with Pashtuns, on top of that the Kalash still retain their pre-Islamic native religion. Besides Chitralis, the entire Gilgit-Baltistan region is non-Iranic apart from a few Wakhis that migrated in the past century due to persecution in Afghanistan.

 

[Nostalgic]

Also Chitral is technically an Indic/Dardic region - the Chitralis still follow their non-Iranic culture although there are a lot of similarities with Pashtuns, on top of that the Kalash still retain their pre-Islamic native religion. Besides Chitralis, the entire Gilgit-Baltistan region is non-Iranic apart from a few Wakhis that migrated in the past century due to persecution in Afghanistan.

Impressive, you sound very well-versed on these topics. On a slight tangent, could you shed light on the Kargilis, now that Ladakh is in play? How similar are they to the people of Skardu in particular and the GB peoples in general? I'm thinking ahead a couple of decades...

 

[Giannis]

Impressive, you sound very well-versed on these topics. On a slight tangent, could you shed light on the Kargilis, now that Ladakh is in play? How similar are they to the people of Skardu in particular and the GB peoples in general? I'm thinking ahead a couple of decades...

Kargil is essentially an extension of GB, they have the same mix of ethnicities and religions. I believe Shina and Burusho are also the main languages there.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Lol this is a fun thread.I think if someone ignores their major (80-90%) bloodline and starts boasting about or taking pride over their minor one , then I think it's not unfair to call them "self-loathers".

You are confusing a few things. If 80-90% of bloodline is South Asian, you cant be a non South Asian. Which is why every Muslim of South Asian descent, identifies with their S Asian, country, ie Pakistan, India, etc. The only people who think people with 80-90% of bloodline are not South Asians, and right wing Hindus who call Muslim Kings born and bred in subcontinent "foreigners" because of the 10-20% foreign blood.

However its normal to take pride in an important ancestor. For example if one of your 8 great grand parents did something important, its understandable to take pride in that ancestors achievements, and ignore the other 7.

However for the common man with no prestigious ancestors, they take pride in the culture as a whole. So the rich culture that the subcontinent Muslim elite created its natural for the common Muslims to take pride in that as well.

Take my example. I'm a South Indian with 25% Maratha/Maharashtrian lineage (paternal grandmother was from a full Marathi family). I can't speak a word in Marathi but if I go around claiming to be the descendant of the great Chatrapati or Peshwa , I'll be laughed at for obvious reasons.

There is a different between claiming descent from a King or a royal family, vs saying that a common soldier from the Martha Empire could have been your ancestor. Most likely you would have at least one ancestor who did fight for that empire as a common soldier.

In the same way, if an African American ignores all his African slave ancestry and starts claiming that he's European because he had a great grandfather who was a German , he'll be made fun of too like that girl who appeared on Dr.Phil's show.

African Americans have European blood, because slave owners raped the female slaves, and kept there own children from those women as slaves. They were shameful people. There is no other parallel in history of a man making his own children slaves.

 

[Mesozoic]

There's a place called India where claiming invader ancestry was institutionalized in something called the caste system. Even to this day, so called high caste claim to be Aryans despite looking no different from their "low" caste countrymen.

Lol what a clueless post.

"Caste" in India has absolutely nothing to do with foreign ancestry. It's more about one's profession and livelihood.

You'll never hear any high caste Indian claim that he/his ancestors came from Europe or Eurasia. Apples to oranges.

 

[uberkoen]

Yes because it is considered to be a source of pride. We actually have some artifacts in our ancestral home which are considered to be over 300 years old.

Just because its considered a source of pride does not mean it's true.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

So the Khiljis are a Pashtun tribe that claim they have Turkic heritage just like any mughal from India but of course we should accept it because of colorism.

The Khaljis of the Khalji Dynasty were of Pashtun and Turkic descent whose ancestors, the Khalaj, are said to have migrated from Central Asia and settled in southern and eastern regions of modern day Afghanistan for over 200 years before finally moving to India.They were treated entirely as Pashtuns by the Turkic nobles of the Delhi Sultanate during the reign of the Khalji Sultanate.

