Pashtun Mullah

[Shehbaz Khan]

^ Re-Read my defination of Mullah.

[Badlun]

I agree with your definition of Mullah

'Mullah' you mean a person having strong knowledge of Islam and follows it's principles.

Islam is beliefs, worship and morality. Its principles are the five pillars. A mullah knows these principles and organizes the institution of a mosque while a Pashtun organizes the secular institution of Hujra.

A Pashtun can be a doctor, an engineer, a scientist, a poet, an artist, but not a Mullah because a Mullah has to study religion for about 8 years in darse nizami in a madrassah and every Pashtun cannot dedicate 8 years to study Islam and then become a Mullah in a mosque.

Some Pashtuns after 1979 have started becoming Mullahs but that is for power and money. Many Mullahs have started becoming Pashtuns heading jirgas and having political power as we see many chiefs of Taliban who do not study Islam for 8 years in a Madrassa but become commanders in the religious Taliban.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I see that your changing your stance here. From your post I get the impression that you believe they are the same in regarding how females are restricted from mobility and free agency.

Even that's false since Pashtun women drive cars, own property, participate in elections and are members in parliaments, there are even pashtunay fighter jet pilots in the PAF, pashtunay work on the farm fields and the kochay tend to their herds out in the open free range. The Burqu is foreign to Pashtuns unlike its similar dress to Saudi version.

More progress needs to be done but progress comes with practical solutions. The Saud regime have institutions and resources that can make all of it practical with a snap of a finger, but the Pashtun society does not. The best example of that is the fact Pashtunay are fighter jet pilots in the PAF and that is so because of its practicality. The reason they drive in certain Pashtun cities is because of its practicality.
It is intellectually dishonest of you to compare the resource rich Saudi regime that have everything available to them but still restrict their females freedoms to how resource poor Pashtun that have been in a state of war for close to 40 years with Superpowers.

Pashtun women drive cars, have membership in parliament DESPITE Pashtunwali not because OF Pashtunwali; it's because they violated the norms.

The fact you describe resource rich Saudi is exactly the reason why Pashtunwali shares the same fascination for misogyny; because by denying women rights of agency; you prevent economic growth and development. Pashtuns NEED women more than ever because of their poverty, yet Pashtunwali prevents them.

So the obsession with denying women basic agency is rooted in the same thing

So there was no change in stance, My stance was Pashtunwali and Wahhabis both embrace woman hatred ....just in their own culturally applied ways.

The reason you see Pashtun women fighter pilots in Pakistan is because those women and their families have abandoned Pashtunwali and to large extent are De-Pashtunized. remember the Pakistani Army is largely Punjabi centered; so they embraced a more Liberalized in comparison

So it's not that my chance has changed; you failed to understand the difference between Pashtuns who have abandoned Pashtunwali from those who have not.

I'm a Pashtun who abandoned Pashtunwali ...even Khostai rejects Pashtunwali ...so does Badlun, even though Badlun is in denial

MOST Pashtuns who have gained education and are progressive minded have abandoned Pashtunwali

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Pashtuns did not come up with pashtunwali on their own. it derived from circumstance that have befallen on the people in the region. This is evident on the fact that most people that came to this region pashtunified and Pashtuns that migrated out depashtunified. The people in the area live in a governmentless, taxless free state with no government authority enforcing laws on them or taxing them. Most pashtunwali codes are derived because of this environment.

It is not pashtunwali that teaches men to think of women as property, it is the ignorance of man that does that and this is true in many clutures. My grandmother was the biggest landowner in her village, no one could take it from her. Chauvanism and aggressiveness is not a noble behavior in pashtunwali. Kabur and Ghor are characters that pashtunwali labels as shamelfull and should be undesired.

Also Pashtunwali is adaptive to different situations unlike the Saud regime imposing their will on their people. People debate and talk in a Jirga on how to best tackle a proble as long as does not infringe on the individuals free will.
Sorry to say but you really lack understanding of pashtunwali.

You know I thought about your premise before; I found it is historically untrue. Pashtuns have been associated with some ruler or some sort; so they weren't completely taxless or free, but perhaps marginally. Furthermore the rulership of Mashars or Tribal Chieftan is feudalism so that contradicts self independence as well.

The claim that Pashtunwali codes are derived from the Environment is also false. Because According to Anthropology; harsh environments create more capable men and women; but Pashtunwali teaches subjugating women, Islam grew out of the Harsh Arabian environment; but women were given rights of agency, to own property, choose their own spouses, become ministers etc. This is evident from the Times of Khulafa Rashideen.

The reason in Afghanistan women are gaining more opportunities is because They're trying to base laws more on Islam than on Pashtunwali. As you YOURSELF admitted the complete weaning from Pashtunwali hasn't happened fully, so we have a long way to go.

