What do Pakistani Pashtuns mean when they say Lar aw bar yaw Pakhtun

[RevolutionThroughReason]

averroes was saying it is compatible, is he not?

Ibn Rushd is saying rationalism as an tool of Islamic understanding and understanding the natural world is compatible with Islam; he's not saying secular institutions governing people is compatible with Islam.

[BLS_1919v2.0]

Haviz Sultan, if you claim your pashto is weak, then why do you feel the need to interpret a song for us all. We can speak pashto and we understand the context of these songs well. Lar au Bar Pakhtun/Afghans means the same anywhere and everywhere. There is no Pakistani, Indian, etc meaning to it.
What is your purpose of trying to create discord among Pashtuns? I mean, everyone here is open about their politics and their regions. Yet you seem to hide yours? Very sketchy. On top of that you are mixing and matching history when it is convenient for you.

[R3SISTANC3]

Hi haviZ,

Even I say lar aw bar yaw Pashtun. It means I ant unity in terms of promoting Pashtun culture and language because we share the same history and doing so together can strengthen Pashtuns. Do I mean I want Pakistan to be destroyed or I want Afghans to grab our lands

I cringed and then felt sad at your statements, but I don't blame you for the confusion, misunderstanding, and ignorance.

If you say lar au bar yaw Pashtun, how is that different than yar au bar yaw Afghan? Pashtun fathered the Afghan, so they'll always be Afghan. When you say that you don't want "Afghans" to grab "our" land, that is no different than saying that Pashtun have no rights over Pashtun land.

Now the land you are talking about are within Pakistan, but they are occupied by Pashtun, who also happen to be Afghan, so how does that statement make any sense? How do you have a problem with Afghan having rights over land that they already occupy, live on, and call home?

Right, the confusion steams from your Pakistani nationality. What you wanted to say is that that land, even though occupied by Afghan, belong to Pakistan, an entity created by non-Pashtun and non-Afghan which till this day serve those non-Pashtun and non-Afghan.

In other words you promote the theft of Pashtun land, yes the land of those very Pakistani Pashtun whom you claim to represent since they are AFGHANS. You can dance around this all you want but those are linguistic, historic, ethnic, genetic and dare I say RELIGIOUS facts you just can't refuse to acknowledge.

That land already belongs to Afghans, and Afghans have already grabbed it, and they are living on it. Those Afghans are known as "Pakistani Pashtun" to you.

[IamDZJ]

Someone ask graveyard the meaning of his signature. Please.

[pashtun_rise]

Hi haviZ,



I cringed and then felt sad at your statements, but I don't blame you for the confusion, misunderstanding, and ignorance.

If you say lar au bar yaw Pashtun, how is that different than yar au bar yaw Afghan? Pashtun fathered the Afghan, so they'll always be Afghan. When you say that you don't want "Afghans" to grab "our" land, that is no different than saying that Pashtun have no rights over Pashtun land.

Now the land you are talking about are within Pakistan, but they are occupied by Pashtun, who also happen to be Afghan, so how does that statement make any sense? How do you have a problem with Afghan having rights over land that they already occupy, live on, and call home?

Right, the confusion steams from your Pakistani nationality. What you wanted to say is that that land, even though occupied by Afghan, belong to Pakistan, an entity created by non-Pashtun and non-Afghan which till this day serve those non-Pashtun and non-Afghan.

In other words you promote the theft of Pashtun land, yes the land of those very Pakistani Pashtun whom you claim to represent since they are AFGHANS. You can dance around this all you want but those are linguistic, historic, ethnic, genetic and dare I say RELIGIOUS facts you just can't refuse to acknowledge.

That land already belongs to Afghans, and Afghans have already grabbed it, and they are living on it. Those Afghans are known as "Pakistani Pashtun" to you.

Pakistan has not taken our lands...but we are here with our lands....that you yourself are saying.The problem is with afghans who are shaking hands with indian govt....U think its better for pashtuns to wlecome them? Its the govts of both pak and afghanistan you can blame...but not people.U must know that there are whole settled villages of pashtuns in punjab and sindh....They didnt claimed of those lands either...those lands were given by british govt.So who ll you guys hate by hating punjab or sindh lands? In karachi people are learning pashto out of love for pashtuns and their culture...with exclusion of hizb_u_shaitan (MQM...who are mafia dealers...they are killings simple sindhis and punjabis too...their religion is money not ethnicity).

