Watch this jihadi, Do you want to fight her or something, Lol why take the net to heart. 
Typical Arab: angry, poorly educated and ready to be violent. No wonder everybody hates them.
Dafa ho jao yahan say chootiyon
Everyone hates us huh? WELL AS IF WE CARE
Believe me the west thinks of Pakistanis as arabs
Majestic
Bear with me .No one should hate ARAB or Iranian or any nationality .
Those who do are themselves victim of rascism & are scarred therefore you should treat them gently understandingly & compassionately .
I believe you are not old enough or mature to have thaught so …hence my advice 
Take care & be proud of your nationality .Iam proud of Arabs b/c i share the same religion with them if not nationality :k:
Majestic
Bear with me .No one should hate ARAB or Iranian or any nationality .
Those who do are themselves victim of rascism 
& are scarred therefore you should treat them gently understandingly & compassionately .
I believe you are not old enough or mature to have thaught so …hence my advice
Take care & be proud of your nationality .Iam proud of Arabs b/c i share the same religion with them if not nationality :k:
i asked the question since pakistan uses arabic sricpt discarding
indian script in amove to be more linguesticaaly closer to arab
language. some how pakistanis conceive alphabets of indian origin
with religen . can you be islamic without knowing one word of arabic?
can god underrstand any non-arabic language? if yes why only arabic used in prayers?
Yawn, sure they do, LoL
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by rvikz: *
i asked the question since pakistan uses arabic sricpt discarding
indian script in amove to be more linguesticaaly closer to arab
language. some how pakistanis conceive alphabets of indian origin
with religen . can you be islamic without knowing one word of arabic?
can god underrstand any non-arabic language? if yes why only arabic used in prayers?
[/QUOTE]
Urdu in its present form is not that old of a language. Its older version emerged from prakrit-Pali, spoken in Northern India and which is the mother of probably all Northern Indian Languages. However, with the coming of Muslim it aqcuired a different tenor. Persian, Turkish and Arabic was overwhelmingly used in local language which had no name thus far. But as this new language became popular, people started calling it Urdu which meant Army in Turkish language as it originated in the Muslim armies on account of their interaction with local population. In the post 17th century period it became increasingly popular. Earlier only sufi saints including saints in Bangladesh had used it as a vehicle to spread Islam. But after 17th century, court poets adopted it as a means of expression. Their language had persian idiom and vocublary but a local grammer. Till then there was no language called Hindi. Urdu was the language which was used in the Fort Williams College Calcutta, by the British. They called it hindustani. The script of hindustani was arabic and it used more persian and arabic than sanskrit.
In the first of decade of the 19th century, some fanatical hindus from Benaras and Allahabad wrote articles exhorting upon the Brit govt to change the script of hinustani to devnagri- hindi script. They themselve started writing hindustani in devnagri using more sanskrit words. And that was the origin of the language that we see on Indian TV and parliament. Hindus were concerned that if Urdu with its persian and Arabic heritage was used by hindus they would lose connection with their ancient hindu culture. Thats why they invented this language.
BUT ALLAH LISTENS TO EVERYONE AND ANYONE, IN WHAT EVER LANGUAGE, YOU PRAY TO ALLAH IN.
Rvikz
You are unecessarily & unfairly trying to look at Islam differently as if no one else has the same problems that you PERCEIVE .Such ‘Why’ abounds
ALSO YOU MISUNDERSTAND L:ITTLE ARABIC INFLUENCE JUSTIFIABLY & WELCOMINGLY BY PAKISTANIS AS TOTAL ARABISATION IN WHICH YOU R DEAD WRONG
ANY RELIGION HAS SPIRITUAL & ALSO CULTURAL ASPECT .
Yes spiritually you can speak any language or talk to god in silence or in chants .
Besides spiritrual function religion is also a tying binding, bonding & clanish group or Organisation. Arabic language is just cultural aspect of tying the Ummah ..nothing else
Why hindus started naming english names into Arya or Ram Sita ,after independence Dalhousie square would not havebeen less hindu .Why you insist on useless ayurveda when it has not helped india in 10000years to get read of malariia cholera t.b. aids ,premature death all has been from allopathic medicine ..
why this ass or donkey like obstinacy to insist on Tantric sex,nothing new Yoga or Hare Rama Hare Krishna cult gruggie criminal white trash going enjoying your free hospitality all in the name of Hindu pride ???
I stop just to remind you there is nothing different "if you look carefully into your oen 'Garebaan’self intriospection & analysis " 
gymno who said india insist on ayurveda ? afterall all medicines has
arisen out of plants. there is no such thing as relgious medicine.
if you have stomach ache they dont go to temple.may be you have check it out about india's pharceutical industry.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by lost soul: *
Well, Fatima has summed up nicely and Mr NYAhmedi's reply is also felicitious.
I think its not the Arab culture which Pakistanis are trying to follow but well there is, to a considerable extent a sizable minority that follow and those who are inspired by the WAhabiism propagated by the Saudis. In Pakistan its penetration was the direct consequence of the Afghan Jihad during which massive aid flowed from the Gulf States that helped in the proliferation of deobandi and wahabi madaris.
