kakar pashtuns tribe hindu members

[ScimitarXEdge]

They're Arab terms yes, but this does not prove that the concepts did not exist or that other words of native origin were not used until borrowing from other languages. You're confusing linguistic origins to the origins of the concept. Pashtoons call food "dodai", which also means bread, does this mean that all food is bread because Pashtoons only have one word for it? It's not a strong claim.

The only other system that was in place was the Caste System of the Hindus? This is somewhat dubious at best. I agree the Hindu Caste System existed at the time; but this is presupposing Pashtoons were in fact Hindus in antiquity which seems to be unverified.

Mullah, Pir , Sadat, Akhound, Mian etc etc, are not analogous to Brahmins, neither are tribals analogous to Kshartiyas; for the most obvious reason that such professions are not restricted on basis of hereditary lines alone, Which they are in Hinduism. The only exception maybe Sad'at but not every Sad'at is wealthy or privileged as a Brahmin would be.

I'm not necessarily rejecting the idea that Pashtoons may have been Hindus at one time; I'm merely saying the claim is at best circumstantial.

[Wrayun]

They're Arab terms yes, but this does not prove that the concepts did not exist or that other words of native origin were not used until borrowing from other languages. You're confusing linguistic origins to the origins of the concept. Pashtoons call food "dodai", which also means bread, does this mean that all food is bread because Pashtoons only have one word for it? It's not a strong claim.

No, it means that since bread is food, it is logical to call it dodai. Other words for bread are nayan and tekala. If the concept of Sajra, linage etc. existed midst Pukhtoons, I am honestly interested to know about the indigenous concepts/terminology.

The only other system that was in place was the Caste System of the Hindus? This is somewhat dubious at best. I agree the Hindu Caste System existed at the time; but this is presupposing Pashtoons were in fact Hindus in antiquity which seems to be unverified.

Pukhtoons came from various backgrounds, and many tribes believed in many different things. Some were shamans, others were Buddhists, some were Hindus etc. But we do know that Islam is the most recent introduction amongst them. The bulk of Pukhtoons were not Muslims.

Mullah, Pir , Sadat, Akhound, Mian etc etc, are not analogous to Brahmins, neither are tribals analogous to Kshartiyas; for the most obvious reason that such professions are not restricted on basis of hereditary lines alone, Which they are in Hinduism. The only exception maybe Sad'at but not every Sad'at is wealthy or privileged as a Brahmin would be.

Actually a Mullah, Pir, Akhound and Miangans are traced by linage. And not all Brahmins were or are rich/wealthy. Brahmins were basically priests who kept society in order through the teaching and implementations of the Vedas. They had nothing to do with wealth, although they could acquire it as long as they kept the elite happy. The Kashtriya (warrior tribal castes) were in fact wealthier then the rest since they represented the core of the foundations i.e. government, rulers and elites. This is exactly how you find things within the Pukhtoon society. The Mullahs, Sad'at's, Akhounds, Pir's got rich if they pleased the tribal Pukhtoon leadership. So the relationship between the Kashtriya and Brahmins is the same that Pukhtoons of today have between them and the religious groups.

[ScimitarXEdge]

No, it means that since bread is food, it is logical to call it dodai. Other words for bread are nayan and tekala. If the concept of Sajra, linage etc. existed midst Pukhtoons, I am honestly interested to know about the indigenous concepts/terminology.



Pukhtoons came from various backgrounds, and many tribes believed in many different things. Some were shamans, others were Buddhists, some were Hindus etc. But we do know that Islam is the most recent introduction amongst them. The bulk of Pukhtoons were not Muslims.



Actually a Mullah, Pir, Akhound and Miangans are traced by linage. And not all Brahmins were or are rich/wealthy. Brahmins were basically priests who kept society in order through the teaching and implementations of the Vedas. They had nothing to do with wealth, although they could acquire it as long as they kept the elite happy. The Kashtriya (warrior tribal castes) were in fact wealthier then the rest since they represented the core of the foundations i.e. government, rulers and elites. This is exactly how you find things within the Pukhtoon society. The Mullahs, Sad'at's, Akhounds, Pir's got rich if they pleased the tribal Pukhtoon leadership. So the relationship between the Kashtriya and Brahmins is the same that Pukhtoons of today have between them and the religious groups.