The whole pak is ours...and of other ethnics. Pashtuns are everywhere....lets not to forget the atrocities done by ayub khan,yahya khan,ghula ishaq khan etc..who were pashtuns but did nothing for pashtuns instead created pashtun punjabi conflicts to regain more and more power....pashtuns prospered at bhotto's time...who was not pashtun.He gave opportunities to them (exclude the present stupid PPP).Brother...dont hate general pakis...

[pashtun_rise]

Someone ask graveyard the meaning of his signature. Please.

I am getting sick of revo's signature..such a big signature with that finger beholding everyone's attention.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Pakistan has not taken our lands...but we are here with our lands....that you yourself are saying.The problem is with afghans who are shaking hands with indian govt....U think its better for pashtuns to wlecome them? It.

As long as India's cooperation with us is diplomatic; what's wrong with it? The're not occupying our lands, they're not sending Taliban terrorists to murder us and intimidate us, they're not covertly backing extremists to harm us? Why should we have a hostile attitude to people who are friendly to us.

Pakistan has done bad things to us and worst of all, they don't even uphold Islamic standards in their own country; so how can the Muslim factor be employed? The only reason you are against us working with India is just blind bigotry.


If you want to be a Pakistani go ahead; just don't tell Afghanistan how to run its affairs. You want to remain backwards, illiterate , full of drug addicts and prostitutes and Mujra dancers? fine go ahead.

We want BETTER, we want progress, we want SCIENCE, KNOWLEDGE and LOGIC. We want a good economy, to be able to feed ourselves good medical care and literacy. You can have the fake "Image of Islam" that you think Pakistan has. we want BETTER.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I am getting sick of revo's signature..such a big signature with that finger beholding everyone's attention.

too bad, this signature signifies Afghan's desire for freedom, independence and prosperity and is telling people lie Pakistani ISI servants such as the Taliban, that they can't stop us from making life better for ourselves.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

First of all i agree that its not a good thread.

My leaders fought as much as possible....till the treaty was signed by none other than your beloved AHMAD SHAH DURRANI.Ahmad shah durrani was a man of greed to take control of all other tribes.He wanted the glory of his tribe only....by declaring many lands under his tribe.The great KHAN/MALIK he was....may be a hero for you guys not for us.Even upto this we karlanis are fighting in courts for our lands which they occupied only officially while infact they were our lands.And yeah...the treaty was signed by him...dont forget that.He can never be my hero.Later on...the durand line was accepted in 1919,1921 ...by afghan govt.Where was their love of pashtuns then? Why claiming now when pashtuns of pak gained more facilities of education etc...? Isnt this hypocricy? I still love those pashtuns more (both lar n bar) who try their best to educate their people....even if they have to migrate.Yes i respect them...i respect those tribes who didnt oppressed others and kept in peace with each other...like karlani tribes...to a certain extent,yousafzai etc..

I dont deny the truth that wardag tribes fought against british....yes i accept that.But when did i say i like british govt or paki govt?

I never said that bar pashtuns were coward...all i said that they didnt help at times of crisis when real time was there to fight for foreign intervention.Where was their so called love for pashtuns then? Or is it that durrani dynasty was too much powerful to divide their power to other tribes .Better you get this into mind...pashtun tribes were autonomous too..those tribes of that time never liked the oppression of durrani tribe as well.Try to ask your grandparents about that.


Regarding your view of consultation...yes thats also true...many tribes were not taken into consideration regarding consultation of so called division or shifting loyalities.That i also accept that whoever did that were a shame to us...



Now if you question my love for pashtun people or me being a pashtun...i damn care.I am not here to ridicule the past or question their loyality...but i am surely here to make pashtuns in general understand that they need to understand their enemies and stay away from so called afflictions of dajjal...which they are misunderstood as friends.(Some pashtuns think that).

But have you read the man's works? Have you read his poetry? There is a poem of his here where he denounces this sort of tribalism and equates Ghilzai and Abdali. In fact, several years into his own rule, he had to deal with unruly Durrani chieftans that were his own friends who wanted to divide up his empire.

He was a complex human being who was a product of amazing occurrences in his own life that was a series of tidal waves, from the early loss of his father to being made a captive to becoming a war chieftan for Nadir Qoli Beg. Despite all of this, he united each tribal finger of thewhole Pashtun hand into a fist to lethal effect - and that was not done before or after him. He was not a saint but he was Alexandrian in his rule where when he came upon a tribe, like the Afridi, he compulsed them to submit but then also left their heirarchy intact, but their own Malik back on the takth. This was not at all what the Brits did to the KP region, where they took at the Maliks that defied them and replaced them with a new heirarchy.