It is Pashtunwali that NURTURES that ignorance; because nowhere in Shari'ah is trading your daughter to settle rivalry is allowed. Nowhere in Shari'ah is death penalty for fornicators advocated or tribal wars allowed.

Pashtunwali is not adaptive; here's proof ...Once Badlun said himself that through out Pashtun history; there have been no major influential Pashtun scientist or someone who did something of strong intellectual caliber. And Pashtunwali was prominent there. So development and growth did not happen which means Pashtuns did not adapt and develop.

But Islamic History; Muslim scientists were everywhere, in Baghdad, only when Muslims became lazy did they lose interest; but Islam allowed science and to explore knowledge and grow; so Islam allowed adaptation.

So we see by evidence Pashtunwali is unadaptable because it is based on traditions; traditions cannot change because those traditions are rooted in the past and not the present. Now people can change their traditions; BUT that is different than traditions themselves changing; that is abandoning old traditions and adopting new, but really the word tradition itself implies stagnancy.


So it is not a lack of Understanding of Pashtunwali at all; it is lack of being honest about Pashtunwali that makes people like Badlun and yourself deny the apparent issues with Pashtunwali and why Pashtunwali promotes the same backwards thinking as Wahhabiyah.

[khushal]

You know I thought about your premise before; I found it is historically untrue. Pashtuns have been associated with some ruler or some sort; so they weren't completely taxless or free, but perhaps marginally. Furthermore the rulership of Mashars or Tribal Chieftan is feudalism so that contradicts self independence as well.

There are feudalistic structures in large valleys but outside of it has no feudal structures which is the majority. There are no khans or feudal landlords, every male member owns land. Mashers and tribal chieftans are elected reps, they don't own large lands to control people. This is evident by the fact that you don't hear about feudal landlords fighting over land but its usually the whole village fighting another village over land(and that land is shared by the whole village) or an individual "kor" fighting another "kor" in the same village.
Afghanistan wasn't really a state in the modern sense since Kabul never really ruled out side of the major cities and this is true to this day. This is the reason that Karzai has been dubbed only the mayor of Kabul.
The Brits were in FATA and KP for over a hundred years and they still could not bring the area under government authority. Even Pakistan today has a tough time bring the area under its authority. Tribal courts rule FATA vs Pakistani gov Courts.

This is a governmentless and taxless state.

The claim that Pashtunwali codes are derived from the Environment is also false. Because According to Anthropology; harsh environments create more capable men and women; but Pashtunwali teaches subjugating women, Islam grew out of the Harsh Arabian environment; but women were given rights of agency, to own property, choose their own spouses, become ministers etc. This is evident from the Times of Khulafa Rashideen.

Your making it seem as though Islam was invented by the Arabs in a harsh environment. What your saying existed prior, did you forget the fact that the prophet himself was employed by his future wife before Islam was revealed to him. This is evidence that women owned property and were employers.
You cant really say its the culture because then Mohammad(pbuh) should have followed it and should have refused to work for a woman. We know he was not ignorant so in essence what your saying has nothing to do with the culture but more to do with ignorance.

There is nothing in pashtunwali that says women should not work, or not go to school, or not progress themselves. Its like your arguing to abolish the first amendment in order to tackle the porn industry just because the porn industry hides behind the first amendment when in reality the first amendment says nothing about the porn industry, it only gives the porn industry the right to argue their point and that's it. It does not give them the right to abuse the society.
`

The reason in Afghanistan women are gaining more opportunities is because They're trying to base laws more on Islam than on Pashtunwali. As you YOURSELF admitted the complete weaning from Pashtunwali hasn't happened fully, so we have a long way to go.

It is Pashtunwali that NURTURES that ignorance; because nowhere in Shari'ah is trading your daughter to settle rivalry is allowed. Nowhere in Shari'ah is death penalty for fornicators advocated or tribal wars allowed.

But that's the point, people are free to leave pakhto unlike in Saudi version of wahabi. If a woman wants to become a fighter pilot, she is free to do so, there is nothing in pashtunwali that will prevent her free will, it actually encourages free will. Pashtun families are usually proud and boast when a female member becomes a doctor, an engineer, etc. The ones that feel shame in this are actually ignorant, they feel that when this happens that the pashtunwali concept of "purdah" (protection) has been violated. But if one debates with them and explains that giving females a tool called knowledge, it actually strengthens the "purdah" (protection) of the female. So in reality pashtunwali would encourage education of females because education protects them.

Pashtunwali is not adaptive; here's proof ...Once Badlun said himself that through out Pashtun history; there have been no major influential Pashtun scientist or someone who did something of strong intellectual caliber. And Pashtunwali was prominent there. So development and growth did not happen which means Pashtuns did not adapt and develop.