I would argue that it's hardly logical; since not all food is bread. The point being the lack of linguistic representation does not mean linguistic representation never existed nor does it mean that the concept did not already exist before the terms did.

The only thing we can agree on is that 2000 years ago the Bulk of Pashtoons were not Muslim at least in the contemporary sense.

Mullah, Pir, Akhound are not necessarily lineage based. Only Sad'at is linage based and it's based on being descendant of a specific person not descendant of a caste.

If you analyze the social use of the caste system; Brahmins were primarily privileged and wealthy, the caste system was installed to maintain a status quo of exploitation of Priestly Classes. You're correct in saying Kshatriyah were aristocrats, but tribal warriors are certainly not anything compared to aristocrats, except notable exceptions.

[hassanzai]

I think there should be better resources out there on Kakar's rather than having to rely on what someone on wikipedia has posted. Or oh well- we are who we are. I'm still following my theory on Islam not being in that region prior to those tribes picking out names. Or even that people traveled and took different names and followed different religions. Just because you're a pashtun or a Kakar does not mean you have to follow one religion.

Assalam - alaikum,

You are right till the end, but whatever research have been done on afghans/pashtuns/pathans by different sources who are not related with pashtuns and Islam(most probably non-muslims) their reports states that among the afghans/pashtuns/pathans, there are not even a single non-muslim related to their tribes and only some shiahs are related to them. You will find this conclusion among the sources related to non -muslims who have researched on us, they could have been biased towards pashtuns and Islam. And muslims and pashtuns who have researched on pashtuns their reports also say that their are not even a single non-muslim pashtuns among the pashtuns of today.

We are talking of today and what happened 1400 years before we dont have any resource, so the present situation says that there are zero non-muslims among pashtuns today all over the world.

[Master Khan]

there are still hindu temples in Afghanistan around Kandahar, did Qais Abdul Rasheed brought Islam to the region.

[hassanzai]

Give an Example

Kakargirl, you are wrong on many accounts. If you visit Kandahar, and leave your house in Britain. You can sort of realize that there are many Kakars who are Pashtun but have embraced Hinduism. Your posts are confusing and misleading, which is why I was mislead. The bottom line is Kakars are not all Muslim. I can be a kakar and I can convert to Christanity, you have nothing to offer as proof. While I have common sense to offer you. Pi(3.142)I believe is a Kakar and he is not a Muslim. So I gave you one example already.

What you are saying that "You can sort of realize that there are many Kakars who are Pashtun but have embraced Hinduism" means they were before muslims then became muslims, is it a recent event or historical event or from any source, can you elaborate it.

It is very confusing what you said, i have never came toward such a news then it will be a great news if you can elaborate.

[hassanzai]

What religion are you

The situation is fluid. Whereas in mountains and remote areas immersed in aggrarian-feudal/tribal life style, the old-lineage based definition of Pashtun identity that is associated with heriditory rights and land-ownership as Wrayun mentioned is still employed, in the plain areas and urban centers Pashtuns are becoming increasingly unconcerned about their tribal backgrounds at least in daily interaction. This trend is the most conspicuous in Yousazfais and other neighbouring/allied Pashtuns.

I think there is a transitional and transformational phenomenon going on in Pashtuns of Peshawar Valley corresponding to the social change in them brought about by a rising literacy rate, urbanization, etc.

As for the relevance or irrelevance of pre-Islamist history of Pashtuns, Pashtun history cannot be simply reduced to few hubdred years of Islamist era although those that are desperate to realise their notion of Muslim unity would like to highlight only the part of Pashtun history related to the Muslim era. Pre-Islamist traditions and culture are as much a part of our identity as those of the Islamist era. Gone are the days of Muslim imperialism when political power and influence depended on association with a Muslim identity. We have to link with global community where creed and tribal-based affiliations are becoming irrelevant.