His concern then turned towards other Muslims in outer regions as well, including the plight of the Uighars. He forged an alliance with the Turks and wrote to the Ottoman Caliph, recognizing he was a unit within a whole body. Yet, he did not comprimise his own people's autonomy in face of slogans. He had laid out the plans to even gain the Shiite Jaffari sect some semblance of a truce with sunnis and label them a madhab to undo what centuries of safavid rule had done to Iranians. If you claim that Jinnah made it easy for you to worship freely, then think about the fact that Abdali proceeded Jinnah by over a hundred years and thought of making the world safe for Muslims to worship in - even if they werent his own.

He also had a deep respect for the concept of mishr and won the loyalty of Payenda Khan.

Where he and Sikander both failed perhaps was that what was left behind was fragile and left to lesser men to rule.

Jinnah could not even carry a glass of water to Ahmad Shah Abdali. Some of what you state is the result of the shift in lineage and it is true that the Sardaraan of Peshawar were horrible rulers. These Durrani cheiftans, under Telai's opportunism, sold Peshawar to the Sikhs.

Had Ahmad Shah not forged such an empire, all of central asia would have fallen to the British on the one side and the Russians on the other. The brave sons of Afghan soil, who never left, are our betters. They have saved Islam time and time again. On the one side, they stopped shiah Safavids from extending their rule and destroying Hanafi Islam. On the other side, as I mentioned above, Ahmad Shah left behind the buffer that stopped Mughal rule on its tracks and made it difficult for the British to go farther. Had the mughal empire extended even beyond Kabul the British would have had an easy time with all of it. They then, like Abraham's willing son walking to the slaughter -without asking for it, stopped the Red Russian juggernaut killing machine from ever reaching their brothers in FATA and greater KP. Now, though they have lost everything and are war weary, they are strapping on their war belts again to save the world from hegemony.

If within sahabaah there was a demand for respect for the original muhajireen and if the ansaar also abided by this - I have no hesitation in saying that both lar and bar have their unique contributions. The KP region, despite the allegations here, has been a place for Pashto culture, the Pashto academy, and Pashtun life to serve as an incubator and safegaurd - like the ansaar. But the glory of the muhajireen-like sons of the Afghan soil who sacrifice again and again should move you to your depths - like witnessing the order of the divine being enacted!

[BarakzaiAbdali]

too bad, this signature signifies Afghan's desire for freedom, independence and prosperity and is telling people lie Pakistani ISI servants such as the Taliban, that they can't stop us from making life better for ourselves.

The issue is its huge and takes up page space. Can it be slightly size reduced?

[pashtun_rise]

But have you read the man's works? Have you read his poetry? There is a poem of his here where he denounces this sort of tribalism and equates Ghilzai and Abdali. In fact, several years into his own rule, he had to deal with unruly Durrani chieftans that were his own friends who wanted to divide up his empire.

He was a complex human being who was a product of amazing occurrences in his own life that was a series of tidal waves, from the early loss of his father to being made a captive to becoming a war chieftan for Nadir Qoli Beg. Despite all of this, he united each tribal finger of thewhole Pashtun hand into a fist to lethal effect - and that was not done before or after him. He was not a saint but he was Alexandrian in his rule where when he came upon a tribe, like the Afridi, he compulsed them to submit but then also left their heirarchy intact, but their own Malik back on the takth. This was not at all what the Brits did to the KP region, where they took at the Maliks that defied them and replaced them with a new heirarchy.

His concern then turned towards other Muslims in outer regions as well, including the plight of the Uighars. He forged an alliance with the Turks and wrote to the Ottoman Caliph, recognizing he was a unit within a whole body. Yet, he did not comprimise his own people's autonomy in face of slogans. He had laid out the plans to even gain the Shiite Jaffari sect some semblance of a truce with sunnis and label them a madhab to undo what centuries of safavid rule had done to Iranians.

He also had a deep respect for the concept of mishr and won the loyalty of Payenda Khan.

Where he and Sikander both failed perhaps was that what was left behind was fragile and left to lesser men to rule.

Jinnah could not even carry a glass of water to Ahmad Shah Abdali. Some of what you state is the result of the shift in lineage and it is true that the Sardaraan of Peshawar were horrible rulers. These Durrani cheiftans, under Telai's opportunism, sold Peshawar to the Sikhs.