Badlun is not proof. The guy is a moron.
Hanifi was afghan, jamalidin al afghani was afghan. AQ Khan is afghan.
Pashtun dynasties ruled India longer than the Brits did and did not force the Indians to pashtunify like the brits force the continent to anglofy. Giving people freedom is of strong intellectual caliber.

But Islamic History; Muslim scientists were everywhere, in Baghdad, only when Muslims became lazy did they lose interest; but Islam allowed science and to explore knowledge and grow; so Islam allowed adaptation.

So we see by evidence Pashtunwali is unadaptable because it is based on traditions; traditions cannot change because those traditions are rooted in the past and not the present. Now people can change their traditions; BUT that is different than traditions themselves changing; that is abandoning old traditions and adopting new, but really the word tradition itself implies stagnancy.

Well, Pashtuns of different regions practice different "traditions." The pashuns in Kandahar practice different traditions than the Pashtuns in paktia which practice traditions different than the ones in peshawar. This proves that it is adaptive.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

There are feudalistic structures in large valleys but outside of it has no feudal structures which is the majority. There are no khans or feudal landlords, every male member owns land. Mashers and tribal chieftans are elected reps, they don't own large lands to control people. This is evident by the fact that you don't hear about feudal landlords fighting over land but its usually the whole village fighting another village over land(and that land is shared by the whole village) or an individual "kor" fighting another "kor" in the same village.

The whole concept of a Mashar/Chieftan is itself hierarchical as we know Tribal Chieftains is passed down by lineage, not by election. Even if you were to say show a handful of examples that isn't the case, EVEN if I were to hypothetically give you that. That would mean the OVERWHELMING majority of Pashtuns don't follow that, so that would not be representative of Pashtunwali as it is a minority. Actually you do hear about chieftains fighting; it's not always other chieftains. But given that the Chieftains are like rulers and the members of the village like subjects; a smite against them as a challenge against a chieftains authority. The internal squabbling is not evidence of Pashtun independence; but rather Pashtuns struggles against each other.

EVen Surfs in Feudal Europe fought each other over who had the right to cultivate certain lands given to them by Feudal Lords. So your narrative, even if I gave it to you, would not demonstrate Pashtuns alleged liberty.

Since Pashtunwali is not doctrinal according to you and Badlun; then the majority actions represent Pashtunwali, because that is how cultures become crystallized as a "culture": by what most people practice as custom.

Afghanistan wasn't really a state in the modern sense since Kabul never really ruled out side of the major cities and this is true to this day. This is the reason that Karzai has been dubbed only the mayor of Kabul.
The Brits were in FATA and KP for over a hundred years and they still could not bring the area under government authority. Even Pakistan today has a tough time bring the area under its authority. Tribal courts rule FATA vs Pakistani gov Courts.

It doesn't need to be a state in the modern sense, I stated it's always been under some sort of rulership or authority that it paid tribute to and lands were brought under the authority of that ruler. Karzai is called Mayor of Kabul because unlike the olden days he can't bring several thousand Durranis or Barakzais like the old kings did to squish rebellions just like Nadir Shah did. That is largely in debt to the fact foreign arms flow all over Afghanistan so it's not easy to just go crush a bunch of unruly chiefs with manpower alone.
But the past kings did it; and we know because tribes who were disobedient were forcefully relocated elsewhere. ...the independence theory is bunk.

The Brits didn't squish the Tribals because .....they didn't really care that much, I know you might find that alarming; but the region had very little in the way of material benefit for the British at least compared to India; the Brits wanted control of Afghanistan because it was just hungry for land and wanted to go against Britain; instead they did the next thing, get a stooge King to do the work for them. That king was Pashtun. They did this succesfully with Shah Shuja and Abdul Rahman Khan.

This is a governmentless and taxless state.

Only in Pashtun day dreams. Pashtun cultural mythology and history are two different things.

Your making it seem as though Islam was invented by the Arabs in a harsh environment.

No, I'm demonstrating your harsh environment premise is not legitimate; because early Muslims lived in a harsh environment which was in the Arabian Peninsula and they managed to overcome those things and establish Islam.

What your saying existed prior, did you forget the fact that the prophet himself was employed by his future wife before Islam was revealed to him.

Which would still defeat your point; because they still lived in a harsh environment even then. There's nothing special about Pashtuns having harsh environments, in fact most of human history has been humans against harsh environments except maybe tropical regions or areas where ample food was available.

However your point is based on misunderstanding; the reason why Muhammad(saw) was hired is because women in pre-Islamic times did not normatively work and have property. In fact if you know about Khadija(ra)'s biography; she was widowed and her business was actually her previous husbands' so she came into her wealth by way of her husband, not her own, because that wouldn't have been allowed. Since she was the only inheritor she ended up with all of it. Islam allowed women the chance acquire their own wealth.