There is also good amount of historical information that indicate, there were Pashtuns even in 11th Century who were not Muslims and possibly professed Hinduism (or other pagan beliefs). It seems for four hundred years, from the era of Safarids(?) till Mahmoud of Ghazna, Pashtuns vehemently resisted Arab incursion on their life-style and freedom. It was only in 11th Century that a mass-conversion to Islam occurred in Pashtuns after they realised the usefulness of Islamist ideology and Jehad in grabbing land and other resources and acquiring wealth and status (status as ghazi or shaheed/martyre, reward in Jannah, jehad spolils in this world---mal-i-ghanimat, captive women, slaves, ..). In fact, the kind of incentive to general masses for the reward in the world here and the one hereafter might have lured Pashtuns to the fold of Islam on a popular level .

It is also possibly wrong to consider Hinduism as a non-prozeltyzing religion tied to an ethnicity, etc. If that were the case, there wouldn't have been the multitude of ethicities and language groups professing Hindu-religion. Most probably, the cast-based system was more linked to distribution of work and power although with religious sanctification. But then again, Hinduism is a flexible religion fast adopting to the realities of today.

"Pre-Islamist traditions and culture are as much a part of our identity as those of the Islamist era"

First I will elaborate that in this world whichever community have its own culture and tradition can become a muslim without having to leave his culture and tradition, but that culture and tradition should conform with the tenents of Islamic spirit, and pashtuns culture which is based on pashtunwali conforms nearest to the Islamic spirit so thats why pashtuns embraced Islam, and those pre-Islamic traditions and culture are based in pashtunwali.

"Gone are the days of Muslim imperialism when political power and influence depended on association with a Muslim identity. We have to link with global community where creed and tribal-based affiliations are becoming irrelevant"

Here is my question, what religion are you because whatever you say says that you are not dependent with a muslim identity, then with whom you are dependent, with some other identity, please elaborate.

Pashtuns are dependent on association with a muslim identity, because pashtuns are 100% muslims, and gone are the days of muslim imperialism, still there is muslim imperialism in Afghanistan and Pakistan where the ruling power will always be a Muslim Imperialist, but he may be a pashtun or not that's different.

Then you said we have to link with global community, pashtuns are linked with the universal community and they knows what's happening in this whole universe, regarding creed and tribal based affiliations, this is the identity of a pashtun nor no one can say that he/she is a pashtun but only referring the tribe or if not knowing his tribe then on oral tradition from his family ancestors. so a pashtun can distance himself from his tribe nor his identity will be lost, he has to acquire a new identity.

"There is also good amount of historical information that indicate, there were Pashtuns even in 11th Century who were not Muslims and possibly professed Hinduism (or other pagan beliefs)"

You are right, but pashtuns most probably where buddhist or shamanic or
zorastrians but not hindus, why because can you find the area where pashtuns reside in afghanistan and pakistan during 11th century AD any hindu temple, i say no because if there is no trace of evidence of hindu temples duri ng that time in pashtun areas, they cannot be hindus.

"It was only in 11th Century that a mass-conversion to Islam occurred in Pashtuns after they realised the usefulness of Islamist ideology and Jehad in grabbing land and other resources and acquiring wealth and status (status as ghazi or shaheed/martyre, reward in Jannah, jehad spolils in this world---mal-i-ghanimat, captive women, slaves, ..)."

Please again you are attacking Islam and pashtuns without knowledge, i will elaborate, pashtuns embraced Islam because the pashtunwali which was the religion of pashtuns before Islam was having the same tenents as Islamic spirit so they embraced islam, and jehad is a concept which is always not understood by kafirs, because no one elaborated to them correctly, jehad is a concept in Islam in which a muslim fights only for Allah sake not for grabbing land and other resources or acquiring wealth or status, who said you these things that jehad means all this cheap concepts which has no place in Islam,
in status you are elaborating that muslims fights for spoils in war like mal-i-ganimat, captive women, slaves, etc, a big shame on you for uttering these words for muslims, from where you got these concepts who preached you these biased words against muslims and pashtuns, a very big shame on you, sorry muslims and pashtuns if fighting a war as jehad will fight only for Allah sake, and you must know what is Allah sake (no unislamic desires only what Allah says a muslim and a pashtun follows and and what Allah says a muslim and pashtun does not follow, there are haraam ways mentioned in the holy book Quran by Allah that a muslim and a pashtun does not follows and there are halaal ways mentioned in the holy book Quran by Allah only a muslim and a pashtun follows. so please correct your mind.

