Pashtun system of marriage has benefits...

[یاسمینه]

Khushal keeps fabricating excuses that could be why.

He says that Walwar is for the family to buy jewelry this quotation clearly proves him wrong.

to whose family? Bride's? It's been clearly stated that de njeley pe sar rupey is to compensate for the loss of their daughter / for her work which she could perform in he parents' household but will never perform.
Groom's family? They become the owners of her mahr (which they bought for the bride) and de facto all kitchen equipment and other stuff bought for newly maried.

What I see is different meaning of mahr in Arabic countries and among Pashtuns. The purpose of mahr in Arabic countries is financial security of a woman in case of divorce. Among Pashtuns mahr goes to the groom and his family.
De njeley de sar rupey is another difference.

[khushal]

I am reading your posts and I am more and more confused.

In my other posts in this tread I quoted excerpt on the financial aspects of marriage among Pashtuns.

"The brideprice is divided into three parts:
(a) An endowment in jewellery given by the husband's family to the bride (mahr). Though this becomes her property, it is not lost to the husband, since the wife makes him a gift of it after the consummation of the marriage. If as sometimes happens, the jewellery has been borrowed for the occasion, he promptly returns it to the rightful owners. Otherwise, the mahr becomes the property of the joint household.

(b) Expenses for the wedding and equipment if the new home (waade depara); mainly foodstuf, with bedding and kitchen equipment.

(c) Outright payment for the girl (de njeley de sar rupey - money for the girl's head)."

No one denied that so I assume that this description is close to the reality.

Now my question: when you discuss the dowry, you use the word walwar (which literally means dowry). Does this word (walwar) refers to one of these three components (if so, to which one) or is it rather general category for dowry construed as financial expenses related to marriage?

Im a Zazai from Paktya and we dont even use the word welwar, we use the word "denyo" which literally means material and when this price is set it includes every expense. We dont use the "money for the girls head" term( I have heard of this in parts of Paksitan) but when certain families keep the money for themselves, there is shame and people do give "peghor" to them. Some families make up expenses from thin air. Certain people go together(the bride's and groom's families) and shop, others give it to the brides elder/elders and they are responsible for shopping for the wedding. Sometimes the brides family is offended if the grooms family insists that they tag along when shopping. We also have a custom where the brides father also buys jewelry, clothing and living material like cooking/bedding equipment for her daughter from his own pocket. Anthropolically speaking this encourages people from dreading to have daughters especially when the family is poor which the vast majority are in Afghanistan and it could lead to what's happening in India.

[khushal]

to whose family? Bride's? It's been clearly stated that de njeley pe sar rupey is to compensate for the loss of their daughter / for her work which she could perform in he parents' household but will never perform.
Groom's family? They become the owners of her mahr (which they bought for the bride) and de facto all kitchen equipment and other stuff bought for newly maried.

What I see is different meaning of mahr in Arabic countries and among Pashtuns. The purpose of mahr in Arabic countries is financial security of a woman in case of divorce. Among Pashtuns mahr goes to the groom and his family.
De njeley de sar rupey is another difference.

You are correct. Some fathers dont feel shame to keep some of the money because he is losing a member of his household.

[khushal]

Khushal keeps fabricating excuses that could be why.

He says that Walwar is for the family to buy jewelry this quotation clearly proves him wrong.

See that is strawman fallacy. I never said jewelry, I said wedding expenses which includes jewelry but that is just one part of it. It includes other expenses as well. The custom is made to prevent what your maternal ancestors were doing and what is happening in India.
The concept of "Namos" is the foundation of pashtunwali. Pashtunwali encourages for every male in the family to die for the protection of the female. It promotes and teaches that the females life and protection is more important than the males.

[khushal]

YES it's illegal; ... you're mixing backwards Ancient Hinduism with Islam. ANything else that happens whether it's giving her jewelry, having a special party for the bride is between the GROOM and BRIDE, not the groom her Beghairat Father and the bride. The Groom and Bride ALONE decide if any extra money is to be given. It's the groom and bride ALONE that decides if she needs an extra party. NO excuse for Walwar at all! That's why Walwar is harram her father or male relatives aren't supposed to be involved in any of that AT ALL.

Prove its illegal. From where are you deriving this from?
Welwar is between the bride and groom, but you have to understand that pashtuns decide as a family not as individual members. I have already explained this dumbo. The father is doing what is best for his daughter.
Where does it say in Islam that the brides parents can not be involved in the wedding. Your ignorant because you have never been to afghanistan and have only read about it. You think Afghans are individualists. hahahahaha.........ha

[Badlun]

The concept of "Namos" is the foundation of pashtunwali. Pashtunwali encourages for every male in the family to die for the protection of the female. It promotes and teaches that the females life and protection is more important than the males.

Is namos only restricted to the protection of women by men? Is it not abroader term equivalent to nang, ghairat, pat , respect and honor?

Why men should always protect women? Why women should not be capable to protect themselves? Are men always strong and women alwyas week so the stronger should protect the weeker? If we have women like Malala and Benazir Bhutto ..cant they become stronger than many men and thus they will not need namoos of men and their protection?

[khushal]

Is namos only restricted to the protection of women by men? Is it not abroader term equivalent to nang, ghairat, pat , respect and honor?

Why men should always protect women? Why women should not be capable to protect themselves? Are men always strong and women alwyas week so the stronger should protect the weeker? If we have women like Malala and Benazir Bhutto ..cant they become stronger than many men and thus they will not need namoos of men and their protection?