You cant really say its the culture because then Mohammad(pbuh) should have followed it and should have refused to work for a woman.

It was also the culture to drink, and watch naked women dance in the middle of the bazaar. Muhammad(saw) never did that; you need to study up on Islamic History and the Narrative of Muhammad(saw)'s life.

One reason Abu Talib(ra) took Muhammad(saw) away from the Arabian Peninsula is because he didn't want him to get influenced by the culture. Muhammad(saw) was progressive for his culture. If Muhammad(saw) followed his culture he'd have worshipped idols, which he never did.

He was not ignorant; because he didn't follow his culture; he had ILHAM from a very young age; which means the belief is he was ALWAYS DIvinely Guided, but he did not realize it. However, let's say we don't invoke the supernatural We knew Muhammad(saw)'s intelligence allowed him to rise above his culture; so that is why he didn't practice his culture's norms.

So you're wrong on all accounts and your reasoning is incorrect.

There is nothing in pashtunwali that says women should not work, or not go to school, or not progress themselves.

Ah but there is ..."Nang aw Namous". The reason there is an anathema about women's education in most places is because the idea is, if she's educated, she'll start having lovers and this will make her unvaluable when it comes time to marrying her off. We can't allow her choose her own husban because that implies she's sexually motivated which means she may have had sex already ...which would be a shame to Nang Aw Namous. so how do we prevent this from happening? Oh yes we deny women from having access to anything that gives her agency.

There is how Pashtuns bar women from education, owning property and gaining her own income.

You're right though women do work.....but in the Gruntish sense; meaning they'll do heavy labor under the order of their families; while the lazy men sip tea in the Hujra telling stories about how yummy the Grapes of Kandahar are.

However this is not the same as working to generate her OWN income.

Its like your arguing to abolish the first amendment in order to tackle the porn industry just because the porn industry hides behind the first amendment

Um what? That makes no sense; because abolishing the first amendment would be restricting freedom; Pashtunwali restricts freedom. Abolishing Pashtunwali would allow greater access to freedom.

So it's more like I'm establishing the first amendment and Abolishing the Old King's Law

But that's the point, people are free to leave pakhto unlike in Saudi version of wahabi. If a woman wants to become a fighter pilot, she is free to do so, there is nothing in pashtunwali that will prevent her free will, it actually encourages free will.

You can say people are free to leave Wahhabism too; not every Saudi follows Wahhabi doctrine in fact in America if you see Saudis; none of them really follow it. Most are like Educated Pashtuns, somewhat progressive. In fact even in Saudi Arabia due to the advent of greater access to media, Young Saudis generally want to abandon Wahhabiyah. It's just the old guard who stick to Wahhabism. The same with Pashtunwali; it's the old fashioned types that stick to Pashtunwali.

Modern Advanced thinking Pashtuns want out.

Pashtun families are usually proud and boast when a female member becomes a doctor, an engineer, etc

Those are urbanized Pashtuns who have abandoned Pashtunwali. Definitely not Tribals

You can't claim the liberalism of Pashtuns who reject Pashtunwali as evidence of Pashtunwali liberalism. THAT is intellectual dishonesty.

. The ones that feel shame in this are actually ignorant, they feel that when this happens that the pashtunwali concept of "purdah" (protection) has been violated.

But if one debates with them and explains that giving females a tool called knowledge, it actually strengthens the "purdah" (protection) of the female. So in reality pashtunwali would encourage education of females because education protects them.

That's what I say too; but that's the progressive attitude. That's not traditional Pashtunwali; and we know it's not because these types of facilities and opportunities for women did not exist until Modern influences came to the Urban Groups.

Badlun is not proof. The guy is a moron.
Hanifi was afghan, jal afghani was afghan. AQ Khan is afghan.
Pashtun dynasties ruled India longer than the Brits did and did not force the Indians to pashtunify like the brits force the continent to anglofy. Giving people freedom is of strong intellectual caliber.malidin a

well he's arguing the same things you are, and he's evidence, not proof.
AQ Khan is an Urdu speaking and depashtunized, and I wouldn't exactly say stealing plans for Nuclear bombs is "scientific advancement"., Hanifi you mean Imam Abu Hanifa? No he was certainly Tajik and that's reliigion. Pashtun dynasties. Jamaluddin Al Afghani was not a scientist and he was a Sayyid. Thus not technically Pashtun.