Also what evidence is there that username [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] actually belongs to this tribe btw I found out Alauddin Khilji was born in Bengal thus making him a Bengali by birth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alauddin_Khalji

The Mughals and the other Turkic dynasties power base was North India, primarily the Delhi and UP regions of India. The people in subcontinent of Turkic ancestors would be the ones who lived there.

As people with surnames like Bukhari, Baig, Mirza, Chughtai.

Most of them would have darker shade now, like these sons of Bahadur Shah Zafar

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirza_Fath-ul-Mulk_Bahadur

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirza_Shah_Abbas

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirza_Jawan_Bakht_(born_1841)

If [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] saw these people alive today, he would be convinced they are liars and delusional.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

There is evidence. The family tree worked out by my father is sufficient evidence for me. Most large, historically elite families in KP have family trees because it is a source of pride for them.

But most families in Pakistan have not worked out their family trees. Hence, there is no basis or evidence of their lineage. If they choose to celebrate foreign achievements, they do it purely from the perspective of religion.

They use their surname.

Bhatti - Rajput
Mazari - Baloch
Bajwa - Jatt
Bukhari - Turk
Tareen- Pathan

 

[Mamoon]

Just because its considered a source of pride does not mean it's true.

Maybe it is maybe it isn’t. As I said, I don’t care either way. It is not a source of pride for me at a personal level.

 

[Mamoon]

They use their surname.

Bhatti - Rajput
Mazari - Baloch
Bajwa - Jatt
Bukhari - Turk
Tareen- Pathan

These are not “most” families. You are only highlighting a few select rich dynastic families.

I repeat - most people can’t even name their great grand fathers and then they do bhangra over Arab and Turkish achievements as if they have anything to do with them.

 

[ishtiaq_ctg]

Arabs conquered Spain
Random Pakistani: We conquered and ruled Spain

Turks ruled the World
Random Pakistani: We used to rule the world.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Arabs conquered Spain
Random Pakistani: We conquered and ruled Spain

Turks ruled the World
Random Pakistani: We used to rule the world.

This just shows how well Pakistanis integrate, they adopt the achievements of fellow Muslims as their own mashallah.

 

[sweep_shot]

Both local heroes and Ertugrul can be celebrated. People can watch whatever they want.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

These are not “most” families. You are only highlighting a few select rich dynastic families.

I repeat - most people can’t even name their great grand fathers and then they do bhangra over Arab and Turkish achievements as if they have anything to do with them.

The point i was making was that families who do not have a 300 year old family tree, simply use their surname.

None of these surnames are exclusive of rich families. Do you know how many dirt poor people in Punjab and Sindh have Baloch, Jatt, Rajput, Pathan surnames?????? No shortage of middle class families have surnames like Baig, Bukhari, etc.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Arabs conquered Spain
Random Pakistani: We conquered and ruled Spain

Turks ruled the World
Random Pakistani: We used to rule the world.

Unless you claim to be the reincarnation of a King, you did not have anything to do with their achievements. So i hope you apply the same standard to yourself, and not claim anything which you have not done yourself.

 

[sweep_shot]

Unless you claim to be the reincarnation of a King, you did not have anything to do with their achievements. So i hope you apply the same standard to yourself, and not claim anything which you have not done yourself.

Well said.

There is nothing wrong with celebrating other people's achievements if there is a connection (national, ethnic, religious, family etc.). It is why parents celebrate achievements of children even though children are the ones who achieved things.

 

[ExplicitAI]

This is soo true.

I have seen people who take sooo much pride in their cast, such a stupid thing.
Whats funny is that most of the arab cast that exist in Pakistan are made up.

There are people who pretend to be syeds just to get respect in the community. There are people who claim to be qureshi because that is what their dad or grandfather told them. Same for sheikhs aswell.

Arab cast are veryyy old, so you never know if they are true or not. Anyone of the ancestors could had claimed that i am from flana cast and after that everyone follows that.