Benazir is a bad example. she did nothing but bring more corruption to Pakistan.
And malalai was kicked out by men because the americans chose not to stand up for her rights which is one of the excuses they are there for.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Prove its illegal. From where are you deriving this from?
Welwar is between the bride and groom, but you have to understand that pashtuns decide as a family not as individual members. I have already explained this dumbo. The father is doing what is best for his daughter.
Where does it say in Islam that the brides parents can not be involved in the wedding. Your ignorant because you have never been to afghanistan and have only read about it. You think Afghans are individualists. hahahahaha.........ha

That's not the father's job in this situation the requirement of Islam is that the bride and groom stipulate their marital agreement with the bride being fully voluntary; you just contradicted yourself if it's between the bride and groom then the father can't be imvolved. It's illegal because it contradicts the Qur'ans guidance, "whatever they negotiate BETWEEN them" ....pretty basic. It's very clear in the Qur'an; hence the proof. Pashtun culture contradicts the Qur'an and if you're saying that their culture deprives the woman the right to negotiate her marriage for herself then that's pretty much the truth. Islam is not an "individualist" religion; but yet it still requires it; you and your backwards relics from Hinduism and Zoroastrianism have no place in Islam.

[یاسمینه]

The concept of "Namos" is the foundation of pashtunwali. Pashtunwali encourages for every male in the family to die for the protection of the female. It promotes and teaches that the females life and protection is more important than the males.

Well, I am not an expert but I think you misinterpret partially the meaning of namus. I would say that a man is taught to protects his wife or sister or daughter because if he doesn't, and a woman will do something unacceptable, then he will be called beghairat and her acts will affect his sense of honour and social acceptance. So in fact by protecting women men in fact protect themselves and their namus.

If it were as you say, men after divorce would not be taunted as talaqi. Probably you know that in Pashto the real meaning of this word is different than that indicated by its Arabic origin. So man after divorce can lose his honor. For me it proves that de facto men protect their own honor.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

See that is strawman fallacy. I never said jewelry, I said wedding expenses which includes jewelry but.

Nothing else needs to be said here; you've debunked yourself.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

to whose family? Bride's? It's been clearly stated that de njeley pe sar rupey is to compensate for the loss of their daughter / for her work which she could perform in he parents' household but will never perform.
Groom's family? They become the owners of her mahr (which they bought for the bride) and de facto all kitchen equipment and other stuff bought for newly maried.

What I see is different meaning of mahr in Arabic countries and among Pashtuns. The purpose of mahr in Arabic countries is financial security of a woman in case of divorce. Among Pashtuns mahr goes to the groom and his family.
De njeley de sar rupey is another difference.

That's harram, you can't ask for money for this reason, That's forbidden in Islam; this is a form of prostitution. Mahr should be defined Islamically, not by Arabic or Pashtun; the Pashtun variation is not compatible. As for the husband's family keeping her jewelry, if her jewelry is the mahr then it's supposed to be hers and then in that case the husband's family would be wrong. If it's not the mahr then it shouldn't be bestowed as such. it still refutes Khushal's original claim that it's use to cover expenses such as Jewelry, since that is clearly already covered. So the Walwar serves no role but to prostitute the daughter.

[Badlun]

Benazir is a bad example. she did nothing but bring more corruption to Pakistan.
And malalai was kicked out by men because the americans chose not to stand up for her rights which is one of the excuses they are there for.

You know I wanted to give example of some great famous Pashtun woman, but by God this moment I could not remember any woman only Malala came to my mind but this was also not this recent Pashtun girl who was shot by Taliban but the historic Pashtun figure Malala .

Benazir is not Pashtun but she was a great leader and remained twice the prime minsiter of a country. I am not concerned with her politics or promotion of corruption here but her personality is my focus.

Why 70 millions of Pashtuns today and billions of Pashtuns in past thousands of years could not produce a single great globally known Pashtun name! This is alarming. The same is true for Muslims as a whole. Except few names like Asiya, Khodeja, Ayesha, Fatima, Rabia Basri we do not have women of global fame!

This is the limit of male cahauvinism in Pashtuns and Muslims! Still we claim namoos and protection for Pashtun women! I am really feeling this moment totally ashamed and guilty.

[یاسمینه]

Mahr should be defined Islamically, not by Arabic or Pashtun; the Pashtun variation is not compatible.

I know - Islam is only one, but its local variants can vary. I didn't want to use the term "Pashto Islam"

[Badlun]

That's harram, you can't ask for money for this reason, That's forbidden in Islam; this is a form of prostitution. Mahr should be defined Islamically, not by Arabic or Pashtun; the Pashtun variation is not compatible. As for the husband's family keeping her jewelry, if her jewelry is the mahr then it's supposed to be hers and then in that case the husband's family would be wrong. If it's not the mahr then it shouldn't be bestowed as such. it still refutes Khushal's original claim that it's use to cover expenses such as Jewelry, since that is clearly already covered. So the Walwar serves no role but to prostitute the daughter.

Of what Islamic mahr are you talking about? The mahr of few dates. few ashrafis. Do you know the quantity of the so called Islamic mahr? Its another cheating with women. Women needs complete financial emancipation not few grains of dates or 10 darhams mahr or few grams of gold. This is a very little price to enslave a woman for the whole life!

[khushal]

That's harram, you can't ask for money for this reason, That's forbidden in Islam; this is a form of prostitution. Mahr should be defined Islamically, not by Arabic or Pashtun; the Pashtun variation is not compatible. As for the husband's family keeping her jewelry, if her jewelry is the mahr then it's supposed to be hers and then in that case the husband's family would be wrong. If it's not the mahr then it shouldn't be bestowed as such. it still refutes Khushal's original claim that it's use to cover expenses such as Jewelry, since that is clearly already covered. So the Walwar serves no role but to prostitute the daughter.

Mahr is separate from the welwar including jewelry. The husbands family does not keep the jewelry, it is her property.
Your trying to make your own definition of it. your too desperate.