Well, Pashtuns of different regions practice different "traditions." The pashuns in Kandahar practice different traditions than the Pashtuns in paktia which practice traditions different than the ones in peshawar. This proves that it is adaptive.

you mean different "traditons" as in gestures and pastimes the "Pashtunwali" is the same. Like the way they tie their turbans or the fact women who are Tribal Ghalji wear konstay in their hair. This isn't customs on moral codes/ethics

So that doesn't prove it's adaptive; that's just like having slightly different grooming habits.

[Al-Afghani]

Tell me my dear friend. How old are you? If I had to guess you are a teenager, am I right?

The way you portray the situation in Afghanistan is a clearly sign of your age. I urge you to read upon Afghanistan history and understand the current situation. By the way, by read upon, I do not mean random article on google. Find real unbiased books and start educating yourself regarding Afghanistan. You be surprised that ethnic violence was and is non existent. Even todays conflict aren't ethnic based.
It is a few people from western countries who have raised that issue and trying to portray it as such. A few of them even manage to sneak into the Afghan government. Teenage kids like you are the prime victims of that fascist agenda. They wanna mislead you, to create ethnic conflict in the future for real.

Sure, Afghanistan is a peaceful country like Switzerland.

If ethnic violence doesn't exist, then all the events from 1992 on must have been fiction?

There exists hatred between the races of Afghanistan. It's not just the elite struggling for power.

Anyone can already predict another round of ethnic slaughter, African style. You don't have to be a rocket scientist.

[DSM0305]

Sure, Afghanistan is a peaceful country like Switzerland.

If ethnic violence doesn't exist, then all the events from 1992 on must have been fiction?

There exists hatred between the races of Afghanistan. It's not just the elite struggling for power.

Anyone can already another round of ethnic slaughter, African style. You don't have to be a rocket scientist.

Glad you mention Switzerland. Afghanistan is actually very similar to Switzerland in terms of many things. To begin with both Afghanistan and Switzerland is a landlocked country. Both countries got various of different ethnic groups. Switzerland is in central Europe and Afghanistan is in central Asia.
Here is a quote
Switzerland comprises four main linguistic and cultural regions: German, French, Italian and the Romansh-speaking valleys. Therefore the Swiss, although predominantly German-speaking, do not form a nation in the sense of a common ethnic or linguistic identity; rather, the strong sense of identity and community is founded on a common historical background, shared values such as federalism and direct democracy, and Alpine symbolism. The establishment of the Swiss Confederation is traditionally dated to 1 August 1291, which is celebrated annually as Swiss national day.

Basically Afghanistan is exactly like Switzerland. The difference between Afghanistan and Switzerland is, that Afghanistan have been a victim of 30+ years of war.

You as I guessed is a young ignorant teenager who have never been in the seventies. Let me guess you do not live in Afghanistan either. I have meet victims of brainwashing like you countless of times, and every time they make me laugh because of their ignorance.

By the way, please restrain yourself from using idioms, because you use them completely wrong. It just make you look stupid.

[Al-Afghani]

Glad you mention Switzerland. Afghanistan is actually very similar to Switzerland in terms of many things. To begin with both Afghanistan and Switzerland is a landlocked country. Both countries got various of different ethnic groups. Switzerland is in central Europe and Afghanistan is in central Asia.
Here is a quote
Switzerland comprises four main linguistic and cultural regions: German, French, Italian and the Romansh-speaking valleys. Therefore the Swiss, although predominantly German-speaking, do not form a nation in the sense of a common ethnic or linguistic identity; rather, the strong sense of identity and community is founded on a common historical background, shared values such as federalism and direct democracy, and Alpine symbolism. The establishment of the Swiss Confederation is traditionally dated to 1 August 1291, which is celebrated annually as Swiss national day.

Basically Afghanistan is exactly like Switzerland. The difference between Afghanistan and Switzerland is, that Afghanistan have been a victim of 30+ years of war.

You as I guessed is a young ignorant teenager who have never been in the seventies. Let me guess you do not live in Afghanistan either. I have meet victims of brainwashing like you countless of times, and every time they make me laugh because of their ignorance.

By the way, please restrain yourself from using idioms, because you use them completely wrong. It just make you look stupid.

It is a disservice to compare any country to Afghanistan, especially Switzerland. I apologize for that.

If you think Pashtuns, Tajiks, Hazara et al. can coexist in a peaceful manner, you are mistaken. Afghanistan has been pretty much the same for the past 200 years, with everyone bearing grudges and bitterness towards other ethnic groups.

But I guess you want to close your eyes and ears because it makes you sleep better at night, then go ahead.

[DSM0305]

It is a disservice to compare any country to Afghanistan, especially Switzerland. I apologize for that.

If you think Pashtuns, Tajiks, Hazara et al. can coexist in a peaceful manner, you are mistaken. Afghanistan has been pretty much the same for the past 200 years, with everyone bearing grudges and bitterness towards other ethnic groups.