Anyways, if you belong from syed, qureshi, sheikh(arab cast) or memon, niazi, malik(pakistani casts) people take pride in those and place it with their name.
But someone belonging from the kanjar or marasi cast can never take pride in it and have to hide it.

Castes don't really define who you are most of the time, your actions from young determine the life you live and you are responsible for every action you commit. That being said, the Jatt caste is the most dominant on both sides of Punjab.

 

[Giannis]

Castes don't really define who you are most of the time, your actions from young determine the life you live and you are responsible for every action you commit. That being said, the Jatt caste is the most dominant on both sides of Punjab.

Not true. Perhaps it is the case in Indian Punjab, in Pakistan the Rajputs, Awans, Kiyanis , Abassis and Gakhars dominate the Potohar plateau while the Jatts share dominance in central Punjab with the Arains, Gujjars and Sheikhs while in North Punjab (Sialkot, Gujranwala etc) it's the ethnic Kashmiris that hold the fort although Jatts and Gujjars come close to them. The south of Punjab is similar to central Punjab except the the Baloch and Pashtun tribes hold more influence.

 

[Giannis]

These are not “most” families. You are only highlighting a few select rich dynastic families.

I repeat - most people can’t even name their great grand fathers and then they do bhangra over Arab and Turkish achievements as if they have anything to do with them.

Those aren't elite surnames lmaoo, those are some of the most commons surnames in Eastern Pakistan. You need to seriously learn more.

 

[Giannis]

Arabs conquered Spain
Random Pakistani: We conquered and ruled Spain

Turks ruled the World
Random Pakistani: We used to rule the world.

They weren't actually Arabs, the people that conquered Iberia were actually Berbers aka Moors. Many Berbers don't even consider themselves Arab. As for Pakistani Muslims celebrating the accomplishments of other Muslim empires (I use the word celebrate rather than claim) is simply because they're Muslim and were advancing Islam and the interests and welfare of their Muslim subjects who by extension are our allies and brothers in faith. It's no different from White Americans/Australians and people of Northern European descent celebrating (or claiming in your words) the achievements of the Greeks and Romans simply because they see them as part of the so called "Western civilization".

 

[Mamoon]

Those aren't elite surnames lmaoo, those are some of the most commons surnames in Eastern Pakistan. You need to seriously learn more.

Pakistanian, you are still vulnerable to missing the point.

Of course not every Tareen or Bukhari is rich. Just like not every Khattak or Afridi or Durrani is rich. However, these are historic, dynastic families whose roots/origins can be traced to a great extent.

But people belonging to this families aren’t the only ones celebrating Arab and Turkish achievements. As I said, you have people in Pakistan who cannot name their ancestors beyond their grandparents but still act as if they have anything to do with Arabs and Turks.

 

[ExplicitAI]

Not true. Perhaps it is the case in Indian Punjab, in Pakistan the Rajputs, Awans, Kiyanis , Abassis and Gakhars dominate the Potohar plateau while the Jatts share dominance in central Punjab with the Arains, Gujjars and Sheikhs while in North Punjab (Sialkot, Gujranwala etc) it's the ethnic Kashmiris that hold the fort although Jatts and Gujjars come close to them. The south of Punjab is similar to central Punjab except the the Baloch and Pashtun tribes hold more influence.

I hear what you're saying but a lot of people deep down know Jatts dominate a lot of areas of Punjab and can literally do whatever they want, it's due to their rich history as farmers, soldiers and warriors. It's the reason why lower castes such as Gujjars tend to get hot headed with them from time to time, I've seen stuff like this happen in the UK in educational institutes where they pick fights with Jatts. Also I believe Sheikh is a title not a caste, it's just like how Chaudhry is a a title but other castes have copied it and stuck it on their names when it was exclusively a Jatt title.

 

[Giannis]

Pakistanian, you are still vulnerable to missing the point.