"It is also possibly wrong to consider Hinduism as a non-prozeltyzing religion tied to an ethnicity, etc. If that were the case, there wouldn't have been the multitude of ethicities and language groups professing Hindu-religion. Most probably, the cast-based system was more linked to distribution of work and power although with religious sanctification. But then again, Hinduism is a flexible religion fast adopting to the realities of today"

Here you expressed who you are, you understood what i said or i should elaborate, hinduism is not the name of a religion it is the name of the people or associated with the river Indus/hindu/sindhu/ which runs from tibet to pakistan to Arabian sea, the people of this area or associated with this area are known as hindus/sindhus/indus, first the name itself denoted people associated with the above mentioned river migrated and settled down in other areas and called themselves people of hindu means the river so the native people wherever they went began to call them hindus and they also began to use this name for themselves, and they were limited to one ethnicity that was aryanism and their religion was based on nature and ancestor worship, these aryans migrated in different parts of india and asimiliated with the local people and absorbed them as the last or fourth caste (in which this caste does not have any rights same as prisoner of war and always used as bonded labor and outcast) and hindus religions was limited, since they could not capture some of the powerful comunities of india with differnt racial grouping they consumed these communities beliefs and concepts within their religion and tried to absorb them as hindus (but as outcast) so that different ethinicities and race in india have different gods, which when studied was found to be ancient religions of this local races and ethnicities (they are known as dravidians ) they were living before the aryans came who brought with them this religion now known as hinduism.

Hinduism is not a flexible religion, because it is adopting other religions best qualities and overwriting their own holy books, this is like just to survive with their religion buy claming that these ways are related with hinduism, we can file a copyright case against hinduism, a very cheap tactic just to survive, rather than to accept the facts.

[hassanzai]

Can you actually read what I wrote?
First of all, I debated you according to history and most of our ancestors were forced to convert to Islam, its a fact and as I told you before, please get a history book and read it.
Secondly, where did I mention that I am not a Muslim now?
People like you really pisses me off, you dont actually read the post and accuse me of not being a Muslim and that I am not happy with my religion! wtf can you even read?
LOL so we just miraculously came into this world after Islam? that doesnt make sense!
I tell you again please go and read history then you will know we have been here for far longer than you might have ever think of.

Assalam-alaikum,

In history books it is mentioned that "pashtuns of the sulaiman mountains were converted by Mahmud ghaznavi in 11th century AD" but it is not elaborated that pashtuns were forced by force to become muslims at the edge of the sword by Mahmud ghaznawi, or in other history books if is mentioned then find who is the author of it, if that author is a non-muslim, he will naturally would try to undermine muslim rulers, for example, if i ask an enemy of yours how good are you, you think what will he say to me, got my point. And we are pashtuns, no one have the power to force us to submit when we accepted something right and truth, then no power on this earth can force us to any religion, since Islam was nearest to our religion before Islam that is Pashtunwali so we embraced Islam.

I am not saying this that we came after Islam came to us, we are ancient people, but known less by the world, no one mentioned us in the books, only minor references are there without any proofs, since with Islam we got a broad identity and respect, that what i wanted to say.

I am sorry for saying you a non muslim, its a grave mistake from my side, I sincerely apologise for that remark, Please forgive me.

[Toramana]

Firstly

There's no such thing as Muslim Imperialism; this is a European Imperialism lie created by Modern Orientalists used to validate European Hegemony on one hand and to illegitimately strive to discredit Islam on the other as a way of implanting European Hegemony. Mind you I am using the Samuel Huntington concept of European as North America is the cultural inheritor of European Imperialism.

However you label it, Arab, or Turk, etc., Muslim Imperialism is a fact you can't deny(Muslim rule in India, Balkans, or forced conversion of non-Muslims outside Arabian Peninsula by earlier Muslims). Both Imperialisms are detestible although weak communities like Pashtuns have to live with them and manipulate their way through their conflicts/rivalaries to ensure their survival.

Secondly; It is irrelevant to the context of the discussion; what Pashtoons may have been 2000 years ago, is not a bearing on whether or not Pashtoons in the current age have Ethnic Members who are from Sikh or Hindu upbringings. Contemporary Sikhs and Hindus who speak Pashto are unanimously of Punjabi/Multani origins, with no actual verifiable examples otherwise

.