But I guess you want to close your eyes and ears because it makes you sleep better at night, then go ahead.

Your first sentence didn't make any sense. Apparently you just put random words together and hope something useful comes up.

You don't have any evidence and just talking from your peanut sized brain.
You haven't lived in Afghanistan back in the day
You don't live in Afghanistan now
You don't have any evidence to back up your claims
You are as I assumed, a brainwashed kid who haven't opened a book in his life time.

In all seriousness, if brains is considered money, you will be a charity case.

[khushal]

The whole concept of a Mashar/Chieftan is itself hierarchical as we know Tribal Chieftains is passed down by lineage, not by election. Even if you were to say show a handful of examples that isn't the case, EVEN if I were to hypothetically give you that. That would mean the OVERWHELMING majority of Pashtuns don't follow that, so that would not be representative of Pashtunwali as it is a minority. Actually you do hear about chieftains fighting; it's not always other chieftains. But given that the Chieftains are like rulers and the members of the village like subjects; a smite against them as a challenge against a chieftains authority. The internal squabbling is not evidence of Pashtun independence; but rather Pashtuns struggles against each other.

EVen Surfs in Feudal Europe fought each other over who had the right to cultivate certain lands given to them by Feudal Lords. So your narrative, even if I gave it to you, would not demonstrate Pashtuns alleged liberty.

No, you don't understand. Your only describing the areas that have feudal structures and have "Khans" or large feudal landlords. The reason you say its hierarchy is because feudal landlords are hierarchal. What they do is devise ways to annex lands for themselves and people living on their lands are their subjects so land equals power because you could control people this way. This is not the case in most of pashtunland. The mashers in the village are not large landlords who have subjects as you say.
Some of my kaliwals are millionaires who reside in Peshawar and others reside in Kabul. These people have badi with other kaliwals who are dirt poor. The poor ones cant publically go to Peshawar or Kabul because the rich ones have bribed the police there to arrest them. But the rich ones cant go to the village or even to Jaji because the poor ones have more "mairoona." In urban areas, wealth is power, and in the rural areas "mairoona" is power. Having large plots of land is not power, having many male members in your household is power.
In order to be a masher in the rural areas where feudal structures have not taken hold, you must either have the guts or courage to accomplish things that other cant, or you must have enough "mairoona" to back you up. People have to like you, so it is an election in the rural areas.

The reason that the Brits, the Russian and the Americas have failed is because they cant figure a way to buy the people wholesale like they have in paksitan or Egypt where feudal landlords can deliver their subject to them very cheaply. It not very hard to buy a feudal society, and you don't really need guns to do it. Your a math expert, it should not be hard for you to figure this out. All one has to do is use math equations to figure out how much wealth is needed to buy a feudal society by figuring out how much a feudal landlord is getting out of his people, if you offer that feudal land lords more money, he would have no choice but take an offer that is higher than what he is getting out of his subjects.

Pashtuns are very expensive especially the ones in hills because the feudal landlord structures have not taken hold and they are too hilly, they cant take hold. Its hard to get them wholesale.

It doesn't need to be a state in the modern sense, I stated it's always been under some sort of rulership or authority that it paid tribute to and lands were brought under the authority of that ruler. Karzai is called Mayor of Kabul because unlike the olden days he can't bring several thousand Durranis or Barakzais like the old kings did to squish rebellions just like Nadir Shah did. That is largely in debt to the fact foreign arms flow all over Afghanistan so it's not easy to just go crush a bunch of unruly chiefs with manpower alone.
But the past kings did it; and we know because tribes who were disobedient were forcefully relocated elsewhere. ...the independence theory is bunk.

hahaha, come on man. your stretching here. Karzai has the best armies in the world at his disposal with wealth and technology far advanced than any Sadozai or Barackzai did before him. They only relocated people from mostly urban areas mostly it was a ghilzai/abdali rivalry. They left the rurals and other tribes alone. The kings only ruled the large cities, the rural areas were always out of their direct control. Interference with them always meant trouble whether it were the kings or brits or Russians or americans.

The Brits didn't squish the Tribals because .....they didn't really care that much, I know you might find that alarming; but the region had very little in the way of material benefit for the British at least compared to India; the Brits wanted control of Afghanistan because it was just hungry for land and wanted to go against Britain; instead they did the next thing, get a stooge King to do the work for them. That king was Pashtun. They did this succesfully with Shah Shuja and Abdul Rahman Khan.

The brits went to Afghanistan because they thought the Russians were gaining to much influence there. It had more to do with paranoia then anything else. It was a buffer state so the king in Kabul had to do his best to try to balance the russians with the brits. His job was basically to convince both they had nothing to fear. Any failure in convincing meant invasion. When the brits got paranoid, the invaded and when the Russians got paranoid, they invaded.