Of course not every Tareen or Bukhari is rich. Just like not every Khattak or Afridi or Durrani is rich. However, these are historic, dynastic families whose roots/origins can be traced to a great extent.

But people belonging to this families aren’t the only ones celebrating Arab and Turkish achievements. As I said, you have people in Pakistan who cannot name their ancestors beyond their grandparents but still act as if they have anything to do with Arabs and Turks.

It's Pakistani, are you too good to spell your own nationality correctly? None of the surnames you named are "historic" or "dynastic". Most Pakistanis can name their ancestors beyong their grandparents, I don't why you have this elitist attiude, you're nothing special. You literally claimed in the past few pages that you believe you're a Khilji and that Pashtuns have legitimate to claims to Turkish heritage .

 

[Giannis]

I hear what you're saying but a lot of people deep down know Jatts dominate a lot of areas of Punjab and can literally do whatever they want, it's due to their rich history as farmers, soldiers and warriors. It's the reason why lower castes such as Gujjars tend to get hot headed with them from time to time, I've seen stuff like this happen in the UK in educational institutes where they pick fights with Jatts. Also I believe Sheikh is a title not a caste, it's just like how Chaudhry is a a title but other castes have copied it and stuck it on their names when it was exclusively a Jatt title.

It's kinda odd that they would carry that beef all the way to the UK.

 

[Mamoon]

It's Pakistani, are you too good to spell your own nationality correctly? None of the surnames you named are "historic" or "dynastic". Most Pakistanis can name their ancestors beyong their grandparents, I don't why you have this elitist attiude, you're nothing special. You literally claimed in the past few pages that you believe you're a Khilji and that Pashtuns have legitimate to claims to Turkish heritage .

And.....you missed the point as usual.

Pakistanian was your previous username here, and actually it was me who educated you back then that there is no such thing as Pakistanian; it is Pakistani.

Moreover, I didn’t claim that I am special. I don’t take pride in my ancestry. I don’t think anyone should.

So whether my proclaimed ancestry is real or not doesn’t really matter.

However, people who have their family trees worked out at least have some basis if they choose to do bhangra over Arab and Turkish achievements.

 

[topspin]

And.....you missed the point as usual.

Pakistanian was your previous username here, and actually it was me who educated you back then that there is no such thing as Pakistanian; it is Pakistani.

Moreover, I didn’t claim that I am special. I don’t take pride in my ancestry. I don’t think anyone should.

So whether my proclaimed ancestry is real or not doesn’t really matter.

However, people who have their family trees worked out at least have some basis if they choose to do bhangra over Arab and Turkish achievements.

Are you sure it's him?

I always thought Pakistanian had more progressive views.

 

[Giannis]

And.....you missed the point as usual.

Pakistanian was your previous username here, and actually it was me who educated you back then that there is no such thing as Pakistanian; it is Pakistani.

Moreover, I didn’t claim that I am special. I don’t take pride in my ancestry. I don’t think anyone should.

So whether my proclaimed ancestry is real or not doesn’t really matter.

However, people who have their family trees worked out at least have some basis if they choose to do bhangra over Arab and Turkish achievements.

Previous username? Brother I don't know about whatever issues you had with other members, I'm just educating you about your ignorance of Pakistan's diversity. If you didn't take pride in your ancestry then you wouldn't have bragged about your father drawing a family tree and having ancient artifacts.

 

[Major]

[MENTION=150563]Giannis[/MENTION] i am impressed by your knowledge on castes. How do you know all this? Do you study this part time or what

 

[Abdullah719]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Pakistan is making any local version of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Ertugrul?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Ertugrul</a> ?<br><br>What do you say about this? <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ErtugrulGhazi?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ErtugrulGhazi</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ertugrulurduptv?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ertugrulurduptv</a> <a href="https://t.co/eutws3uCyh">pic.twitter.com/eutws3uCyh</a></p>— Khaleej Mag (@KhaleejMag) <a href="https://twitter.com/KhaleejMag/status/1304029413747630082?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 10, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Well…