I didn't give any categorical statement on the Pashtun Muslim or non-Muslim controversy. The only thing I have said is, the tribe-based or creed-based notions of identity induced by the isolating impact of a natural environment and divisive, self-righteous doctrines of an intrinsically intolerant ideology will give way to a more humanistic concept of identity based on cultural and linguistic affinty. And this is already happening. This is related to the broader issue i.e., what is it that defines a Pashtun.

Thirdly, the historical information we have about Pashtoons is so ambiguous and based on circumstantial hearsay it's hard to really know who's being referred to. But let's assume your claim is true, albeit we all know that it's merely warped European slant to serve the Capitalist Neo-Colonial Geopolitical Agenda in Contemporary Times. The fact that Non-Muslims of regions conquered by Muslims had still remained as they were and only over time became Muslims only demonstrates that such a claim has no merit.

I wonder how could you call the confirmation by Al-bairuni, Al-Utbi, the court historians of Mahmoud of Ghazna, of the existance of non-Muslim/pagan Pashtuns as hearsay while push in your own non-sensical, absurd, and ridiculous conspiracy theory of West's agenda to fan the rumour of the presence of non-Mulsim Pashtuns for geopolitical agenda as the truth. See below,

To disprove the assertion that the Pukhtoon tribes had embraced Islam en-bloc after the return of Qais Abdul Rashid from Medina, the accounts of Al-Beruni and Al-Utbi, the contemporary historians of Mahmud of Ghazna, establish "that four centuries later than the time of Qais the Province of Kabul had not been Islamized and this was achieved under the Ghaznavides. The Hindu Shahiya Kingdom of Jaipal extended almost to Kabul, Mahmud had to fight against infidel Afghans of the Sulaiman mountains". Even Prithvi Raj had a cavalry of Afghans in the battle of Tarian against Mohammad Ghori.

Moreover, I see more Muslim geopolitics in the propaganda of Pashtuns accepting Islam en-mass or being Muslims as a nation by those concerned with return to medieval Khilafath system or extending their colonial frontiers as General Zia-ul-Haq of Punjab envisaged to HinduKush on the pretext of Muslim unity.

By the way are a Musalman first or a Pashtun first?

Although I personally wish it did, the Pagan Cultures of Pre-Islamic times were totally morally degenerate on par with the dysfunctional capitalist cultures; to claim such a thing as "freedom" is total *******ization of the word and meaning. This is what American Military Propaganda Machine strives to use as a smokescreen for its own corrupt incursions. In summary, the claim is simply an attempt at European projection which some more gullible Easterners who have acquired an inferiority complex have taken to heart.

The fact is, the so-called moralist society couldn't produce even 0.05% of the knowledge or moralist/humanist (as a whole) ethos (apart from a concept of morailty geared to establishing the sanctity of harems) as the dysfunctional cultures have, the many bad things they have done notwithstanding though.

[hassanzai]

pashtunwali existed before islam and then we converted to islam along the way
that is why there is that saying i am pashtun before i am a muslim ( well i have heard it dont no bout you lot oh lol )

Assalam-alaikum,

See if you are a muslim you must say yourself first as Muslim then as pashtun, arab, european, aryan,chinese. Because in Islam Allah has defined in the holy book Quran, that who reads the kalima to become a muslim, should be called as muslim, then as his race or ethnicity or family,etc.

[Toramana]

Assalam-alaikum,

See if you are a muslim you must say yourself first as Muslim then as pashtun, arab, european, aryan,chinese. Because in Islam Allah has defined in the holy book Quran, that who reads the kalima to become a muslim, should be called as muslim, then as his race or ethnicity or family,etc.

This is a Pakistani non-sense created to serve the interests of the Punjab...We don't subscribe to such ideology. We are Pashtun first and Pashtun last although Islam is also a part of our heritage.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Toramana I re-edited my post to include responses to your points regarding hinduism if you'd like to reexamine what I wrote and respond to it; it would make a more comprehensive dialogue.

[hassanzai]

Who are you

You guys are making some grave mistakes when addressing Pukhtoon history, linage, and heritage.