Only in Pashtun day dreams. Pashtun cultural mythology and history are two different things.

Then why does no one in our tribe pay taxes to anyone. No one in our tribe follows or accepts the Afghan constitution, No one recognizes the afghan police or courts. Even the Pashtuns in FATA don't follow an Pakistani constitution not do any courts law apply there. The brits could not change them even though they tried for over a hundred years and their child Pakistan trying to do the same thing for 70 years after that.

No, I'm demonstrating your harsh environment premise is not legitimate; because early Muslims lived in a harsh environment which was in the Arabian Peninsula and they managed to overcome those things and establish Islam.

OK, fair enough, but we could also say the brits and now the US have managed to buy them wholesale. They have managed to build military bases there with no trouble. Wahabya infringes on free will and pashtunwali keeps it free.

Which would still defeat your point; because they still lived in a harsh environment even then. There's nothing special about Pashtuns having harsh environments, in fact most of human history has been humans against harsh environments except maybe tropical regions or areas where ample food was available.

However your point is based on misunderstanding; the reason why Muhammad(saw) was hired is because women in pre-Islamic times did not normatively work and have property. In fact if you know about Khadija(ra)'s biography; she was widowed and her business was actually her previous husbands' so she came into her wealth by way of her husband, not her own, because that wouldn't have been allowed. Since she was the only inheritor she ended up with all of it. Islam allowed women the chance acquire their own wealth.

Still, she inherited her wealth right where you said before they could not. My point was that pashtunwali does not say anything about females inheritance but if its the ignorance of household to not give it to them, then the fault lies with that household.

It was also the culture to drink, and watch naked women dance in the middle of the bazaar. Muhammad(saw) never did that; you need to study up on Islamic History and the Narrative of Muhammad(saw)'s life.

One reason Abu Talib(ra) took Muhammad(saw) away from the Arabian Peninsula is because he didn't want him to get influenced by the culture. Muhammad(saw) was progressive for his culture. If Muhammad(saw) followed his culture he'd have worshipped idols, which he never did.

He was not ignorant; because he didn't follow his culture; he had ILHAM from a very young age; which means the belief is he was ALWAYS DIvinely Guided, but he did not realize it. However, let's say we don't invoke the supernatural We knew Muhammad(saw)'s intelligence allowed him to rise above his culture; so that is why he didn't practice his culture's norms.

So you're wrong on all accounts and your reasoning is incorrect.

So in essence, he was raised by his uncle who regarded what the Arabs were doing was ignorance. Worshipping Idols wasn't really an Arab culture but it was more an influence by the business community. They profited by convincing people to by idols from them and keep those idols in their homes so they could have protection. They basically sold them a superstition. Those naked women and drinking was also influence from the business community, alcohol and slave women were cheap tools to manipulate people. Its not that different from todays alcoohol establishments and how women are used as sales pitch to get men to spend their money and keep them ignorant.

The first people to rebel against Mohammads(pbuh) teachings was the business community because it was them that were threatened the most. His preachings were a threat to their profits. He was trying to give knowledge to the common man and the business community thrived on the ignorance of the common man.

Ah but there is ..."Nang aw Namous". The reason there is an anathema about women's education in most places is because the idea is, if she's educated, she'll start having lovers and this will make her unvaluable when it comes time to marrying her off. We can't allow her choose her own husban because that implies she's sexually motivated which means she may have had sex already ...which would be a shame to Nang Aw Namous. so how do we prevent this from happening? Oh yes we deny women from having access to anything that gives her agency.

Your looking at this from a very primitive point of view. The concept of namos is that the namos life is more important than the mans. If the concept of namos is violated, then the man or many men must put his life on the line to correct the violation. The concept of namos is basically what evolutionary biologist call mate guarding.

You're right though women do work.....but in the Gruntish sense; meaning they'll do heavy labor under the order of their families; while the lazy men sip tea in the Hujra telling stories about how yummy the Grapes of Kandahar are.

but that's the ignorance of man though. PAshtunwali would consider those men as baighyrat. in PAshtunwali, the man is supposed to protect and take care of his woman, if it is the other way around, then pashtunwali does not consider than man a man at all.

Um what? That makes no sense; because abolishing the first amendment would be restricting freedom; Pashtunwali restricts freedom. Abolishing Pashtunwali would allow greater access to freedom.

So it's more like I'm establishing the first amendment and Abolishing the Old King's Law

Yes, your doing the same thing. Your putting the blame in the wrong place. You think inheritance to women is blocked by pashtunwali just like the porn industry is hiding behind the first amendment when in reality pashtunwali says nothing about inheritance and the fist amendment says nothing about the porn industry abusing society.