However, I must say that albiet, there is a strong hold of this sect on the madrassas in Pakistan, there is also enough resistance to that. THe result being intrasectarian strife ( that is within the Sunni sects of Islam) as opposed to the traditional Shia Sunni differences.
My own view regarding this topic is that in a bid to follow the Saudis we would loose our identity. We are South Asian Muslims and we are no less Muslims than any other Muslim living in any part of the world. We cannot deny the fact that culture does effect the day to day life of the individual. Our practices are and have been effected by our culture but that has not changed our faith in the fundamentals of our religion. So, there is no need to worry about that.
[/QUOTE]
*WAHABISM EXPOSED *
By M. Amir Ali
The term "Wahabism" has been in vogue for over a century and it began to be used in India and spread to the whole of Muslim world. **It is a derogatory and an accusatory term used to denigrate Muslims of certain Aqeedah and who shun certain practices, perceived by others to be Islamic. **According to users of the term "Wahabism" it refers to Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab of Nejd in the Arabian peninsula who lived in the eighteenth century C.E.
In Muslim culture when a group is attributed or associated with a person it is done for the following commonality:
1. When people belong to a certain tribe or a place or country or descendence, such as Ansari, Jaafari, Pakistani, Hindi, Johani, Saudi, Bukhari and so on.
2. When people belong to a certain aqeedah, such as, Ashari, Juhaimi, Sunni, Shi'ah, Khwariji, Zahiri, Batini, and many others.
3. When people belong to a certain Sufi order, such as Chishti, Suhrawardi, Quadri, Naqshbandi, Shadhli, Tijani and so on.
4. When people belong to a certain madhhab or school of thought of fiqh, such as Jaafri, Zaidi, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafe'i, Hanbali, Salafi and so on.
Let us examine "Wahabism" to find which of the above categories it fits.
There is no place or tribe or country or nation or family by the name of "Wahab"; it is therefore, not applicable. If we examine to see if Muhammad Ibn Abdulwahhab originated a new aqeedah we find no such thing in his teachings to give credit to him for something new. Did he originate a new Sufi order? We discover that he was neither a sufi nor he supported them, in fact, he fought against certain innovations of the sufis. Did Muhammad Ibn Abdulwahhab presented any new school of fiqhi principles? We find that he was himself an ardent follower of HANBALI madh-hab, and he revered Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal. One of the major contributions of Muhammad Ibn Abdul- wahhab is that he discovered and brought into the limelight another great Hanbali scholar, Imam Ibn Taimiyah and his student Ibn Qayyim. We find that Muhammad Ibn Abdulwahhab remained throughout his life a follower of Hanbali madh-hab and did not deviate much from it.
In the light of what has been said there is no definition of the term "Wahabism" possible except as a label to bring hatred against certain group of people. It is stereotyping, slanderous and a hate-mongering term; no educated person should allow himself to the use of this term. Those who made their goal to fight "Wahabism" are fighting a non-existent enemy, a creation of a figment of their own mind, an imaginary ghost.
Alleged "Wahabis" do not call any one to follow any new fiqh, any sufi order, any new aqeedah but they call Muslims to follow the Qur'an and Sunnah of the Prophet (S) found in the famous books of Hadith like Bukhari, Muslim, Muwatta, Ibn Majah, Abu Dawud, Ibn-Majah and others. The books of Hadith mentioned are famous and all Sunni Muslims give lip service to them. It is unfortunate that those who call you to go one step beyond lip service to the Qur'an and Sunnah and implement the teachings in your lives are labelled as Wahabis by their opponents.
Who was Muhammad Ibn Abdulwahhab? He was a reformer and called people to the Qur'an and Sunnah instead of getting trapped into following personality cults of self-appointed, ignorant religious leaders leading masses into the pit of disgrace in this world and the pit of fire in the life hereafter. He did hurt the business of selfish, ignorant and arrogant religious leaders of Arabian Peninsula and he tried to eliminate shirk (associationism with Allah) and bid'ah (innovation in the deen al-Islam). Naturally, those who were hurt by Muhammad's teaching screamed and fought back with their own devilish instruments of slander, lies and hate mongering.
The Crusaders of Europe wanted to evict Muslims from Jerusalem but could not do so without creating hate hysteria in the European population. Today, in America there are Christian Crusaders of pen and tongue, like Anis Shorrosh, Robert Morey, John Ankerberg and others who are fanning the flames of hatred against Muslims through slander, lies and fabrications about Islam and Muslims. In our age, our enemies have adopted another Christian term to denigrate Muslims, that is, fundamentalism, a term without definition but made derogatory.
All educated, intelligent and thinking Muslim brethren have a duty to isolate all those who use the term "Wahabism" or "Wahabis" and associate them with hate mongering groups. We have a duty to love all those who profess to be Muslims and educate those who are ignorant of the true teachings of Islam, rather than creating hate. Those who use the term 'Wahabism or Wahabis" are agents of our enemies, particularly, our worst enemy, Shaytan. We have a duty to do all we can to free our brethren from the clutches of Shaytan and his friends.