The concept of Sajra, Nasil (both Arabic words and concepts) and linage didn't exist before the arrival of Islam midst Pukhtoons. Is there a family tree that existed before the arrival of Islam? Don't you people find it odd that the whole family tree starts with the arrival of Islam i.e. Qais Abdr Rashid met the Prophet and from him comes all the Pukhtoons? This means only one thing, that the Sajra-e-Afghan is a recent fabrication. It is full of inconsistencies. So to say that there aren't any Hindu kakar forefathers in the linage, thus these Hindus can't be original Pukhtoons, is absurd.

Even today Pukhtoons/Afghans go by one name. They don't apply the last names, or identifications of origin like places or regions. These things were introduced with Islam. Muhammad bint Abdullah bint Meccan etc.

Just like today many Europeans claim that they are Natives of Americas i.e. North and South American Indios, the descendants of Islamic expansionists, whether Turks, Arabs, or Persians claim to be original Pukhtoons or Afghans (Bani-Israeli) based on linages they created themselves.

More research needs to be done on this subject matter.

"Is there a family tree that existed before the arrival of Islam"

Yes there were tribes and families attached to them, which have reference when Alexender the greek king attacked afghanistan and pakistan, you can read it in history books, since times when the first civilization in the Earth developed it was based on tribal and family tree identity, for this also you can read in history books on ancient civilization of the world. So naturally pashtuns were also having their tribes and family trees arranged and area also specified before the arrival of Islam.

"Don't you people find it odd that the whole family tree starts with the arrival of Islam i.e. Qais Abdr Rashid met the Prophet and from him comes all the Pukhtoons? This means only one thing, that the Sajra-e-Afghan is a recent fabrication"

You people means what, you are not a pashtun and we are only pashtuns.

Now the important point as i said above, the family tree was there before Islam, and regarding Qais Abdur Rashid, he may be our ancient ancestor and king of pashtun people, so we pashtuns take lineages from him, since he may be the last link throw which we pashtuns could have known each other family trees, or maybe he would have been sent to Makkah to verify about this new religion called Islam, and maybe he was the first muslim from among the pashtuns, and changed his name from his native name, we cannot say that he met Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) , but from him the lineages have been taken of whatever pashtun tribes remained in their regions of that time, because pashtuns comes from him can also be a reality as i said before, most probably he was the last link for the pashtuns on the oral concepts which pashtuns were having.

It needs deep research but most probably it is very ancient, regarding sajra-e-afghan maybe pashtuns have named their ancestor with an Islamic Name Qais Abdur Rashid, and some tribes and lineages also got their names changed to Islamic names and those who embraced Islam later on may probably kept their ancient names alive, when they got to know this point of Islam that a muslim can keep his culture and traditions alive if it is not in confrontation with the tenents of Islam. for example, tribe Abdali changed its name to Durrani, now no one k nows anyone by the name of abdali pashtuns.

"It is full of inconsistencies. So to say that there aren't any Hindu kakar forefathers in the linage, thus these Hindus can't be original Pukhtoons, is absurd"

There are no hindus or any other religion people in pashtun/afghans/pathans of today. Because hindus/sikhs migrated during the times of mughal and british period and imposed on us, they are surviving till this time because of pashtuns's Islam & pashtunwali (where a pashtun provides refuge to any outsider maybe any race or ethnicity of this world, but only on the basis of hamsaya origin) slowly if these same people adopting the lifestyles and culture of pashtun, demands that to accept them as their own people is very offending and challenging by the same people whom we have given refuge.

There are kakkars as hindus/sikhs but not kakars , the difference is that they are related with jats/khatri and not with pashtuns, maybe they have came during mughal and british times and settled or some of them are making a claim to get obsorption in the main tribe

But how it is possible when we pashtuns don accept even a muslim punjabi,tajik,hazara,uzbeki,baluch,brohi in our tribes and lineages then how come a non-muslim that too in the biggest tribe of pashtuns, very dangerous plans you people( beware don't try to apply it very dangerous consequences for any step)

"Even today Pukhtoons/Afghans go by one name. They don't apply the last names, or identifications of origin like places or regions. These things were introduced with Islam. Muhammad bint Abdullah bint Meccan etc"

Again a big mistake, see we pashtuns have a name, for example any people in this world he will be having his status as an arab, turk, rajput, jat, khatri, etc as a name for the people then they have their last names like with tribal affiliation, how many tribes and lineages are their in these peoples, some of them attach a place name or other etc., this is common with every race or ethnicity of this world and it is common with pashtuns also

These things were never introduced after Islam as you say Muhammed bin Abdullah bin saleh, these are prevalent with some special races and ethnicities of this world, these are not related with pashtuns.