You can say people are free to leave Wahhabism too; not every Saudi follows Wahhabi doctrine in fact in America if you see Saudis; none of them really follow it. Most are like Educated Pashtuns, somewhat progressive. In fact even in Saudi Arabia due to the advent of greater access to media, Young Saudis generally want to abandon Wahhabiyah. It's just the old guard who stick to Wahhabism. The same with Pashtunwali; it's the old fashioned types that stick to Pashtunwali.

Modern Advanced thinking Pashtuns want out.

Actually, wahabya has been amended and is used to keep saud in power and infringe on the common Saudis rights and freedoms. PAshtunwali does the opposite, it keep all authorites out from infringing on the common persons rights and freedoms.

Those are urbanized Pashtuns who have abandoned Pashtunwali. Definitely not Tribals

You can't claim the liberalism of Pashtuns who reject Pashtunwali as evidence of Pashtunwali liberalism. THAT is intellectual dishonesty.

There are female schools in the tribal areas, but they want to ensure what they perceive as enough protection for the females. The urbanized ones perceive that they are protected enough. So when it comes down to is there enough protection.

well he's arguing the same things you are, and he's evidence, not proof.
AQ Khan is an Urdu speaking and depashtunized, and I wouldn't exactly say stealing plans for Nuclear bombs is "scientific advancement"., Hanifi you mean Imam Abu Hanifa? No he was certainly Tajik and that's reliigion. Pashtun dynasties. Jamaluddin Al Afghani was not a scientist and he was a Sayyid. Thus not technically Pashtun.

He is not arguing the same thing, he is on a different tangent.
Well one can be a syed maternally, he still could have been Pashtun paternally And Hanafa's father was from Kabul, we don't really know if he was Tajik or Pashtun but regardless we are talking about the geography and we are talking about influence. If you are talking about technical achievement, Ill do some research, Im pretty sure Ill find you something.

you mean different "traditons" as in gestures and pastimes the "Pashtunwali" is the same. Like the way they tie their turbans or the fact women who are Tribal Ghalji wear konstay in their hair. This isn't customs on moral codes/ethics

So that doesn't prove it's adaptive; that's just like having slightly different grooming habits. .

No, not grooming habits. One example would be that Urban Pashtuns divorce because in the urban setting a woman can take care of herself but in the rural setting divorce is unheard of since women can not take care of themselves. ITs about practicality.
Another "tradition" that is different is that when an engagement is announced, there is gunfire, urban Pashtuns don't do this since it is not practical considering the danger in a condensed population setting.
peshawaris have their celebration and nekha on the same day, we on the other hand never have it on the same day.

These are traditions not grooming habits.

[gadoonwal]

The reason why Pashtuns have taken to Wahabism is because Pashtunwali is like Wahhabism.

Think about it; what are the major things that Wahhabists are known for? Depriving women basic rights like , using harsh unwarranted punishments for petty crimes.

This is true also in Pashtunwali

Pashtunwali denies women inheritance, which in turn is denying women the right of Agency and Self determination. Pashtuns restrict the movement of women and their participation in society.

Wahhabism also denies women self determination; invent rulings to usurp their Islamic rights of inheritance and restrict the movement of women and participation of society

Pashtunwali is basically the Native Pashtun version of Wahhabism.

besyaar tashakur aga e gul aga,,but
pashtunwali mean love,respect,hospitility,tolerance,gerat and honour.
You can say pashtunwali or pashtun culture is arabized and i fully agree on that point.
Pashtuns failed to defend its culture from arab influence.
On the other side parsiwans protect their culture which is great.
IN the 80s zai ul haque spread arab culture accross the durandline and in pashtunkhwa.We all are suffering from this.
Pashtuns are fully defeated by mullas and arabization whic dose,nt mean islam.
Islam now has many names,
punjabi islam
arabi islam
etc.
The real islam is disappeared.

[khushal]

^^Your ANP and pmap or whatever it is are the real enemies of the people. you pretend to fight for Pashtun freedoms when in reality your selling to the highest bidder.

[gadoonwal]

^^Your ANP and pmap or whatever it is are the real enemies of the people. you pretend to fight for Pashtun freedoms when in reality your selling to the highest bidder.

mr isi ,s foot soldier we never sell our land.
we are here and never run away from our land.
anp never sell pashtuns when it was under wali khan and ajmal baba.
asfandyar was sell out not anp.
he is dumped now.
He was good freind of karzai.
Pkmap and mamod khan kaka are the most respected leaders in the entire country.
Everyone respect him even his enemies.
on the other side find me an afghan leader not sell out except najeeb.
you are gulo ,s supporter i know that.
He is the isi balkay or tato.

[khushal]

^^I know that you love Pashtun killers and the best one was najib.