Had Ahmad Shah not forged such an empire, all of central asia would have fallen to the British on the one side and the Russians on the other. The brave sons of Afghan soil, who never left, are our betters. They have saved Islam time and time again. On the one side, they stopped shiah Safavids from extending their rule and destroying Hanafi Islam. On the other side, as I mentioned above, Ahmad Shah left behind the buffer that stopped Mughal rule on its tracks and made it difficult for the British to go farther. They then, like Abraham's willing son walking to the slaughter -without asking for it, stopped the Red Russian juggernaut killing machine from ever reaching their brothers in FATA and greater KP. Now, though they have lost everything and are war weary, they are strapping on their war belts again to save the world from hegemony.

If within sahabaah there was a demand for respect for the original muhajireen and if the ansaar also abided by this - I have no hesitation in saying that both lar and bar have their unique contributions. The KP region, despite the allegations here, has been a place for Pashto culture, the Pashto academy, and Pashtun life to serve as an incubator and safegaurd - like the ansaar. But the glory of the muhajireen-like sons of the Afghan soil who sacrifice again and again should move you to your depths - like witnessing the order of the divine being enacted!

I agree with most of sacrifices you mentioned...but not the man you are praising too much.He didnt equate ghilzai...on the contrary those were ghilzais who ruled with fair means.May be some of maliks of "the man" were just but not majority.Come to pakistan and tribals areas esp....what KHAN of durrani dynasty means....We hate them for proclaiming for our lands....Whats the big deal in preventing KP from russians...same is done by pak from indian govt.The taxes paid by us karlanis were more than those of bar pashtuns.I have to this day gone through racism from racist KHANS...u may live in bookish fairy tales...not me.It doesnt mean i hate them... i love pashtuns in general.This racism thing is far behind in my mind.It has no value to me.


I respect some rulers of pashtuns esp khushal khan khattak...but not greedy ones.The problem is not with people...the prob is with greedy leaders...few have emerged as sincere.

[pashtun_rise]

As long as India's cooperation with us is diplomatic; what's wrong with it? The're not occupying our lands, they're not sending Taliban terrorists to murder us and intimidate us, they're not covertly backing extremists to harm us? Why should we have a hostile attitude to people who are friendly to us.

Pakistan has done bad things to us and worst of all, they don't even uphold Islamic standards in their own country; so how can the Muslim factor be employed? The only reason you are against us working with India is just blind bigotry.


If you want to be a Pakistani go ahead; just don't tell Afghanistan how to run its affairs. You want to remain backwards, illiterate , full of drug addicts and prostitutes and Mujra dancers? fine go ahead.

We want BETTER, we want progress, we want SCIENCE, KNOWLEDGE and LOGIC. We want a good economy, to be able to feed ourselves good medical care and literacy. You can have the fake "Image of Islam" that you think Pakistan has. we want BETTER.

Ok if u like indians that much why bother my mesz? M here to elaborate my duty and that i will...I dont need to show my fake image of islam as you do...mr wahhabi.You better get lessons of islamic history from alims.You are neither secular nor islamic...something inbetween.

[faye]

too bad, this signature signifies Afghan's desire for freedom, independence and prosperity and is telling people lie Pakistani ISI servants such as the Taliban, that they can't stop us from making life better for ourselves.

it looks a bit half baked though, because she is still wearing the burkha.

[faye]

indians are investing all around the world. they are a developing country that still has a lot of internal problems but for them, investment is part of their long term insurance for india.
they still have to be kept an eye on, because they and china have companies in africa, that have been negligent to the locals there and to the african environments.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Ok if u like indians that much why bother my mesz? M here to elaborate my duty and that i will...I dont need to show my fake image of islam as you do...mr wahhabi.You better get lessons of islamic history from alims.You are neither secular nor islamic...something inbetween.

because you're pathetically trying to hide behind religion and use some sort of phony emotional black mail scheme using Islam as a justification for it. And you're trying to tell us Afghanistan natives who we're allowed and not allowed to make friends with.

Now if India was sending militants to Afghanistan blowing things up; then I'd understand, but India has more or less been friendly to us.

Mr. Wahhabi? If I was a Wahhabi I'd be arguing about being friends with Pakistan JUST because they call themselves Muslims and hating India just because they're NOt Muslim; ...that's how a Wahhabi thinks.....you know who else on this forum thinks that way?....You do.

I refuted all your historical claims; the History you learn in Pakistan is bogus; they specifically hide and censor things from you as a way of mind control; that's not the case for me.