"Just like today many Europeans claim that they are Natives of Americas i.e. North and South American Indios, the descendants of Islamic expansionists, whether Turks, Arabs, or Persians claim to be original Pukhtoons or Afghans (Bani-Israeli) based on linages they created themselves"

I dont know about europeans, but i can clear you about turks,arabs and persians, they never in their wildest dreams would want to attach themselves with pashtuns, because they seems themselves very strong and most intelligent and most probably they have a very strong social society, in the opposite pashtuns can claim a persian lineage or turkic lineage or arab lineage if he or his tribe area have been occupied by these ethnicites and the other pashtun tribes have fled that area, then that tribe will claim itself with the dominating people, you can find this example in baluchi people, these baluchi people occupied lands of these pashtuns tribes and the tribes which survived under them assumed them as baluchis but in reality they are pashtuns.

Again another mistake, "pashtuns or afghan(bani-israel)" what are you trying to impose on pashtuns first the hindus/sikhs now the bani-israel, you are trying to play a dangerous game which is dangerous, BEWARE.

[Catya Sher]

I wasn't following this discussion. It's very valuable though, I plan to look back through it later, Inshallah.

Kakargirl, those yellowed land deeds or documents sound neat!
It would be fun to see them; I bet the writing is really beautiful.
Hope your father has lots of copies just in case the paper disintegrates at some time in the future.

ScimitarXEdge, that post you referred to right above was great.

I only disagree that the Pagan Cultures were really so bad.
It depends which ones you mean, yes that's true of the Arabian pre-Islamic Jahiliya one.
As far as Middle Eastern pagan religions, i tend to stick up for them, going against the grain.
I see them as another example of indoctrination by Western historians taking a Christian perspective where pagans were horrific and Christians were the heroes.
Not necessarily so! - is my idea after giving this ingrained assumption some years of critical assessment.

At any rate, NONE of those Pagans were remotely as terrible as the modern Godless Western agenda which passes for a "civilization".

I believe this is the worst we've seen for thousands of years.
Over-technological, and anti-religious, some believe that it harks back to the destruction by God of the lost continent of Atlantis for abuse of science and technology. Plus a lot of black magic there. It's the same scenario today.

The Pagans of Greece and Rome and Near Eastern cultures were nothing dangerous like THAT

[How's that for a surprising idea?]

About the houris, I completely agree how this was all overdone by Western European authors who seemed to be unbalanced themselves in this department: hence they made such a big deal over all the supposed lasciviousness in Islamic history and lore.

Most Westerners blindly absorbed those prejudices, because those must have somehow made them feel superior. While at the same time, maybe intriguing them in a VERY UNhealthy way!

This whole topic needs to be examined by Muslim scholars in order to definitively debunk all these Western /Orientalist claims.

[hassanzai]

What religion are you

This is a Pakistani non-sense created to serve the interests of the Punjab...We don't subscribe to such ideology. We are Pashtun first and Pashtun last although Islam is also a part of our heritage.

Again I ask you, what religion are you, because when you talk like this no pashtun will assume as a muslim,

To be a muslim, he will be a Muslim first and then pashtun next, if you say that you are pashtun first and pashtun last, then I say you are not a pashtun, simply confusing everyone, and condeming muslims and Islam in all your post, is again a proof that you are not even a pashtun nor even a muslim, whatever you quoted, by the wording you becomes a kafir, if you are a muslim then read the kalimah again nor Allah will never approve it, nor I pesume you to be a kafir, because address replies with salam, which i cannot addres to a kafir.

It does'nt matter if you are a kafir and a non-pashtun, because it will be easy to reply to you, because whatever you have posted is right according to a kafir and a non-pashtun, we can explain differently.