In our time, when Islam and Muslims are under attack from all sides, from Christians, Jews, Hindus, atheists, agnostics, secular humanists and secular nationalists, it is not right for us to divide ourselves and fight against each other. We have to pool our resources together and fight the common enemies of Islam and Muslims. If a group among us is different, we should learn to ignore the differences, emphasize the commonality and call each other to the true teachings of the Qur'an and Sunnah of the Messenger (S) of Allah. We should not call any group of people by any name which they do not like, that is slander. **There is no group of people who like to be called "Wahabis", therefore, this term should be dropped by the Muslims. The term "Wahabis" and "Wahabism" was the invention of the Britsih to divide Muslims and fight against each other and weaken each other, so that British could continue to conquer Muslims land and rule them. **We should not allow ourselves to continue to be the victims of Imperialist designs.
Rvikz:)
Thats why i give it as an example of CULTURAL aspect of hinduism & not the spiritual aspect .In the suggestion some one said ,you can talk to god in any language or even silent thaughts wearing any decent cloth without the elaborate rituals of incense or gong or bells or ANY PLACE …
but there are superflous baggage of CULTURE with EVERY religion …
AND ITS SO INGRAINED IN US THAT WE DONT SEE OUR OWN FOOLISHNESS BUT ONLY OTHERS…Peace 
The Mughuls were arabs/persians. I kind of group the two in the same pot, although I know I shouldn't.
Mughuls were certainly not Hindus or Brits, now were they, gymno?
gudia, mughals were mongols who lived for generations in whats now iran and western afghanistan (the word "mughal" is a corruption of "mongol"). persianized mongols. not arabs for sure.
persians and arabs are very different culturally and ethnically. ask any arab or persian.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PyariCgudia: *
The Mughuls were arabs/persians. I kind of group the two in the same pot, although I know I shouldn't.
Mughuls were certainly not Hindus or Brits, now were they, gymno?
[/QUOTE]
PCG
I think Queer has replied to your doubts.Thanx Queer
The reason some Arabic remains in Islam is not that all muslims should be 'like Arab' in fact in last Sermon of Prohet it is said no Arab is more than non Arab or any one else or words to thateffect .The original text of koran is kept in original (as much as possible) because look at judeaism & christianity they LOST there original text in original hebrew or other archiac language of the time b/c they translated & retranslated into what is known asNEW testament as opposed to OLD testament .
If Koran was read in non Arabic language ,you know how many koran there would be ....Like Mathew James Luke & John ....MANY mANy mOre .
Here atleast you can challenge one interpretations & go yourself if you have energy & desire to learn Arabic & crtique others take on Koran .Arabic language partly is the only link to Arab culture with rest of muslims.Nothing else is sacred about ARABS ...neither the kahafa ,the 'tope' camel or the sand & camel ....these are not symbols of Islam but of the local region.
Of course ..i presume you knew that ,so i reminded you .
gymno is there any institution that is taking care of islamic holy places
have people working fort them from different mulim bacground representing the diversity of muslims?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by rvikz: *
gymno is there any institution that is taking care of islamic holy places
have people working fort them from different mulim bacground representing the diversity of muslims?
[/QUOTE]
Its co incidence ,luck & convenience that most holy shrine Mecca & Medina is in Saiudie which since 40s have become extravagantly rich that no one is needed to to care of those places.And yopu will agree even as non muslim they do pretty good job for 2 months around haj period..a very expensive task .
I dont know holy places in terms of decreasing importence for shias is in IRAQ Karbala where legendery muslim saga of battle of Yazid took place .Its holy & of importence to all muslims even sunni Then local shrines like famous mosques in Iran Gulf countries for its antiquities ....so on & so forth
I must point out there are many false holy shrines .....i suspect places say they have hair of prophet in Kashmir but many ppl. dont nbelieve that to be true for even if it is ..Mohommed would never have liked it to be used as shrine..His grave in Medina is simple & thats the way he liked it as per his will.He did pray in clay built mosque & everything in his life pointed to humility shunning pomp ,show & grandiosement which could have been his easily .He built medina mosque nabvi with his hand .Of course now everything has been expanded by petro dollar but the origins were very humble.
btw the moguls were not in an area in iran and afghanistan, but they were descendents of mongols and babaur himself was a descendent of chengis khan. they were nomads and moved about places... the turks of central asia ,turkey and moghals thus were linguistically and ethnically related toeachother..... thas why even today a kazakh, a turkish and an uzbek from afghanistan could understand eachother..........
I would love to adopt all the positive things about the Arabic culture, and let go of the negative things that have emerged from living so long with the Hindus...
the negative things that have emerged from living so long with the Hindus... <<
this should read "the negative things that have emerged from having been hindus until 700 years ago". also explains why it's so hard for you guys to let go of them.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by queer: *
the negative things that have emerged from living so long with the Hindus... <<
this should read "the negative things that have emerged from having been hindus until 700 years ago". also explains why it's so hard for you guys to let go of them.
[/QUOTE]
Bad habits are hard to let go, Mr. India... Its been so many years and you cannot even let go of worshipping rats, drinking their milk, even cow piss, and stupid practices like Satti... Apne ghirabhaan me pehle jhaank lo